Energy xxx (2011) 1e8

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

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

Second law analysis of wind turbine power plants: Cesme, Izmir example
Omer Baskut a, Onder Ozgener a, b, *, Leyla Ozgener c
a
Graduate School of Natural and Applied Sciences, Solar Energy Science Branch, Ege University, TR-35100, Bornova, Izmir, Turkey
b
Solar Energy Institute, Ege University, TR-35100, Bornova, Izmir, Turkey
c
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, Celal Bayar University, TR-45140, Muradiye, Manisa, Turkey

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

Article history: In this study, the energy and exergy efficiency results of the Wind Turbine Power Plants (WTPPs) are
Received 9 July 2010 presented. Exergy, energy and technical availability analysis are performed. The case study includes the
Received in revised form actual system data taken from the system in Cesme, Izmir WTPP. General energy, exergy and other
25 November 2010
performance parameters are also presented. Investigated WTPP is Turkey’s first installed (1998) wind
Accepted 27 January 2011
Available online xxx
plant (1.50 MW) located in Izmir. Exergy efficiency of the power plant found to be between 0% and
68.20%. The monthly average technical availabilities are 96.11%, 98.71%, 98.52% for turbine 1, turbine 2,
and turbine 3, respectively. Furthermore, authors developed some correlations, which are capable of
Keywords:
Exergy
predicting the values of exergy efficiencies of the WTPP for different power factor value.
Wind Ó 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Renewable energy

1. Introduction
Wind power is the conversion of wind energy into a useful form
such as electricity using wind turbines. At the end of 2008,
worldwide installed capacity of wind-powered generators was
about 122 GW. Table 1 shows total installed wind power capacity
for the last five years. The US, despite projections that wind power
would drop due to the recession, continued to see growth and
remains on top in total installed capacity. For the 4th year in a row,
China has doubled its installed wind power capacity. As in the US
recently as well, wind was the fastest growing source of clean
energy (or energy at all) in Europe in recent years [1].
Although the wind power industry will be impacted by the global
financial crisis in 2009 and 2010, BTM Consult Aps (an indepen-
dent consultancy company specialized in services regarding rene-
wable energy) 5-year forecast up to 2013 projects substantial growth.
The annual installation of wind power capacity will grow from
today’s 28,190 MW to around 58,500 MW per year in 2013. Cumu-
lative capacity by the end of 2013 will reach around 343 GW [2].
For Turkey, electricity consumption is increasing about 9% per
year increasing each year. Turkey import around 70% of its cumu-
lative energy needs [3]. Regional wind potential investigation
studies are performed recently for Aegean region of Turkey (e.g.,
[4e6]). Turkey’s annual total theoretically available potential for
wind power may be around 53,000 MW [7]. This means renewable
* Corresponding author. Solar Energy Institute, Ege University, TR-35100,
Bornova, Izmir, Turkey. Tel.: þ90 232 311 1242; fax: þ90 232 388 60 27.
E-mail address: onder.ozgener@ege.edu.tr (O. Ozgener).
energy sources can be very important and adequate solution for
Turkey. In Turkey, electricity generation through wind energy for
general use was first realized in 1986 with a 55 kW nominal wind
energy capacity in Izmir. Utilization of wind energy in Turkey has
increased since 1998 when the first wind power plant (1.5 MW)
was installed in Ceşme-Izmir. Table 2 shows installed wind power
capacity for Turkey. As seen from table, by the end of 2008, 17 wind
power plants (433.35 MW) were installed. Total capacity is repor-
ted as 801 MW by the end of 2009 [8].
Wind turbine technology is advancing rapidly, but there is
a need to assess accurately the behavior of wind scientifically. Some
of the thermodynamic characteristics of wind energy are not
yet clearly understood. The efficiency of a wind turbine can be
considered as the ratio of the electricity generated to the wind
potential within the area swept by the wind turbine [9].
Meteorological variables affect most new and renewable energy
sources such as wind, solar, hydraulic and wave energy. If the
meteorological characteristics of these renewable energy sources
are not well known and understood there can be important gaps in
knowledge related to energy investments. Meteorological effects
on wind power have been discussed by Petersen et al. [10]. Mete-
orological variables such as temperature, pressure, and moisture
play important roles in the occurrence of wind. Generally, in wind
engineering moisture changeability is negligible and air is assumed
to be dry. Wind as a meteorological variable can be described as
a motion of air masses on a large scale with potential and kinetic
energies. Pressure forces lead to kinetic energy [11].
The exergy analysis is a vital tool for all energy resource utili-
zation since exergy is a part of the energy analysis. The theory of

0360-5442/$ e see front matter Ó 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.energy.2011.01.047

Please cite this article in press as: Baskut O, et al., Second law analysis of wind turbine power plants: Cesme, Izmir example, Energy (2011),
doi:10.1016/j.energy.2011.01.047
2 O. Baskut et al. / Energy xxx (2011) 1e8

Nomenclature T temperature (K)

T0 reference temperature (K)
A rotor swept area (m2) Vr local wind velocity (m/s)
Cp power factor (energy conversion ratio) (e) V1 inlet wind velocity (m/s)
Cp,a air specific heat (kJ/kg K) V2 outlet wind velocity (m/s)
C: p,v water vapor specific heat (kJ/kg K) Wa available power (W)
E: x exergy rate (kW) We power at inverter output (W, kW)
E: xdest exergy destruction (W, kW) Wu useful power from turbine (W, kW)
E: x1 exergy input rate (kW) Lex exergy loss (kW)
E x2 exergy output rate (kW)
ke1 inlet specific kinetic energy (J/kg; m2/s2) Greek letters
ke2 outlet specific kinetic energy (J/kg; m2/s2) u humidity ratio (kg(water)/kg(air))
m _ mass flow rate of air (kg/s) u0 humidity ratio at reference point (kg(water)/kg(air))
m _w mass flow rate of water vapor in air (kg/s) h energy efficiency (e)
P pressure (kPa) e exergy efficiency (e)
P0 average pressure (kPa) ja specific exergy of air (kJ/kg)
PV,1, Pin inlet pressure to the turbine (kPa) r air density (kg/m3)
PV,2, Pout outlet pressure from the turbine (kPa)
R maximum rotor radius (m) Abbreviations
Ra gas constant (kJ/kg K) WTPP Wind Turbine Power Plants
Rn vapor constant (kJ/kg K) TSMS Turkish State Meteorological Service
t1,2,3,4 period of time (h)

exergy analysis is basically that of available energy analysis. The a measure of the maximum useful work that can be done by
concepts of exergy, available energy, and availability are essentially a system interacting with an environment, which is at a constant
similar. The concepts of exergy destruction, exergy consumption, pressure P0 and a temperature T0. Note that the exergy of a system
irreversibility, and lost work are also essentially similar. Exergy is at a specified state depends on the conditions of the environment
(dead state) as well as the properties of the system. Therefore,
Table 1 exergy is a property of the systemeenvironment combination and
Installed wind power capacity in the world [29e34]. not of the system alone. Altering the environment is another way of
World (MW) 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 increasing exergy, but it is definitely not an easy alternative [12].
Germany 18,415 20,622 22,247 23,903 25,777
Spain 10,028 11,615 15,145 16,740 19,149
Italy 1718 2123 2726 3736 4850 1.1. Brief look on exergy studies
France 757 1567 2454 3404 4410
United Kingdom 1332 1963 2389 3288 4070 Koroneos et al. [13] applied exergy analysis to renewable energy
Portugal 1022 1716 2150 2862 3535
sources including wind power. But in this paper only the electricity
Denmark (&Faeroe Islands) 3136 3140 3129 3160 3465
Netherlands 1219 1560 1747 2225 2229
generation of wind turbines is taken into account. They concluded
Sweden 510 572 788 1067 1560 that while the wind speed changes between 5 m/s and 9 m/s,
Ireland 496 745 805 1245 1260 exergy efficiency changes between 35% and 45%. Exergy lost in
Greece 573 746 871 985 1087 rotor mostly. Xydis et al. [14] implemented the exergy analysis
Austria 819 965 982 995 995
methodology as a wind farm sitting tool. Rosen et al. [15] studied
Turkeya 20 51 146 433 801
Othersb 1137 1548 2043 3106 4148 recently developing a new sustainability index as a measure of how
European Union 40,722 48,122 56,614 65,255 74,767 exergy efficiency affects sustainable development. They took the
United States 9149 11,603 16,818 25,170 35,159 role of exergy in increasing efficiency and sustainability and
Canada 683 1459 1856 2369 3319 reducing environmental impact as subject, and they reached that
China 1260 2604 6050 12,210 25,104
India 4430 6270 8000 9587 10,925
result: Exergy can identify better than energy the environmental
Japan 1061 1394 1538 1880 2056 benefits and economics of energy technologies. The results suggest
Taiwan 104 188 282 358 436 that exergy should be utilized by engineers and scientists, as well as
South Korea 98 173 191 278 348 decision and policy makers, involved in green energy and tech-
Othersc 59 74 94 128 142
nologies in tandem with other objectives and constraints.
Brazil 29 237 247 338 606
Mexico 3 88 87 85 520 Ozgener [16], Ozgener and Ozgener [17] and Ozgener et al. [18]
Costa Rica 71 74 74 74 123 performed a case study; exergy analysis of a wind turbine system
Othersd 155 159 184 230 343 (1.5 kW) located in Solar Energy Institute of Ege University (latitude
Australia 708 817 824 1494 1712 38.24 N, longitude 27.50 E), Izmir, Turkey. They reported that exergy
New Zealand 169 171 322 325 497
All Africa 261 346 486 571 774
efficiency changed between 0% and 48.7% at different wind speeds
according to a dead state temperature of 25  C and an atmospheric
Total 59,422 74,590 93,139 122,246 159,400
pressure of 101.325 kPa considering pressure differences between
a
Ref. [8]. state points. Considering temperature differences between state
b
Poland, Belgium, Norway, Bulgaria, Czech Republic, Finland, Hungary, Ukraine, points exergy efficiencies were calculated to be 0e89%.
Croatia, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxemburg, Romania, Russia, Slovakia,
Switzerland.
Ahmadi and Ehyaei [19] have studied exergy analysis recently on
c
Rest of Asia and Oceania. a wind turbine. Modeling entropy production, they concluded that
d
Rest of Americas. entropy production is directly opposite of energy production, also

Please cite this article in press as: Baskut O, et al., Second law analysis of wind turbine power plants: Cesme, Izmir example, Energy (2011),
doi:10.1016/j.energy.2011.01.047
 O. Baskut et al. / Energy xxx (2011) 1e8 3

Table 2 this paper, we investigate the performance characteristics, the

Wind energy capacity in Turkey [8]. operation and thermodynamic efficiencies of the Turkey’s first
Location Installation Installed capacity, Capacity under installed wind plant in Ceşme-Izmir, and we present an overview of
date 1998e2010 (MW) construction (MW) these results for the period 2007e2008 operating seasons.
Izmir-Ceşme 1998 1.5
Izmir-Ceşme 1998 7.2
Canakkale-Bozcaada 2000 10.20
1.2. Brief of system description
Istanbul-Hadımköy 2003 1.20
Balıkesir-Bandırma I/2006 30
Istanbul-Silivri II/2006 0.85 Selected Wind Turbine Power Plant (WTPP) is located in Ger-
Izmir-Ceşme I/2007 39.20 miyan-Ceşme 86 km far from Izmir. The WTPP is Turkey’s first
Manisa-Akhisar I/2007 10.80 installed wind plant. Measured average wind speed around the hub
Canakkale-Intepe I/2007 30.40
is 10 m/s in 2007/2008 operating season. Height of the hub is 42 m.
Canakkale-Gelibolu II/2007 14.90
Hatay-Samandag  I/2008 30 The turbine type is Enercon E-40. Rotor diameter is 40.3 m. Swept
Manisa-Sayalar I/2008 30.60 area is 1520.5 m2. The turbines have three blades, the blade length
Izmir-Aliaga I/2008 42.50 is 20 m, cut in velocity is 2.5 m/s and cut off velocity is 25 m/s.
Istanbul-Gaziosmanpaşa I/2008 24
WTPP has been working since February 1998 and it produces
Istanbul-Catalca I/2008 60
Balıkesir-Samlı II/2008 90
around 5 million kWh each year [22]. In this study, the reference
Mug la-Datça II/2008 10 state temperature and the atmospheric pressure are taken as
Aydın-Didim I/2009 31.50 291.1 K and 101.325 kPa, respectively. These reference states are
Hatay-Samandag  II/2009 22.50 taken as the average ambient conditions for the operation time.
Osmaniye-Bahçe II/2009 135
Meteorological data were taken from Turkish State Meteorological
Izmir-Ceşme II/2009 22.50
Izmir-Ceşme II/2009 15 Service (TSMS) [23]. Meteorological data are given in Table 3 for the
Manisa-Soma II/2009 140.80 operation months.
Hatay-Samandag  35.10 In this study, inlet and outlet pressure differences of the turbines
Balıkesir-Susurluk 19
are taken into account. Temperature and humidity differences
Balıkesir-Bandırma 45
Tekirdag-Şarköy 28.80
between inlet and outlet state points are neglected. Schematic
Balıkesir-Havran 16 representation of the turbine is drawn as Fig. 1.
Canakkale-Ezine 20.80
Hatay-Belen 30
Manisa-Kırkag aç 25.60
1.3. Assumptions
Edirne-Enez 15
Izmir-Aliaga 30
Izmir-Aliaga 90 In this study, inlet and outlet pressure differences of the turbines
Izmir-Aliaga 30 are taken into account. Temperature and humidity differences
Izmir-Foça 30 between inlet and outlet state points are neglected. The wind flow
Balıkesir-Kepsut 54.90
aç
is steady, one dimensional, and incompressible. Schematic repre-
Manisa-Soma-Kırkag 90
Balıkesir-Kepsut 142.50 sentation of the turbine is drawn as the Fig. 1.
Total 800.65 702.70

2. Analysis
they revealed that exergy analysis is more powerful than energy
2.1. Energy and exergy analysis
analysis for energy systems.
The effects of temperature, humidity, density, etc. should always
The energy efficiency of a wind turbine is usually characterized
be taken into account when planning wind farms. Beyond these
by its power coefficient as given below with a maximum value of Cp
exergy studies, there are some reports about the effects of these
as 0.5926 according to Betz criterion
parameters on power performance and these effects are well
described in the IEC 61400-12-1 [20,21]. To the best of the authors’ We
knowledge, no any examination of the long term (11 months) Cp ¼ (1)
halternator  hmechanic  0:5  r  p  R2  Vr3
energetic, exergetic efficiencies have been analyzed. There are no
studies undertaken so far related to the evaluating long term exe- In this study, electrical equipment and mechanic equipment losses
rgetic efficiencies, and some performance parameters of WTPPs. In were assumed to be halternator ¼ 0.98 and hmechanic ¼ 0.97, respectively.

Table 3
Meteorological data for the operation time.

Months Specific heat Average environmental Average relative Average specific humidity Average atmospheric
(kJ/kg K) temperature ( C) humidity (%) (kgwater vapor/kgdry air) pressure (kPa)
November 2007 1.861 14.4 74.35 0.0088 101.640
December 2007 1.860 10.4 73.26 0.0083 101.780
January 2008 1.861 8.4 68.29 0.0080 102.230
February 2008 1.861 9.3 71.79 0.0085 102.320
March 2008 1.862 18.4 73.13 0.0076 101.326
April 2008 1.863 16.7 69.60 0.0090 101.340
May 2008 1.863 19.8 63.39 0.0110 101.350
June 2008 1.864 24.7 62.30 0.0130 101.090
July 2008 1.863 26.0 59.16 0.0124 101.105
August 2008 1.862 26.6 62.39 0.0134 101.005
September 2008 1.861 22.8 64.67 0.0128 101.140

Please cite this article in press as: Baskut O, et al., Second law analysis of wind turbine power plants: Cesme, Izmir example, Energy (2011),
doi:10.1016/j.energy.2011.01.047
4 O. Baskut et al. / Energy xxx (2011) 1e8

Fig. 1. Schematic representation of the turbine (inlet and outlet states).

The wind speed is the key driver for wind energy systems in the Therefore, the work potential or exergy of kinetic energy of
form of kinetic energy. The exergy content of the blowing air simply a system is equal to the kinetic energy itself, regardless of
equals the kinetic energy as [24] temperature and pressure of the environment [12,24].
Exergy is always evaluated with respect to a reference envi-
Vr2 ronment (so-called dead state). In analysis, the temperature T0 and
Kinetic exergy of air ¼ ke1 ¼ (2)
2 pressure P0 of the environment are often taken as standard-state
To determine the available power, we need to know the amount values, such as 25  C and 1 atm. However, the reference environ-
of air passing through the rotor of the windmill per unit time, the ment conditions may be specified differently, depending on the
mass flow rate. Taking average ambient conditions (291.1 K and application. T0 and P0 may commonly be taken as the average
101.325 kPa), in this study the density of air is 1.225 kg/m3 and its ambient temperature and pressure, respectively, for the location at
mass flow rate is: which the system under consideration operates or if the system
uses atmospheric air. T0 might be specified as the average air
_ ¼ r  A  Vr ¼ r  p  R2  Vr
m (3) temperature if both air and water from the natural surroundings
According to Fig. (1), the portion of incoming kinetic energy not were used. T0 would be specified as the lower of the average
converted to electric power leaves the wind turbine as outgoing temperatures for air and water [25]. Exergy efficiency, useful work
kinetic energy. Noting that the mass flow rate remains constant, the (Wu) and exergy destruction (losses) can be calculated by using the
exit velocity can be determined by using Eq. (4a) Eqs. (5)e(11), respectively. The exergetic efficiency of a turbine is
defined as a measure of how well the stream exergy of the fluid is



mke _ 1 1  Cp /0:5mV
_ 2 ¼ mke _ 12 1  Cp ¼ 0:5mV
_ 22 /V2 ¼ V1 converted into inverter work output. Applying this to the wind
qffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi turbines, we obtain exergy efficiency as
1  Cp ð4aÞ
We We
Therefore, the available power is calculated by using Eq. (4b) 3¼ ¼ (5)
Wu Ex1  Ex2


_
Available power ¼ Wa ¼ mxke1 (4b) where the useful work is
this can be defined as the maximum available power to the wind _
m
turbines. Most wind turbines in operation today harness about 20% Wu ¼ ðP1  P2 Þ (6)
r
to 40% of kinetic energy of the wind. Kinetic exergy is a form of
mechanical energy, and thus it may be converted to work entirely. The exergy losses are defined as

Table 4
Energy, exergy, exergy destruction rates, exergy efficiencies, and other properties of the turbine 1 at various wind velocities.
:
Months/Year Wind Speed Hour Power _ (kg/s)
m Available Produced Useful power e (e) Ex dest Technical
(m/s) (h) factor (e) power (kW) energy (kWh) (kW) (kW) availability (e)
11/2007 7.9 563 0.290 14,714 288,292 127,973 459.172 0e0.444 231.866 93.25%
12/2007 7.4 471 0.256 13,783 236,293 92,775 377.393 0e0.393 180.418 72.63%
01/2008 7 654 0.401 13,038 201,166 122,896 319.445 0e0.611 131.531 99.17%
02/2008 7.4 524 0.322 13,783 236,297 116,661 377.391 0e0.494 154.756 99.63%
03/2008 8.6 662 0.296 16,018 375,297 168,376 592.362 0e0.449 338.018 99.87%
04/2008 6.9 612 0.391 12,852 189,904 114,976 305.943 0e0.605 118.074 97.47%
05/2008 6.1 632 0.377 11,361 112,230 76,502 211.397 0e0.682 90.350 97.18%
06/2008 7.1 624 0.319 13,224 212,675 102,236 333.327 0e0.481 169.487 95.28%
07/2008 7.9 664 0.344 14,714 288,294 151,661 459.176 0e0.526 230.771 98.98%
08/2008 7.7 656 0.327 14,342 234,165 133,514 425.174 0e0.570 221.647 99.99%
09/2008 6.7 594 0.350 12,479 170,134 94,130 280.104 0e0.553 121.636 99.93%

Please cite this article in press as: Baskut O, et al., Second law analysis of wind turbine power plants: Cesme, Izmir example, Energy (2011),
doi:10.1016/j.energy.2011.01.047
 O. Baskut et al. / Energy xxx (2011) 1e8 5

Table 5
Energy, exergy, exergy destruction rates, exergy efficiencies, and other properties of the turbine 2 at various wind velocities.
:
Months/Year Wind Speed Hour Power _ (kg/s)
m Available Produced Useful e (e) Ex dest (kW) Technical
(m/s) (h) factor (e) power (kW) energy (kWh) power (kW) availability (e)
11/2007 7.9 592 0.302 14,714 288,294 133,151 459.174 0e0.462 234.257 99.31%
12/2007 8.2 649 0.285 15,273 317,943 140,439 513.493 0e0.442 297.100 95.56%
01/2008 7.2 631 0.348 13,410 217,865 116,099 347.616 0e0.533 163.624 97.43%
02/2008 7.9 517 0.265 14,714 288,295 116,654 459.171 0e0.405 233.535 99.07%
03/2008 9 675 0.265 16,763 439,274 172,904 678.924 0e0.394 422.770 97.18%
04/2008 7.3 620 0.338 13,597 224,217 117,660 362.293 0e0.525 172.519 98.36%
05/2008 6.6 659 0.322 12,293 164,588 82,727 267.756 0e0.503 142.222 99.99%
06/2008 7.6 664 0.285 14,155 220,728 111,911 408.824 0e0.507 240.283 99.99%
07/2008 8.4 671 0.290 15,645 349,969 153,784 551.994 0e0.439 322.808 99.07%
08/2008 8.2 698 0.288 15,273 317,943 142,264 513.494 0e0.447 309.677 99.99%
09/2008 7.1 599 0.302 13,224 212,673 96,668 333.323 0e0.455 171.941 99.98%

: : 2.2. Calculation of technical availability

Lex ¼ Wu  We ¼ ðEx 1  Ex 2 Þ  We (7)
Technical availability is calculated on the basis of data collected
Here, the flow exergy rate (Ex) is
with the ENERCON SCADA system which assigns the status
: messages to the following time categories:
_  ja
Ex ¼ m (8)
The specific exergy of humid air is calculated from Eqs. (9) and t1 period of time during which:
(10) [26,27]  The wind turbine is in operation or ready for operation
     The wind turbine connections (grid,etc.) are available

 T T  The wind turbine does not show any faults
ja ¼ Cp;a þ uCp;v T0  1  ln
T0 T0  The wind farm remote monitoring system works.
 
P t2 total period of time since start of data acquisition/time
þ ð1 þ 1:6078uÞRa T0 ln interval under consideration
P0
  t3 period of time during which grid connection is not available
ð1 þ 1:6078u0 Þ
þ Ra T0 ð1 þ 1:6078uÞln
ð1 þ 1:6078uÞ
 
A grid connection is not available if the connection parameters
u
þ 1 þ 1:6078uln ð9Þ are out of permitted range (grid voltage/grid frequency at the wind
u0 turbine connection point)
and
t4 period of time during which the wind turbine is not operation


ja ¼ Cp;a þ uCp;n ðT T0 ÞT0 at the instigation of the customer
     t5 period of the time during which SCADA data is not available as

 T P
Cp;a þ uCp;n ln ðRa þ uRv Þln monitoring system has been interrupted
T0 P0
  
ð1þ1:6078u0 Þ u
þT0 ½Ra þ uRn ln þ1:6078uRa ln ð10Þ The following formula is used to calculate technical availability
ð1þ1:6078uÞ u0
t1
where the specific humidity ratio is Technical availability ð%Þ ¼  100% (12)
t2  t3  t4  t5

u ¼ m
_ w =m
_ (11) Assumptions: in this study, we assumed that Cp,a, Cp,v equal to
1.004 kJ/kg K, 1.861 kJ/kg K, respectively. Gas constant Ra, water
and T0 and P0 are reference temperature and atmospheric vapor constant Rv assumed to be 0.287 kJ/kg K and 0.4615 kJ/kg K,
pressure that are 291.1 K and 101.325 kPa in this study, respectively. Yearly average specific humidity ratio is calculated as
respectively. 0.0085 kgwater vapor/kgdry air. Specific humidity is determined by the

Table 6
Energy, exergy, exergy destruction rates, exergy efficiencies, and other properties of the turbine 3 at various wind velocities.
:
Months/ Wind Speed Hour Power factor m_ Available power Produced energy Useful power e (e) Ex dest Technical
Year (m/s) (h) (e) (kg/s) (kW) (kWh) (kW) (kW) availability (e)
11/2007 7.7 601 0.345 14,342 234,166 141,049 425.176 0e0.602 186.918 99.28%
12/2007 8 677 0.331 14,900 294,375 151,368 476.835 0e0.514 243.602 98.34%
01/2008 7.2 646 0.347 13,410 217,865 115,958 347.616 0e0.532 163.847 98.93%
02/2008 7.8 503 0.255 14,528 273,964 108,279 441.953 0e0.395 232.516 97.35%
03/2008 9 695 0.279 16,763 439,275 181,894 678.922 0e0.414 409.449 100.00%
04/2008 7.2 629 0.364 13,410 217,862 121,653 347.611 0e0.558 151.396 98.79%
05/2008 6.3 659 0.376 11,734 146,567 84,053 232.879 0e0.574 105.333 99.98%
06/2008 7.4 628 0.290 13,783 236,293 105,206 377.391 0e0.445 218.948 96.93%
07/2008 8.3 671 0.279 15,459 328,122 142,473 532.512 0e0.434 320.183 98.90%
08/2008 8.1 697 0.285 15,087 304,213 135,520 494.931 0e0.445 300.776 99.87%
09/2008 7 568 0.297 13,038 201,162 91,249 319.442 0e0.454 167.106 93.89%

Please cite this article in press as: Baskut O, et al., Second law analysis of wind turbine power plants: Cesme, Izmir example, Energy (2011),
doi:10.1016/j.energy.2011.01.047
6 O. Baskut et al. / Energy xxx (2011) 1e8

0.8 0.45

0.40
0.7
0.35

Power factor (Cp) (-)

0.6
Exergy Efficiency (-)

0.30
0.5
0.25

0.4 0.20
Cp = 0.629× (ε ) + 0.011
R² = 0.990
0.3 0.15

0.10
0.2 turbine 1
turbine 2 0.05
0.1
turbine 3 0
0 0.35 0.38 0.41 0.44 0.47 0.50 0.53 0.56 0.59 0.62 0.65
11 07 12 07 01 08 02 08 3 08 4 08 5 08 6 08 7 08 8 08 9 08 Exergy efficiency (-)
Month/Year
Fig. 4. Variation of exergy efficiency with the power factor (e) for Turbine 1.
Fig. 2. Exergy efficiency at monthly average actual meteorological variable.

psychrometric chart [28]. The reference state temperature and the do not come up with enough and desired production. Exergy
atmospheric pressure are taken as 291.1 K and 101.325 kPa, destruction reaches maximum in March 2008. Monthly average
respectively. While calculating the monthly exergetic efficiency, technical availabilities are 96.11%, 98.71%, 98.52% for turbine 1,
pressure differences between inlet and outlet points are assumed turbine 2, and turbine 3, respectively. As seen in Table 4 for turbine
between 20 Pa and 50 Pa. 1, in December 2007, it is measured low. A considerable number of
the types of faults and problems such as electronic automation,
3. Result and discussion over and lower load electricity problems, its frequencies, mechanic
transmission faults in turbine, mechanic system faults, problems
Performance and environment effect analysis of renewable energy were experienced. Technical availability and capacity factors of
systems are very important in terms of the concept of sustainable WTPP briefly are given in Tables 4e6’s last columns.
development. For this aim, the operation and thermodynamics effi- We now analyze exergy efficiencies and their trends. Fig. 2
ciencies of Cesme wind turbine power plant are evaluated. The effi- shows exergy efficiency for each turbine by months at the dead
ciency results of the system are presented for the last year. state T0 ¼ 291.1 K, P0 ¼ 101.325 kPa. Fig. 2 and Tables 4e6 show
Measurements and operating data of wind turbines are taken the exergy efficiency of the power plant changes between 0% and
time period of November 01, 2007eSeptember 31, 2008 by Demirer 68.20% by using Eq. (5). In Fig. 3, the exergy input rate is given. As
Inc.. Output power wind speed and blowing (operation) time are seen each turbine shows the similar performance. Exergy input rate
sampled over periods of time and average values of wind for each takes the maximum value in February 2008. Exergy input rate is
period are stored. Tables 4e6 show measured and calculated important because it gives an idea about mass flow rate. High mass
performance parameters average values of turbine 1, turbine 2, and flow rate causes high exergy input rate. In Figs. 4e6 we give exergy
turbine 3, respectively. Measurements show that average wind speed, efficiencyeCp graph for the first time to our knowledge. We present
operating hour, product energy are 7.36 m/s; 580.6 h; 113,995 kWh an original and more practical version of the energy and exergy
for turbine 1; 7.80 m/s; 607.1 h; 120,990 kWh for turbine 2; 7.67 m/s; analysis of the system at a more realistic reference temperature of
607.5 h; 120,520 kWh for turbine 3, for a month. 291.1 K as the actual average local temperature, rather than the
Tables 4e6 show the general mass, energy and exergy rates to standard environment temperature and investigate the energy and
find the energy and exergy inputs and outputs, the rate of exergy exergy losses in the system at this particular practical temperature.
decrease, the rate of irreversibility, exergy destruction and the Furthermore, we study the effects of varying Cp power factors from
energy and exergy efficiencies. High exergy destruction means high 0.255 to 0.401 on the exergy efficiencies of the system and develop
inefficiency occurs in the system. High exergy destruction occurs in a practical correlation that is capable of predicting efficiencies at
some months, this is because, convenient environment conditions various power factors.

30000 0.40
turbine 1
0.35
25000 turbine 2
Exergy Input Rate (kW)

turbine 3 0.30
Power factor (Cp) (-)

20000
0.25
C = 0.511×(ε ) + 0.061
15000 p
0.20
R² = 0.772
10000 0.15

0.10
5000
0.05
0
11 07 12 07 01 08 02 08 3 08 4 08 5 08 6 08 7 08 8 08 9 08 0
Months/Year 0.35 0.38 0.41 0.44 0.47 0.50 0.53 0.56
Exergy efficiency (-)
Fig. 3. Bar charts of exergy input rates (kW) for the period 2007e2008 operating
seasons. Fig. 5. Variation of exergy efficiency with the power factor (e) for Turbine 2.

Please cite this article in press as: Baskut O, et al., Second law analysis of wind turbine power plants: Cesme, Izmir example, Energy (2011),
doi:10.1016/j.energy.2011.01.047

0.40
0.35
0.30
Power factor (Cp) (-)
0.25
0.20
0.15
0.10
0.05
0  The effects of varying reference state temperature from
0.35 0.38 0.41 0.44 0.47 0.50
Exergy efficiency (-)
Fig. 6. Variation of exergy efficiency with the power factor (e) for Turbine 3.
Furthermore, energy (Cp) and exergy efficiency values are
correlated and illustrated in Figs. 4e6 with high correlation coef-
ficients (R2 ¼ 0.990, R2 ¼ 0.772, R2 ¼ 0.902 for turbines 1, 2 and 3,
respectively). As seen in the figures, power factor and exergy effi-
ciencies of the WTPP vary between 0.255 and 0.401 and 0.393 and
0.682, respectively.
The total maximum exergy input values are obtained by using
Eqs [8e11] for a range from 4.935 MW to 24.909 MW for
different reference state values, basically from 281.55 K to
299.75 K for a better coverage and presentation of how the
varying reference state temperature affects the performance of
the system in terms of power factors and exergy efficiencies. In
conjunction with this, the total exergy destruction values are
obtained to be from 90 kW to 422 kW. As expected, the lower
the reference state temperature, the significantly larger the
energy and exergy losses in the system. However, exergy losses
rates of the system, wind turbine and useful exergy increase
considerably. The reason for this rapid rise in exergy rates is due
to a decrease in the ambient temperature. Based on these, we do
curve-fitting to observe the trend of the exergy efficiencies of the
WTPP as follows:
Taking Cp as the power factor of the wind turbine, exergy effi-
ciency correlations become for WTPP:
 For turbine 1
Cp ¼ 0.629  (e) þ 0.011, R2 ¼ 0.990
 For turbine 2
Cp ¼ 0.511  (e) þ 0.061, R2 ¼ 0.772
 For turbine 3
Cp ¼ 0.544  (e) þ 0.047, R2 ¼ 0.902
These correlations are capable of predicting the values of exergy
efficiencies of the WTPP for different power factor values.
The exergy efficiency values are obtained for a range from 39.3%
to 68.2% for different reference state values, basically from 281.55 K
to 299.75 K for a better coverage and presentation of how the
varying reference state temperature affects the performance of the
system in terms of energy demands.
Please cite this article in press as: Baskut O, et al., Second law analysis of wind turbine power plants: Cesme, Izmir example, Energy (2011),
doi:10.1016/j.energy.2011.01.047
O. Baskut et al. / Energy xxx (2011) 1e8 7
4. Conclusions
Exergy analysis is more significant tool, than energy analysis for
system performance assessment and improvement since it allows
Cp = 0.544×(ε) + 0.047 true magnitudes of the losses to be determined. The results of the
paper, particularly on locations and types of the losses, will help the
R² = 0.902 researchers, government administration, and engineers and oper-
ators working in the area of wind energy systems develop and
adapt appropriate measures and policies.
Additional conclusions drawn from the present study may be
summarized as follows:
0.53 0.56 0.59 0.62 281.55 K to 299.75 K, wind speed, humidity, and atmospheric
pressure on the energy and exergy efficiencies of the systems
are investigated and developed a practical correlation that is
capable of predicting efficiencies as functions of various power
factors.
 The technical availabilities are almost constant which are
between 93.25% and 100.00% in a year except December 2007.
In December 2007 technical availability is 72.63%. This is
because of the mechanic faults.
Acknowledgements
The authors gratefully acknowledge the support provided for
this work by Demirer Holding Inc. and personal support by its
general manager, Mr. Erol Demirer. This study would not have been
possible without the cooperation and assistance of the personnel at
the Turkish State Meteorological Service.
References
[1] Anon., European Wind Energy Association (EWEA), statistics; 2009.
Available from: http://www.ewea.org/fileadmin/ewea_documents/documents/
publications/statistics/070129_Wind_map_2006.pdf.
[2] Anon., BTM consult 2009, International wind energy development world
market update; 2009. Available from: http://www.btm.dk/world-index.htm.
[3] Anon., Energy Market Regulatory Authority (EPDK); 2009. Available from:
http://www.epdk.gov.tr.
[4] Eskin N, Artar H, Tolun S. Wind energy potential of Gokceada Island in Turkey.
Renewable & Sustainable Energy Reviews 2008;12:839e51.
[5] Ozgener L. Investigation of wind energy potential of Muradiye in Manisa,
Turkey. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 2010;14(9):3232e6.
[6] Ucar A, Balo F. Evaluation of wind energy potential and electricity generation
at six locations in Turkey. Applied Energy 2009;86:1864e72.
[7] Anon., Ministry of Energy and Natural Resources; 2009. Available from: www.
enerji.gov.tr.
_ Turkey’s installed capacity report; 2009. Available from: www.eie.
[8] Anon., EIE.
(13) gov.tr.
[9] Sahin A, Dincer I, Rosen MA. Thermodynamic analysis of wind energy. Inter-
national Journal of Energy Research 2006;30(8):553e66.
[10] Petersen EL, Mortensen NG, Landberg L, Hojstrup J, Frank HP. Wind power
meteorology, part I: climate and turbulence. Wind Energy 1998;1:25e45.
[11] Sahin AD. Progress and recent trends in wind energy. Progress in Energy and
Combustion Science 2004;30:501e43.
(14) [12] Cengel YA, Boles MA. Thermodynamics an engineering approach. New York:
McGraw-Hill; 1994.
[13] Koroneos C, Spachos N, Moussiopoulos N. Exergy analysis of renewable
energy sources. Renewable Energy 2003;28:295e310.
[14] Xydis G, Koroneos C, Loizidou M. Exergy analysis in a wind speed prognostic
model as a wind farm sitting selection tool: a case study in Southern Greece.
Applied Energy 2009;86(11):2411e20.
[15] Rosen MA, Dincer I, Kanoglu M. Role of exergy in increasing efficiency and
(15) sustainability and reducing environmental impact. Energy Policy 2008;36:
128e37.
[16] Ozgener O. A small wind turbine system (SWTS) application and its performance
analysis. Energy Conversion and Management 2006;47(11, 12):1326e37.
[17] Ozgener O, Ozgener L. Exergy and reliability analysis of wind turbine systems:
a case study. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 2007;11:1811e26.
[18] Ozgener O, Ozgener L, Dincer I. Analysis of some exergoeconomic parameters
of small wind turbine system. International Journal of Green Energy 2009;6
(1):42e56.
[19] Ahmadi A, Ehyaei MA. Exergy analysis of a wind turbine. International Journal
of Exergy 2009;6(4):457e76.
8 O. Baskut et al. / Energy xxx (2011) 1e8
[20] IEC Windturbines-Part12-1: power performance measurements of elec-
tricity producing wind turbines (IEC 61400-12-1 International standard);
2005.
[21] Baskut O, Ozgener O, Ozgener L. Effects of meteorological variables on exer-
getic efficiency of wind turbine power plants. Renewable and Sustainable
Energy Reviews 2010;14(9):3237e41.
[22] Demirer E. (Demirer Inc.) Personal communication; 2009.
[23] TSMS. Turkish State Meteorological Service, personal communication; 2009.
[24] Cengel YA, Turner RH. Fundamentals of thermal-fluid sciences. Singapore:
McGraw Hill Press; 2001.
[25] Moran MJ. Engineering thermodynamics. In: Kreith F, editor. Mechanical
engineering handbook. Boca Raton: CRC Press LLC; 1999.
[26] Wepfer WJ, Gaggioli RA, Obert EF. Proper evaluation of available energy for
HVAC. ASHRAE Transactions 1979;85(1):214e30.
[27] Dincer I, Sahin AZ. A new model for thermodynamic analysis of a drying
process. International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer 2004;47(4):645e52.
[28] Zhang Z, Pate MA. Methodology for implementing a psychrometric chart in
a computer graphics system. ASHRAE Transactions 1988;94:1.
Please cite this article in press as: Baskut O, et al., Second law analysis of wind turbine power plants: Cesme, Izmir example, Energy (2011),
doi:10.1016/j.energy.2011.01.047
[29] Anon., Global installed wind power capacity (MW) Global Wind Energy Council
6.2.2008. Wind power installed in Europe by end of 2008 (cumulative); 2009.
Available from: http://www.gwec.net/fileadmin/documents/PressReleases/PR_
stats_annex_table_2nd_feb_final_final.pdf.
[30] Anon.; 2009. Available from: http://www.ewec2009.info/fileadmin/ewec2009_
files/documents/Media_room/European_Wind_Map_2008.pdf.
[31] Anon., Electric power monthly (January 2008 edition). Energy Information
Administration; January 15, 2008. Available from: http://www.eia.doe.gov/
cneaf/electricity/epm/epm_sum.html [retrieved 2008-01-15].
[32] Anon., World wind energy report 2009. Report, World Wind Energy Associa-
tion; February 2010. Available from: http://www.wwindea.org/home/images/
stories/worldwindenergyreport2009_s.pdf [retrieved 13 March 2010].
[33] Anon., Global Wind Energy Council (GWEC), statistics; 2010. Available from:
http://www.gwec.net/fileadmin/documents/PressReleases/PR_2010/Annex%
2520stats%2520PR%25202009.pdf [retrieved 2010-08-29].
[34] Anon., European Wind Energy Association, EWEA; 2010. Available from:
http://www.ewea.org/fileadmin/ewea_documents/documents/statistics/
general_stats_2009.pdf [retrieved 2010-08-29].