Energy Reports 7 (2021) 1780–1797

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Energy Reports
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/egyr

4E analyses and multi-objective optimization of a solar-based

combined cooling, heating, and power system for residential
applications
Sarkhel H. Taher Karim a,b , Tofiq Ahmed Tofiq c , Mortaza Shariati d ,
∗ ∗
Hima Nikafshan Rad e , , Amir Ghasemi f ,
a
Computer Department, College of Science, University of Halabja, Halabja, Iraq
b
Sulaimani Polytechnic University, Technical College of Informatics, Computer Networks Department, Sulaymaniyah, Iraq
c
Computer Department, College of Science, University of Sulaimani, Sulaymaniyah, Iraq
d
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Tabriz Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tabriz, Iran
e
School of Electrical and Computer Engineering, College of Engineering, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran
f
School of Environment, College of Engineering, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran

article info a b s t r a c t

Article history: The purpose of this paper is to propose a novel combined cooling, heating, and power generation
Received 6 January 2021 system driven by evacuated tube solar collectors for residential applications. Accordingly, evacuated
Received in revised form 27 February 2021 tube collectors are employed to provide sufficient heat for cooling and power generation purposes,
Accepted 16 March 2021
while the waste heat of the evacuated tube collectors is then exploited for heating. The proposed
Available online 31 March 2021
system is comprehensively analyzed from various standpoints i.e., energy, exergy, and exergoeconomic.
Keywords: Afterward, the multi-objective genetic algorithm optimization – as a suitable tool – is applied to
ETC the system to extract a trade-off between the competing objective functions. The results showed
APC that R124 results in better exergetic efficiency compared to other refrigerants. The parametric study
ERC outcomes indicate that with increasing the collector area, total product cost reduces but the total
Evacuated tube solar collector
cost rate increases dramatically. The results also show that input parameters can directly affect
Multi-objective optimization
the exergetic sustainability index to be cautiously designed. The optimization results show that the
system’s maximum exergy efficiency is 10.06% while the minimum total cost rate is obtained as 0.4835
$/h. Further, the decision factors’ scatter plots show that LiBr mass fraction should be around 25% for
optimal operation. Overall, the proposed system can be employed for cooling, heating, and power
generation as a potential cycle.
© 2021 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND
license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).

1. Introduction suggest and develop more efficient and environmentally-friendly

Global warming has become the most common challenge that
negatively affects people’s lives (Behzadi et al., 2018a; Habibol-
lahzade et al., 2018b). An abrupt change in the population rate
and an inappropriate shift in people’s lifestyles have brought
unfavorable consequences to nations e.g. global warming (Be-
hzadi et al., 2018b; Habibollahzade et al., 2018d). Considerable
CO2 and inefficient power plants play a pivotal role in such
consequences humans deal with (Habibollahzade, 2019a). Acid
rains, greenhouse gas emissions, and other pollutions that harm
our environment are just a few examples of these problems
(Behzadi et al., 2019b, 2018c). On the other hand, ever-increasing
energy demands would attract many scientists and experts to
∗ Corresponding authors.
E-mail addresses: Hima.Nikafshan@gmail.com (H. Nikafshan Rad),
Amir_ghasemi@ut.ir (A. Ghasemi).
energy systems (Behzadi et al., 2019a; Habibollahzade et al.,
2019). In this regard, an innovative power plant for power, cool-
ing, and heating purposes can be considered a great option to
address the energy crisis (Asefi et al., 2021). Renewable-based
energy systems concerning their great potentials in reducing
greenhouse gas emissions, would be great alternatives to con-
ventional energy systems (Behzadi et al., 2018d; Habibollahzade
et al., 2018a). Solar (Habibollahzade et al., 2018c), geothermal
(Gholamian et al., 2018a), and biomass (Gholamian et al., 2018b)
are considered renewable energy resources with sufficient acces-
sibility and quantity at plethora regions. After eco-environmental
evaluation of novel combined cooling, heating, and power sys-
tems (CCHP), scholars found that these kinds of energy systems
are less pollutant that can be integrated with renewable ener-
gies (Chu and Majumdar, 2012). In recent years, much research
has been performed on novel CCHP systems to ascertain their
merits and demerits. For example, a geothermal energy system is

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.egyr.2021.03.020
2352-4847/© 2021 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-
nc-nd/4.0/).
S.H.T. Karim, T.A. Tofiq, M. Shariati et al. Energy Reports 7 (2021) 1780–1797

introduced by Parikhani et al. (2018) for cooling and power gen-

Nomenclature eration. To evaluate the performance of the mentioned system,
A Area, m2 3E analyses were considered showing that the suggested system
c Exergy cost, $/GJ can generate power up to 221.4 kW, and a cooling capacity of
161.2 kW was expected besides the total product cost of 93.87
Ċ Rate of Cost, $/h
$/GJ. Moreover, sensitivity analyses and parametric studies were
Cp Specific heat at constant pressure, kJ/kg
conducted to define the most useful parameters. The results indi-
K
cated that, although the thermal and second law efficiencies were
f Exergoeconomic factor 16.4% and 28.95% at the baseline, they increased the working fluid
Gt Solar radiation, W/m2 concentration and the temperature of the evaporator.
h Specific enthalpy, kJ/kg It is noteworthy that the exploitation of waste heat from
ir Interest rate off-gases in industrial scales is an applicable choice for cooling,
İ Irreversibility, kW heating, and power generation, thereby reducing air pollution
ṁ Mass flow rate and the cost of the final product. In this regard, a CCP CO2
n Years of operation ejector-based energy system was introduced (Ipakchi et al., 2019).
P Pressure, kPa Initially, the system was assessed from a thermodynamic view-
point and after that, the effects of the sensitive parameters were
Q̇ Heat load, kW
assessed to determine the possible ways to enhance the system’s
s Entropy, kJ/kg K
efficiency. Optimization results showed that net generated elec-
T Temperature, ◦ C
tricity could reach 7.55 kW and maximum thermal and second
U Heat transfer constant law efficiencies would be 27.42% and 24.21%. A small CCHP en-
V Velocity, m/s ergy system was proposed in another study driven by off-gases
Ẇ Work, kW of a cement plant (Nami and Anvari-Moghaddam, 2020). The
Z Investment cost, $ authors analyzed the system from various aspects i.e. thermo-
Ż Components cost rate, $/h dynamic, sustainability, and economics. Afterward, they assessed
different working fluids and various configurations to comple-
Greek letters ment the assessment of the system. It was observed that siloxanes
η Efficiency could maximize the studied Organic Rankine Cycle (ORC) while
ψ Exergy rate, kW combining two siloxane kinds may help the system work opti-
ηth Thermal efficiency, % mally. The steam generator and evaporator in the ORC subsystem
were also indicted as the most destructive elements between the
ηex Exergy efficiency, %
system’s components. The outcomes indicated that the second
θest Exergetic sustainability index
law efficiency and sustainability factor would be 63.6%, and 2.747,
τ Annual plant operation hours, h respectively. Peng et al. (2020) introduced and evaluated a CCHP
ρ Ground reflectance, kg/m3 system driven by a solar collector, solid oxide fuel cell, and steam
λ Entrainment ratio turbine. In the mentioned study, a fuel cell unit was utilized to
generate electricity and thermal energy; a steam turbine was
Subscripts, superscripts and abbreviations
utilized to create extra power; a solar collector to generate ther-
0 Dead state mal energy, and a double effect absorption chiller for cooling. To
Abs Absorber assess the impact of different circumstances, three locations in
Bo Booster Iran were taken into account. Also, a novel CCP system involving
col Collector a supercritical CO2 Brayton cycle with absorption refrigeration
con Condenser was proposed driven by exhaust gases of an engine (Wu et al.,
2020). The authors evaluated the system’s thermodynamic as-
CRF Capital recovery factor
pects, concluding that the power output and cooling capacities
D Destruction
were 253.9 kW and 168.6 kW, respectively. Liao et al. (2019)
Dif Diffuser introduced and assessed a CCHP system integrated with the ORC
eje Ejector subsystem to reuse the waste heat of coal-fired energy systems.
ETC Evacuated tube solar collector The parametric study was applied to the system to assess critical
EV Expansion valve factors’ influence on thermal and second law efficiencies beside
eva Evaporator cooling capacity. The outcomes confirmed that when the chilled
MF Mixed fluid water flow rate increases, the proposed system’s performance
Noz Nozzle increases. In another research (Matuszewska and Olczak, 2020),
o Outlet the steam turbine application and its influence on ORC’s efficiency
were studied. Besides, R254fa, R1233zd, and R600 were chosen as
pu Pump
three different working fluids, and the performance of each was
PF Primary fluid
assessed and compared.
SF Secondary fluid
The use of solar and geothermal sources in CHP, CCP, CCHP,
SHX Solution heat exchanger and multigeneration systems has been extensively analyzed in
tot Total recent decades. Ghorbani et al. (2020) proposed a solar dish CHP
Turbine tu system for power and freshwater generation through a phase
VG Vapor generator change material to store solar energy. The desalination unit was
PF Primary fluid observed that has the capability of the freshwater generation rate
of 8321 kg/s. The results further revealed that the suggested sys-
tem’s net electrical efficiency, thermal and second law efficiencies
are 28.84%, 97.18%, and 52.23%, respectively. Saini et al. (2020)
1781
S.H.T. Karim, T.A. Tofiq, M. Shariati et al.
proposed, evaluated, and compared three different topologies of
an innovative solar-driven CCHP plant through energy and exergy
analyses. Ghasemi et al. (2017) assessed a solar-biomass-based
CCHP system for freshwater, cooling, and heating purposes. Sim-
ulation results demonstrated that heating and cooling’s net power
capacities would be 802.5 kW, 1039 kW, and 5658 kW. Moreover,
simulation outputs showed that the thermal and second law
efficiencies were 61% and 7%. In a later study, the improved
version of that system studied by Ghasemi et al. (2017) was
proposed by Ghasemi et al. (2018). Accordingly, an LNG produc-
tion unit was added so that the CCHP plant was upgraded to a
multigeneration system to increase the primary system’s thermal
efficiency. MATLABReportedly, the proposed energy system could
produce 8.8 kg/s freshwater, 23.41 kW cooling load, 16.11 kW
electricity, and 0.02 m3 /h LNG. Solar and geothermal energies
were considered to design a novel system described by Alirahmi
et al. (2020) for power, cooling, heating, freshwater, and hydrogen
production.
Moreover, ten working fluids were utilized, and R123 showed
the best performance, while Therminol 59 concluded a better
performance in the geothermal unit. In addition, the parametric
study showed that geothermal temperature and its mass flow
rate, solar radiation intensity, and the inlet pressure of steam
turbines were prominent parameters that had direct impacts on
the cost of products and efficiencies of the proposed system.
The integration of a thermoelectric generator, electrolysis unit,
and parabolic solar collector to introduce a novel system was
conducted by Habibollahzade et al. (2018a). In that research
paper, exergy and economic indicators were selected to examine
the system. They investigated the system from thermodynamic
and thermoeconomic standpoints then optimized the system us-
ing multi-objective optimization. The outcomes showed that net
plant price and exergy efficiency would be 13.29% and 63.96 $/GJ
at a well-balanced optimal point. Arsalis et al. (2018) examined
the reliability of coupling a CCHP energy system with a pho-
tovoltaic subsystem for use in Cyprus. Their modeled system’s
anticipated lifetime was set at 20 years, and the life-cost of the
system was calculated as 11.2 million USD. Chen et al. (2019) de-
veloped a thermoecological cost evaluation for an energy system
combined with various solar collectors.
The effects of critical parameters on the system were also
studied and discussed. 3E evaluation and multi-criteria optimiza-
tion of an innovative energy system conducted by Behzadi et al.
(2018a) in which solar/geothermal energy was utilized. By inte-
grating photovoltaic thermal collectors with geothermal sources,
the authors designed a novel system and then analyzed it thermo-
dynamically. Simulation results highlighted that the lion’s share
of the exergy destruction occurred in the collector (29.6 kW).
Miar Naeimi et al. (2019) optimized an innovative solar hybrid
energy system after evaluating it from energy, exergy, exergoe-
conomic, and exergoenvironmental points of view.
Balakheli et al. (2020) designed and examined a cogeneration
energy system for power generation, cooling, and drinking water
production based on geothermal heat resources. The optimization
findings indicated that the highest second law efficiency would
be around 77.08%. In another study, thermoeconomic optimiza-
tion was applied to four different geothermal-based CHP plants
(Van Erdeweghe et al., 2018). Li et al. (2018b) applied a multi-
objective optimization to a CCHP plant showing that the optimal
performance could be achieved using the wood as the feedstock.
In another study, the thermodynamic assessment of an integrated
CCHP was conducted by Yang et al. (2018). Wang et al. (2017)
simulated and evaluated two configurations of CCHP energy sys-
tems based on modified thermo-economic aspects. Furthermore,
a comprehensive investigation of a CCHP system coupled with the
ORC subsystem was conducted by Li et al. (2018a). Ghaebi et al.
1782
Energy Reports 7 (2021) 1780–1797
(2018) introduced a new trigeneration system utilizing a geother-
mal heat source. The outcomes indicated that the condenser
concludes the highest exergy destruction. Chen et al. (2019) de-
veloped a micro-CCHP plant integrated with a geothermal heat
source for hydrogen, cooling, heating, and electricity production.
The result showed that exergy efficiency could reach 8.8%.
Evacuated tube collectors (ETC) can be taken into account for
many reasons, such as their significant performance during all
years, even in low solar radiation conditions. Compared to other
solar collectors, such as flat plate collectors, mentioned collectors
have lower heat loss and less production cost (Kalogirou, 2003).
Moreover, due to these kinds of collectors’ specific structures,
the system’s elements’ maintenance is straightforward (Morrison
et al., 1984). Besides, based on the experimental tests, it has
been found that the effectiveness of ETCs is higher than other
solar collectors in the same test circumstance (Zambolin and
Del Col, 2010; Ayompe et al., 2011). To boost the efficiency of the
ETCs, some investigations have been carried out. In this regard,
wide ranges of nanofluids were utilized as working fluids in the
mentioned collectors. The mentioned materials were made by
adding nano-particles of metal and metal oxide to the primary
fluid. The findings verified that adding H2 O-based Ag and ZrO2
to the working fluid can significantly improve the collector’s
efficiency (Hussain et al., 2015). In another study, Sharafeldin
and Gróf (2018) scrutinized the ETC’s performance when H2 O-
based CeO2 is used as working fluid. The results were evaluated
and compared after testing the mentioned working fluid in three
different concentrations and different mass flow rates. The results
illustrated that the absorbed energy enhances when mentioned
mixed fluid is utilized. Furthermore, it was observed that the
collector’s thermos-optical characteristic is improved up to 34%
when the mentioned material is utilized in the tube of the ETC.
In another research (Feliński and Sekret, 2017), the application
of phase change material inside an ETC and its influence on a
water heater system’s thermodynamic performance was studied.
The results showed that grade paraffin inside the collector de-
creased the heat loss in the evening when the solar radiation was
insufficient. Also, by utilizing the mentioned material into the col-
lector, the water heater system’s performance improved by 20.5%
compared to a similar collector without phase change material
inside the collector. Utilizing mini channels was another innova-
tive method that was evaluated in an investigation (Sharma and
Diaz, 2011). The mentioned method was used to minimize the
convective loss inside the evacuated-glass envelope. For a wide
range of temperature and working fluid’s rate, the performance
and the pressure drop were measured, and findings were com-
pared with an ETC without mini channels. Finally, the results
approved the performance of the presented configuration. The
environmental impacts are another research area that has been
captured the attention of scholars who studies on ETCs. In this
regard, Sharafeldin et al. (2019) conducted an investigation on
the energetic performance and environmental impacts of copper-
based nanofluid inside an ETC. Not only the energy efficiency of
the tested ETC improved, but also, the results certified that using
copper nanoparticles can play a pivotal role in the reduction of
greenhouse gas emission.
After a thorough investigation of the scientific literature, we
concluded that a reliable CCHP solar-based system consisting of
evacuated tube solar collectors (ETC) had not been proposed for
residential applications. An affordable and efficient ETC-based
CCHP system can be critical to decision-makers to design appro-
priate systems. Also, the proposed systems should be assessed
from different viewpoints while being optimized through multi-
objective optimization methods. In this study, a novel system is
designed and proposed by employing ETCs, ejector refrigeration,
and an absorption power system for heating, cooling and power
S.H.T. Karim, T.A. Tofiq, M. Shariati et al. Energy Reports 7 (2021) 1780–1797

generation. The system is assessed about thermodynamics and 3. Theoretical analysis

thermoeconomic analyses. A sensitivity analysis is also conducted
to define the impact of the input variables on the cycle. Afterward, The proposed system is analyzed theoretically and for each
multi-objective optimization is applied to the cycle to extract subsystem, the related equations are provided. For this purpose,
an optimal trade-off between exergetic efficiency and cost rate. Solar collector performance analysis and ejector mathematical
Finally, a scatter distribution regarding the input variables is modeling, beside the other components, are provided.
presented to complement the proposed study’s investigation.
3.1. Solar collector performance analysis
2. Description of the proposed CCHP system
Evacuated tube solar collectors (ETC) are considered to provide
The concept of the designed CCHP system is illustrated in the required heat for the proposed system. The available heat
Fig. 1. The proposed cycle consists of two subsystems: the first supplied from solar energy is (Mohsenian et al., 2016; Valipour
one is an absorption power cycle/ejector refrigeration system et al., 2018):
for combined cooling and electricity. The second one is a solar-
based unit to supply the subsystems’ heat source and for heating Q̇solar = Acol Gt (1)
purposes to be used in residential applications. Absorption power ETC utilizes the diffuse and beam radiation so Gt would be deter-
cycles have been investigated theoretically using various heat
mined as (Bellos et al., 2016):
sources. The ejector refrigeration system is also a well-known
1 + cos(β ) 1 − cos(β )
( ) ( )
cooling cycle that has been numerically and experimentally stud-
Gt = Rbm Gb + Gd + ρ (Gb + Gd ) (2)
ied in the literature. The proposed concept is novel and similar 2 2
composition has not been proposed earlier. The mentioned CCHP
where ρ is the ground reflectance. The thermal efficiency of the
plant consists of an ejector, an evaporator, a storage tank, two
collector is then given by (Bellos et al., 2016):
expansion valves, two vapor generators, three pumps, and an ( )
evacuated tube solar collector (ETC), a vapor booster, an absorber, Q̇u ṁcol Tcol,out − Tcol,in
a condenser, and a steam turbine. ηcol = = (3)
Q̇solar Acol Gt
The required heat energy of the plant is supplied by an ETC
unit utilizing solar radiation. In order to utilize the solar radiation For high performing evacuated solar collectors, the empirical ef-
efficiently and to prolong the operation time during the night and ficiency is provided as provided in the scientific literature (Bellos
cloudy hours, a molten salt storage tank is provided to store solar et al., 2016):
heat. The ETC unit provides sufficient heat for vapor generator 1 (
Tcol,in − T0
)
(VG 1) to vaporize the water. Additionally, to meet the residential ηcol = η0 − · f1 (4)
applications’ demands, the outlet hot water of VG 1 (state 11a) is Gt
used for space heating. in which η0 , and f1 are 0.82, and 2.19, respectively.
In VG 1, the solution and the vapor are separated into two The storage tank is modeled considering a specific value for
flows with two different thermodynamic properties. The gener- the volume of the tank given in the literature (Bellos et al., 2016):
ated vapor (state 4) is transferred to the steam turbine for power
generation. Meanwhile, the high-temperature solution (state 5) Acol × 1[m]
is delivered to vapor generator 2 (VG 2) to supply the ejector Volume = (5)
30
refrigeration unit’s required heat. The outlet stream of VG 2 (state
6) is sent to the solution heat exchanger (SHX) unit, and after The mass flow rate by the heat source the mass flow rate of the
transferring heat to the fluid (state 7) is delivered and expanded working fluid of the collector are equal (Yousefi-Lafouraki et al.,
through the expansion valve 1 (E.V 1). At the next step, the 2016):
mentioned stream enters the absorber (state 8). On the other ṁs = ṁcol (6)
hand, pump 1 is used to pressurize the absorber unit’s outlet
stream (state 1). The high-pressure flow is then delivered to The conservation of the energy law is also applied to the storage
the SHX unit (state 2), for being heated and then transferred to considering the possible heat losses:
the VG 1. By utilizing the rejected heat of VG 2 in the ejector
ρfluid · V · Cp,fluid · dT 1dt /N = ṁh · Cp,fluid · (T10a − T 1)
refrigeration subsystem, the domestic cooling demand is satisfied.
T 1 − T0
To pressurize the leaving stream of the evaporator, a booster +ṁl · Cp,fluid · (T 2 − T 1) − U · A ·
is employed within the system. Improving the plant’s cooling N
capacity and entrainment ratio are two essential criteria that ρfluid · V · Cp,fluid · dT 2dt /N = ṁh · Cp,fluid · (T 1 − T 2)
can justify adding a booster within the proposed CCHP energy T 2 − T0
system. Accordingly, the high-pressure stream (state 15) enters
+ṁl · Cp,fluid · (T 3 − T 2) − U · A ·
N
the ejector while the secondary stream is drawn into the ejec-
ρfluid · V · Cp,fluid · dT 3dt /N = ṁh · Cp,fluid · (T 2 − T 3)
tor; finally, two mentioned streams (primary and secondary) are
T 3 − T0 (7)
mixed and leave the ejector (state 16) then enters the condenser +ṁl · Cp,fluid · (T 4 − T 3) − U · A ·
(state 16). The sub-cooled stream (state 17) is then separated N
into two streams (state 18 and 19). A portion of the fluid passes ρfluid · V · Cp,fluid · dT 4dt /N = ṁh · Cp,fluid · (T 3 − T 4)
through the expansion valve 2 (E.V 2) at state 19 and then is sent T 4 − T0
to the evaporator (state 20) for cooling. The remaining portion is +ṁl · Cp,fluid · (T 5 − T 4) − U · A ·
N
sent to the pump (state 18).
Given the mentioned explanations, the designed system based
ρfluid · V · Cp,fluid · dT 5dt /N = ṁh · Cp,fluid · (T 4 − T 5)
T 5 − T0
on a solar collector, an ejector refrigeration cycle and an ab- +ṁl · Cp,fluid · (T11 − T 5) − U · A ·
sorption power system may be used for cooling, heating, and N
power. The proposed system has enough potential to respond to where N is the number of layers (equal to 5 in this study). Also,
the user’s energy demands in a more environmentally-friendly the radius of the tank is assumed to be equivalent to the height of
manner. the tank. The steady-state condition for the storage and the whole
1783
S.H.T. Karim, T.A. Tofiq, M. Shariati et al. Energy Reports 7 (2021) 1780–1797

2
13
17 18 3
13 9
23 24
8
22 12 12
14
19
7
15
1 6 4
11
16 5
10 20
27-28

21

Fig. 1. Schematic diagram of the proposed CCHP energy system.

cycle is considered, so the first terms in Eq. (7) are canceled. It A booster is employed to improve the performance of the ERC
is noted that the outlet temperature of the evacuated tube solar unit by compressing the fluid. We can write:
collector is fixed at 125 ◦ C whereas the mass flow rate of the
ẆBo = ṁ21 (h22 − h21 ) (16)
operating fluid is a variable. This is a preferred approach in the
simulations of the solar systems (Habibollahzade et al., 2018a) The isentropic efficiency of the booster is also included in the
simulations.
3.2. Absorption power cycle For modeling the ejector, a constant pressure mixing model is
used as described by Huang et al. (1999). The potential pressure
For modeling the components of the APC unit, energy balance losses are predicted and assumed within the constant cross-
equations beside mass balance are employed. section. The fluid passing through the ejector is considered a per-
For the vapor generator 1 and 2, we have (Behzadi et al., fect gas with variable specific heat. In addition, the steady-state
2018c; Gholamian et al., 2018a): condition is considered for the corresponding ejector modeling.
The entrainment ratio of the ejector is defined as (Huang et al.,
ṁ10 (h10 − h11 ) = ṁ4 h4 + ṁ5 h5 − ṁ3 h3 (8) 1999):
ṁ5 (h5 − h6 ) = ṁ15 (h15 − h14 ) (9) ṁSF
λ= (17)
ṁPF
For the solution heat exchanger, we can write:
in which SF and PF refer to the secondary and primary fluids.
ṁ6 (h6 − h7 ) = ṁ2 (h3 − h2 ) (10) The efficiency of the nozzle is then defined as (Huang et al.,
1999):
And also, the efficiency of the heat exchanger should be included.
Pump 1 is theoretically modeled as: hPF ,in − hPF ,out
ηNoz = (18)
hPF ,in − hPF ,is
Ẇpu1 = ṁ1 (h2 − h1 ) (11)
The outlet velocity of the primary fluid is given by (Huang et al.,
For the turbine, we have: 1999):
Ẇtu = ṁ4 (h4 − h9 ) (12) )) 21
VPF ,out = 2 × ηNoz × hPF ,in − hPF ,is
( (
(19)
Isentropic efficiency of the turbine and the pump should also be For the mixing section, the momentum balance is applied (Huang
considered. et al., 1999):
The following equation can model the absorber:
ṁPF VPF ,out + ṁSF VSF ,out = (ṁPF + ṁSF ) VMF ,is (20)
ṁ12 (h13 − h12 ) = ṁ9 h9 + ṁ8 h8 − ṁ1 h1 (13)
The outlet velocity of the secondary flow is expressed as:
Enthalpy of the fluid would remain constant after passing through ( ( )) 21
the expansion valves. VSF ,out = 2 hSF ,in − hSF ,out (21)
The speed of the mixed fluid is then defined as:
3.3. Ejector refrigeration cycle
VPF ,out
VMF ,is = (22)
ERC unit is similarly modeled considering mass and energy 1+λ
balance equations for different components. The mixing efficiency is given by:
The evaporator of the ERC system is modeled as: 2
VMF
ηMix = (23)
ṁ20 (h21 − h20 ) = ṁ23 (h23 − h24 ) (14) 2
VMF ,is
The condenser is used for cooling the fluid, which can be theo- The mean velocity of the mixed fluid would be:
retically simulated: 1
VPF ,out (ηM ) 2
ṁ16 (h16 − h17 ) = ṁ25 (h26 − h25 ) (15) VMF = (24)
1+λ
1784
S.H.T. Karim, T.A. Tofiq, M. Shariati et al. Energy Reports 7 (2021) 1780–1797

The energy balance in the mixing section should also be consid- Capital investment cost rate of the kth component is given by
ered: (Salehi et al., 2019):
CRF × φ
( ) ( ) [ ]
2 2
VPF ,out VSF ,out
ṁPF hPF ,out + + ṁSF hSF ,out + ŻkCI +OM = Zk (36)
2 2 τ
( 2
VMF
) where φ denotes the operating & maintenance factor. τ is the
= (ṁPF + ṁSF ) hMF + (25) number of operating hours annually. Additionally, CRF is given
2 by (Talebizadehsardari et al., 2020):
The enthalpy of the mixed fluid is then given by: ir × (1 + ir )n
CRF = (37)
hPF ,in + λhSF ,out 2
VMF (1 + ir )n − 1
hMF = − (26)
1+λ 2 where n is the number of operations and ir is the rate of interest.
Outlet enthalpy of the mixed fluid is then given by: Chemical Engineering Plant Cost Index (CEPCI) is used to convert
the original year’s cost to the current year.
hMF ,out ,is + hMF For each component, the exergoeconomic factor is defined as
hMF ,out = hMF + (27)
ηDif (Shamoushaki et al., 2017):
where subscript Dif refers to the diffuser. ŻkCI +OM
Finally, the whole performance of the ejector is related to fk = (38)
ŻkCI +OM + ĊD + ĊL
(Huang et al., 1999):
( [ ]) 12 where ĊL is the exergy loss cost defined as:
hPF ,in − hPF ,is
λ = ηNoz ηMix ηDif −1 (28) ĊL = cF × ψ̇loss × 0.0036 (39)
hMF ,out ,is − hMF
Table 1 shows the related equations of exergoeconomic analysis
3.4. Exergy analysis for each component. The theory of LMTD is used to predict the
area of heat exchangers using heat transfer rates (Uk ). For genera-
Exergy analysis is applied to the proposed cycle to evaluate tor, solution heat exchanger, condenser, absorber, and evaporator,
the cycle with regard to the second law efficiency (Ghasemi et al., these values are 1.6, 1.1, 1, 0.6, and 0.9 mkW
2 K , respectively. For the

2021). Exergy destruction rate is defined as (Golkar et al., 2019): prediction of heat exchanger area, Eq. (40) is used:

ψ̇in = ψ̇out + İ (29) Q̇k = Ak Uk ∆TLMTD (40)

where ψ̇ and İ denote the rate of exergy and exergy destruction. 3.6. Performance criteria
The rate of exergy (exergy multiplied by mass flow rate) is
given by (Ehyaei et al., 2020): Some performance criteria are considered to examine the pro-
posed system from various aspects. The first law efficiency of the
ψ̇ = ṁ (h − h0 − T0 (s − s0 )) (30)
system is defined as:
The solar exergy is given by (Noorpoor et al., 2016): Q̇ev a + Ẇnet + Q̇h
[ ( ) ( )4 ] ηth = (41)
4 T0 1 T0 Q̇solar
ψ̇solar = Q̇solar 1 − + (31)
3 Tsun 3 Tsun where Q̇ev a and Q̇h are cooling and heating capacities. Total net
power output is defined as:
3.5. Exergoeconomic theory Ẇnet = Ẇtu − Ẇpu1 − Ẇpu2 − ẆBo (42)

Exergoeconomic analysis is considered to investigate the sys- In addition, the exergy efficiency of the proposed system is given
tem from the viewpoint of economic. For this purpose, exergy by:
theory needs to be combined with the economic via applying cost ψ̇eva + Ẇnet + ψ̇h
balance equations to each component. Cost balance equation is ηex = (43)
ψ̇solar
generally defined as (Shayesteh et al., 2019):
∑ ∑ The total rate of cost for the whole cycle is:
CI +OM
Ċq,k + Ċin,k + Żtot = Ċw,k + Ċout ,k (32) i=k
∑
Ċtot = Żi + Ċfuel (44)
where Ċ denotes the cost rate and Ż refers to rate of capital or
i=1
maintenance cost associated with each component. Cost rate is
given by (Ashari et al., 2012): Accordingly, the total product cost of the system is given by:

Ċ = c × ψ̇ × 0.0036 (33) Ċtot

cP ,tot = (45)
(ψ̇ev a + Ẇnet + ψ̇h ) × 0.0036
In which c is the cost of exergy stream materials.
In addition, the rate of the cost of irreversibility is then defined Also, the payback period of the system is calculated considering
as (Aliehyaei et al., 2015): the cost of the components and the electricity cost which is
considered to be 0.1 $/kWh:
ĊD = cF × İ × 0.0036 (34) ∑i=m
i=1 Zi
in which cF refers to the fuel cost. PP = (46)
Ẇnet × τ × 0.1 [$/kWh]
For each component, we may write (Cao et al., 2020a):
In addition, in order to analyze the system deeply, the exergetic
Żk CI +OM = Żk CI + Żk OM (35) sustainability index should be calculated as described in Ref.
1785
S.H.T. Karim, T.A. Tofiq, M. Shariati et al. Energy Reports 7 (2021) 1780–1797

Table 1
Exergoeconomic relations for each component (Bellos et al., 2016; Parikhani et al., 2018).
Component Cost balance and auxiliary equations Cost functions
Solar collectors/pump Ċ11 + ŻETC = Ċ10 250 × Acol [m2 ]
Ċ10 + Ċ3 + ŻVG1 = Ċ4 + Ċ5 + Ċ11 )0.78
130 × AVG1 [m2 ]/0.093
(
Vapor generator 1
c10 = c11
Expansion valve 2 Ċ20 = Ċ19 + ŻEV 2 0
Ċ2 = ĊW ,pu1 + Ċ1 + Żpu1 ( )0.71
Pump 1 3540 × ẆPu1 [kW]
cw,pu1 = cw,tu
Ċ14 = ĊW ,pu2 + Ċ18 + Żpu2 ( )0.71
Pump 2 3540 × ẆPu2 [kW]
cw,pu2 = cw,tu
Ċ7 + Ċ9 + Ċ12 + ŻAbs = Ċ13 + Ċ1
)0.78
130 × Aabs [m2 ]/0.093
(
Absorber Ċ8 + Ċ9 Ċ1
= , c12 = 0
ψ8 + ψ9 ψ1
Expansion valve 1 Ċ8 = Ċ7 + ŻEV 1 114.5ṁ7 [kg/s]
Ċ4 + Żtu = Ċ9 + ĊW ,tu ( )0.7
Turbine 4405 × Ẇtu [kW]
c4 = c9
Ċ6 + Ċ2 + ŻSHX = Ċ3 + Ċ7 )0.78
130 × ASHX [m2 ]/0.093
(
Solution heat exchanger
c6 = c7
Ċ16 + Ċ25 + Żcon = Ċ26 + Ċ17 )0.78
130 × Acon [m2 ]/0.093
(
Condenser
c16 = c17 , c25 = 0
Ċ20 + Ċ23 + Żev a = Ċ24 + Ċ21 )0.78
130 × Aev a [m2 ]/0.093
(
Evaporator
c20 = c21 , c23 = 0
Ejector Ċ16 = Ċ15 + Ċ22 + Żeje 114.5ṁ19 [kg/s]
Ċ22 = ĊW ,Bo + Ċ21 + ŻBo )0.46
9624.2 × ẆBo [kW]
(
Booster
cw,Bo = cw,tu
Ċ5 + Ċ14 + ŻVG2 = Ċ6 + Ċ15 )0.78
130 × AVG2 [m2 ]/0.093
(
Vapor generator 2
c5 = c6

Hashemian and Noorpoor (2019). Higher exergetic sustainability Table 2

index means lower exergy destruction compared to the exergetic Decision variables used for the multi-objective optimization where exergy
efficiency and cost rate are objective functions.
efficiency and input and output exergies. For this purpose, we
Decision variables Constraint
may write:
Acol (m2 ) 50–200
ψ̇out ,tot ηex × ψ̇in,tot
( ) ( )
Pin,tur (kPa) 50–120
θest = × (47) LiBr mass fraction (%) 25–40
ψ̇out ,tot + İ + ψ̇fuel 100 × İ T10 (◦ C) 120–160

3.7. Multi-objective optimization

Optimization is usually conducted when we have two or more
conflicting objectives, such as efficiency and cost, usually in con-
flict (Habibollahzade et al., 2021c; Habibollahzade and Houshfar,
2020). So we may need to optimize the system by increasing
the desired objective function while minimizing the other one
(Habibollahzade and Rosen, 2021; Cao et al., 2020b). For this
purpose, conventionally, we extract a Pareto frontier to disclose
the relationship between these objectives (Habibollahzade et al.,
2021b,a). Different objective functions can be considered for the
optimization purpose, while the exergy efficiency and total cost
rate are the typical objective functions widely used in the litera-
ture (Habibollahzade et al., 2018). Hence, maximizing the exergy
efficiency while minimizing the total cost rate are the two ob-
jective functions that are intended to be optimized. Optimization
can be conducted using various algorithms, while the genetic al-
gorithm has always been the right choice because of its significant
advantages for energy systems (Habibollahzade, 2019b). Here,
MATLABMATLAB and EES are linked to optimizing the system
by receiving information from EES in MATLABMATLAB. MAT-
LABA well-known genetic algorithm is used to accomplish the
optimization using the provided tool in MATLAB, so there is no
need to program the genetic algorithm (Habibollahzade et al.,
1786
2018). The population is considered to be 100 members and the
number of generations is set at 10; the probability of crossover
and mutation of 85% and 1% are respectively considered. Finally,
at different operating conditions (optimum points), decision vari-
ables values and objective function values are provided to help
the decision-makers and stakeholders select a desired operating
condition based on their own view. Scatter plots for each de-
cision variable are also provided to show the suitable range of
operations applied to each variable.
Table 2 shows the range of decision variables and target func-
tions used as the input of optimization.
The input parameters for the simulation purposes are listed in
Table 3.
3.8. Working fluid selection
It is important to select the best operating fluid to maximize
the performance of the proposed system. Accordingly, many flu-
ids are tested and five refrigerants were superior to other working
fluids. According to Fig. 2, the highest exergy efficiency resulted
from using R500, but R124 results in a more linear trend while
having the highest exergy efficiency at the heat source’s low
S.H.T. Karim, T.A. Tofiq, M. Shariati et al. Energy Reports 7 (2021) 1780–1797

Table 3 Table 4
Input data used for the simulation of the proposed system. Verification of the subsystems used in the proposed system.
Parameter Value Parameter Value APC unit
Thermodynamic values Parameter This work Theoretical
T0 20 ◦ C P0 101.3 kPa (Garcia-Hernando
PETC 750 kPa P4 100 kPa et al., 2013)
TETC 125 ◦ C P14 1550 kPa Steam flow rate (kg/s) 2.35 2.33
Acol 100 m2 LiBr mass fraction 36% Thermal efficiency (%) 14.12 14.10
P22 Solution flow rate (kg/s) 22.42 22.60
Gt 800 W/m2 = PRbo 1.6 Turbine power (MW) 1.003 1.002
P21
∆Thot ,VPG1 (T10 − T4 ) 10 C ◦
T21 10 ◦ C Ejector unit
∆Tcpp,VPG1 (T11 − T3 ) 3 ◦C ηpu = ηtu = ηNoz = ηD 0.85 Tgen (◦ C) λ (This work) λ (Experimental
∆TTT ,VPG2 (T5 − T15 ) 20 C ◦
ηMix 0.9 Ruangtrakoon and
Thongtip, 2020)
∆Tpp,eva = ∆Tpp,VG2 ◦
3 C εSHX 0.83
102 0.12 0.1
Exergoeconomic values 104 0.43 0.45
ir 0.12 n 20 years 106 0.62 0.66
φ 1.06 τ 330 × 24 h 112 0.61 0.6
Multi-objective optimization ETC unit
Population size 100 No. of generations 10 Normalized heat gain ηcol (This work) ηcol (Experimental
Crossover probability 85% Mutation probability 1% (m2 K/kW) Naik et al., 2019)
4 0.61 0.6
7.5 0.51 0.52
11 0.41 0.43
15 0.4 0.41

4.2. Exergy and exergoeconomic evaluations

The main results of the exergy and exergoeconomic evalua-

Fig. 2. The performance of the different working fluids used in the ejector
refrigeration system.
temperatures. Consequently, R124 is used to complement the
simulations. It is noted that we have examined a wide range of
operating conditions, and still, R124 was considered the preferred
working fluid as it resulted in a higher exergy efficiency.
4. Results and discussion
The proposed system is analyzed considering energy, exergy
and exergoeconomic aspects. The simulation results of the pro-
posed system are provided. For this purpose, 4E analyses of the
proposed are conducted accordingly.
tions are provided. Table 5 shows the thermophysical properties
of each stream along with their cost rate and exergy values.
The results of the exergy and exergoeconomic analyses for
various components are provided in Table 6. The highest exergy
destruction occurs in the solar collector, making sense as solar
collectors are not usually efficient. The highest exergy destruction
cost relates to the condenser as the cost of fuel for this component
is high. The highest total cost rate is associated with the solar col-
lectors and the turbine has a high-cost rate. The exergoeconomic
factor of solar collectors and pump 2 is very high, indicating
that the cost of exergy destruction is by far lower compared to
the total cost rate. However, this factor’s value is very low for
expansion valves and the condenser showing that the cost of
exergy destruction is very high in these components.
The share of the exergy destruction for the components is
presented in two pie charts in Fig. 3. The left-hand side of the
figure shows that the highest exergy destruction occurs in the
solar collectors, while the right pie chart shows the share of the
exergy destruction after excluding the solar collectors.
The exergy flows within the proposed system is presented in
Fig. 4 as visual Sankey diagrams to have an excellent presentation
of the exergy flows.
4.3. Parametric study

4.1. Verification
The verification of the subsystems of the proposed system is
provided in Table 4. Obviously, the outcomes of the subsystems’
simulation are in good agreement with the outcomes of the pub-
lished articles. The basic subsystems are considered to validate
the results and the input values are considered to be the same
as the input values of the references with which the results are
compared. LiBr mass fraction in the absorption cycle is 47.5% and
absorber pressure is fixed at 4.2 kPa. For validation of the ejector
refrigeration cycle, the evaporator temperature is considered to
be 10 ◦ C and condenser pressure is fixed at 94.6 kPa.
1787
To assess the influence of the significant input factors on the
designed system’s functionality, parametric studies are conducted
in this part. In all of the illustrated plots, the effect of effective
parameters on pivotal factors such as thermal and exegetics ef-
ficiencies, total cost rate, the overall product cost, power output,
cooling capacity, heating load, and exergetic sustainability index
is evaluated. Fig. 5 shows the impact of temperature difference
in VG1 (streams 4 and 10) on the cycle’s performance criteria.
As can be seen, with increasing the mentioned factor, the power
generation, exergetic efficiency, total cost rate and exergetic sus-
tainability index of the proposed system decrease while, total
product cost, cooling capacity, and heating load and thermal
S.H.T. Karim, T.A. Tofiq, M. Shariati et al. Energy Reports 7 (2021) 1780–1797

Table 5
Thermophysical, exergy and exergoeconomic properties of every stream.
Stream T (◦ C) P (kPa) h (kJ/kg) s (kJ/kg K) Y (%) ṁ (g/s) ψ̇ (W) Ċ (̸ c/h) c ($/GJ)
1 35 4.127 70.13 0.3703 36 81.28 78.42 0.6866 24.32
2 35.03 100 70.22 0.3706 36 81.28 78.73 29.02 1024
3 56.41 100 126 0.5463 36 81.28 424.4 39.05 255.6
4 115 100 2706 7.441 – 11.7 6178 41.51 18.66
5 115 100 262.3 0.8835 42.05 69.58 1978 42.9 60.26
6 67.81 100 147.7 0.5646 42.05 69.58 511.2 11.09 60.26
7 40.61 100 82.58 0.3628 42.05 69.58 94.53 2.051 60.26
8 40.9 4.127 82.58 0.3651 42.05 69.58 47.68 2.07 120.6
9 29.51 4.127 2315 7.669 – 11.7 811.6 5.453 18.66
10 125 750 525.4 1.581 – 143.7 9320 48.2 14.36
11 59.41 750 249.3 0.8234 – 143.7 1556 8.044 14.36
12 20 101.3 83.93 0.2962 – 1297 0 0 0
13 25 101.3 104.8 0.3669 – 1297 228.8 10.7 129.9
14 35.7 1550 240.1 1.135 – 45.03 951.3 56.36 164.6
15 95 1550 417.2 1.646 – 45.03 2172 88.63 113.3
16 58.51 516.1 399.5 1.652 – 76.9 2218 133.5 167.2
17 35 516.1 239.2 1.134 – 76.9 1564 94.15 167.2
18 35 516.1 239.2 1.134 – 45.03 915.8 55.12 167.2
19 35 516.1 239.2 1.134 – 31.88 648.4 39.03 167.2
20 10 235 239.2 1.139 – 31.88 603 39.04 179.8
21 10 235 365.8 1.586 – 31.88 462 29.91 179.8
22 25.26 376 374.7 1.59 – 31.88 702.8 44.9 177.4
23 20 101.3 83.93 0.2962 – 137.8 0 0 0
24 13 101.3 54.64 0.1951 – 137.8 48.96 10.5 595.7
25 20 101.3 83.93 0.2962 – 589.5 0 0 0
26 25 101.3 104.8 0.3669 – 589.5 104 40.41 1080

Table 6
Exergy and exergoeconomic analyses results for different components.
Component ψ̇fuel (kW) ψ̇product (kW) İ (kW) ĊD (̸ c/h) Ż OM +CI (̸ c/h) f (%)
Solar collectors/storage 74.79 9.32 65.47 0 40.15 100
Vapor generator 1 7.765 7.731 0.034 0.174 5.21 38.79
Expansion valve 2 0.6484 0.603 0.045 2.73 0 0.32
Pump 1 0.007 ≈0 0.007 26.91 0.18 0.66
Pump 2 0.0414 0.0355 0.006 ≈0 0.64 88.18
Absorber 0.7808 0.2288 0.552 4.82 3.88 44.62
Expansion valve 1 0.0945 0.0477 0.047 1.02 0.02 1.85
Turbine 5.366 4.583 0.783 5.26 30.16 85.14
Solution heat exchanger 0.4167 0.3457 0.071 1.54 0.99 39.07
Condenser 0.6543 0.104 0.55 33.1 1.03 3.02
Evaporator 0.141 0.049 0.092 5.96 1.37 18.72
Ejector 2.875 2.218 0.657 30.5 0 0
Booster 0.2826 0.2408 0.042 0.6 10.91 94.76
Vapor generator 2 1.466 1.221 0.245 5.3 0.47 8.10
Total 74.79 6.19 68.6 0 95.01 100

Fig. 3. The share of exergy destruction; overall system (left side) and excluding solar collectors (right side).

1788
S.H.T. Karim, T.A. Tofiq, M. Shariati et al.
Fig. 4. Grassmann figures indicating the exergy flows.
efficiency of the system increase. To justify the decreasing trend
of the mentioned parameters, it should be noted that, the men-
tioned difference has a close relationship with transferred heat
energy from the collector into the absorption power cycle. In fact,
with increasing the difference between the two temperatures,
the delivered heat into the absorption power cycle decreases,
and consequently, the power generation in the turbine decreases,
and this lower power generation leads to lower exergetic effi-
ciency. Besides, due to decreased net output power, the proposed
system’s overall cost decreases as the cheaper turbine can be
employed. The system’s lower exergetic efficiency makes the
system less efficient with a higher rate of exergy destruction, so
the exergetic sustainability index decreases. On the other hand, to
justify the increasing trend of thermal efficiency, it is noteworthy
that increasing the mentioned temperature deference, because of
improved capacities of heating and cooling, increases the energy
efficiency of the system. Moreover, the decreased power genera-
tion can potentially reduce the product cost. Further, the heating
capacity increase with the increment of the mentioned factor as
the temperature of state 11 increases.
Fig. 6 depicts the impact of the collector area on the per-
formance metrics of the proposed system. Obviously, with the
increasing area of the solar collector, different trends are seen
regarding different performance indicants. Indeed, the proposed
system’s energy and second law efficiencies remain constant
without any change because a constant temperature has been
considered for the outlet stream of the collector (state 10a). The
collector area alteration’s influence is involved by considering a
variable mass flow rate of the collector’s working fluid in the
1789
Energy Reports 7 (2021) 1780–1797
simulation process. Also, as overall exergy destructions of the
plant remain constant, the exergetic sustainability index remains
constant. On the other hand, with the increasing area of the
collector, the generated power, heating load, cooling, and overall
cost rate of plant increase because the collector’s mass flow rate
increases so that higher energy is provided to the plant. On the
other hand, as it is clear, the total product cost decreases due to
an increase in the system’s generated power.
Fig. 7 illustrates the impact of solar radiation intensity on
the primary performance criteria of the proposed system. By
comparing this figure with Fig. 6, it is seen that the trends of
the curves are similar. In other words, the thermal and exer-
getic efficiencies and the exergetic sustainability index of the
proposed system remain constant. On the other hand, heating
load, cooling load, overall cost, and power generation of the
proposed system increase. The reason behind the similarity is that
higher solar radiation has a similar effect on the proposed system
compared to the influence of increment of the solar collector
area. In fact, higher solar radiation means that the absorbed heat
energy enhances similar to the effect of increasing the area of the
collector.
Fig. 8 demonstrates the impact of the TIP (turbine inlet pres-
sure) on the system’s performance metrics. With increasing tur-
bine inlet pressure, apparently, there are some extremes for the
power output, exergetic efficiency, the exergetic sustainability
index, and the proposed system’s total cost rate. The extremes
are related to the good optimum local maximum and minimum
points. For instance, the maximum net power is seen at 70 kPa
and after that, due to the significant reduction of the turbine
S.H.T. Karim, T.A. Tofiq, M. Shariati et al.
Fig. 5. The impact of the temperature difference of VG1 (streams 4 and 10) on the system.
Fig. 6. The influence of collector area on the performance metrics of the proposed system.
power output, the net power output decreases dramatically. The
extremes regarding thermal efficiency and the exergetic sus-
tainability index would be expected at 80 kPa. On the other
hand, total product cost has a minimum value of around 80 kPa,
which is favorable. The reason can be found by contemplating
the total product cost formula; the value of power output is in
the equation’s dominator. However, the total cost rate trend is
reverse, which is related to a higher cost allocated to the turbine
and other components. The increasing trend of the heating and
cooling capacity can be justified because higher turbine inlet
pressure can increase the exchanged heat in the evaporator and
the temperature of the fluid leaving VG 1 would increase.
Fig. 9 illustrates the effect of the pressure of VG2 unit on
the main performance criteria of the proposed system. As can
be seen, cooling capacity would increase to a maximum value
of around 1400 kPa by increasing the pressure of VG2. However,
with increasing pressure, the total cost rate and the electricity
1790
Energy Reports 7 (2021) 1780–1797
decrease as turbine power declines; so, the total cost rate drops.
Although the electricity declines, the energy and second law
efficiencies increase because of increased cooling and heating ca-
pacities. Moreover, by increasing the pressure of VG2, the curve of
the exergetic sustainability index experiences an increasing trend.
The rational reason that can be highlighted here about that trend
is, by improving the exergetic and thermal efficiencies of the pro-
posed system, the overall rate of destructions decreases, which
means that the system operates in an environmentally-friendly
way.
Fig. 10 shows the effect of the booster pressure ratio (rbooster )
on the cycle’s performance metrics. With raising the ratio, the
electricity decreases because of the raised power consumption
in the booster. Further, the proposed system’s cooling load in-
creases, leading the system to operate in higher thermal ef-
ficiency. Besides, heating capacity does not correlate with the
booster pressure ratio, so an unchanged trend is seen for the
S.H.T. Karim, T.A. Tofiq, M. Shariati et al.
Fig. 7. The influence of intensity of solar radiation on the performance metrics of the proposed cycle.
Fig. 8. The effect of the input pressure of the turbine on the proposed system.
heating capacity. Also, within the reasonable range of booster
pressure ratio, the plant’s exergetic efficiency decreases as the
turbine power output drops. Obviously, a higher-pressure ratio
of the booster can improve the cooling capacity of the ejector re-
frigeration cycle. Moreover, the total cost rate raises with raising
the booster pressure ratio and such an increment is related to the
price of the booster. In addition, the increasing trend can be seen
in the curve of product cost because of its close relationship with
the generated power.
Fig. 11 indicates the effect of the evaporator temperature on
the performance metrics. With increasing the evaporator tem-
perature to which the system cooling load is proportional, the
system’s thermal efficiency would increase as the system cooling
load rises, but the exergy efficiency decreases. This is justified be-
cause increasing the cooling load of the system cannot overcome
the decreased output power; thus, a slight reduction in exergy
efficiency is seen. In addition, the exergetic sustainability index
1791
Energy Reports 7 (2021) 1780–1797
of the system decreases with increasing evaporator temperature
because of the reduced system exergy destruction rate, which is
not desirable. Also, the proposed system’s product cost increases
with increasing the evaporator temperature as the total cost rate
of the system increases and the power output falls.
Fig. 12 illustrates the impact of the solar collector’s outlet
temperature (TETC,out ) on the performance metrics of the cycle.
With raising the output temperature of the solar collector, the
electricity increases, which makes sense. In addition, such an
increment reduces the energy efficiency as the heating capacity
decreases. The reason for the reduced heating load is that the
temperature of the fluid leaving VG1 (state 11) reduces with
increasing the outlet temperature of the ETC. The system’s ex-
ergetic sustainability index increases because the rate of total
exergy destruction of the proposed system reduces. On the other
hand, the cooling capacity drops because the higher input heat to
the system can negatively affect the ejector refrigeration cycle’s
S.H.T. Karim, T.A. Tofiq, M. Shariati et al.
Fig. 9. The effect pressure of VG2 unit on the proposed system.
Fig. 10. The effect of the booster pressure ratio (rbooster ) on the proposed system.
performance. Also, the increased turbine power output increases
the total cost rate as the turbine’s purchase cost directly relates
to its power capacity.
Fig. 13 shows the effect of LiBr mass fraction on the perfor-
mance metrics of the proposed system. By raising the fraction,
the net power and second law efficiency decrease significantly.
This is justified because although the heating and cooling loads
increase with increasing the fraction, reduced power output can
overcome the increased exergy of cooling and heating capacities.
Also, because of the increased total cost rate and reduced electric-
ity, the product cost increases considering the formula defined.
Finally, the system’s exergetic sustainability index decreases due
to an increase in the overall rate of the exergy destruction.
5. Multi-objective optimization
The Pareto front consisting of optimum points is provided
in Fig. 14. The two conflicting objectives would increase with
1792
Energy Reports 7 (2021) 1780–1797
increasing either of them. Some points are extracted and can be
considered for designing the systems depending on engineers’
and stakeholders’ perspectives. However, the desired operating
points should be compared to the ideal condition shown in the
figure. Six different operating points are selected, having different
efficiency and total cost rate. The values of the decision variables
corresponded to these points along with the value of the objective
functions are given in Table 7. The payback period of the system
at different optimal solutions would be within the range of 5.4 to
7.1 years.
A scatter distribution of the selected decision variables should
be given and analyzed to alert the engineers what would be
the best operating range of these variables. According to Fig. 15,
within the studied range of population, the inlet pressure of the
turbine has no specific good operating range because optimum
points are not constrained in a specific range. However, the
optimum points as a result of altering the outlet temperature of
ETC are located at the top and bottom of the studied range, which
S.H.T. Karim, T.A. Tofiq, M. Shariati et al. Energy Reports 7 (2021) 1780–1797

Fig. 11. The impact of evaporator temperature on the proposed system.

Fig. 12. The effect outlet temperature of the solar collector (TETC,out ) on the proposed system.

Table 7
Decision variables and objective functions values at the selected points.
Parameters Objective functions Payback period
Acol (m2 ) Pin,tur (kPa) Y (%) T10 (◦ C) ηex (%) Ċtot ($/h) PP (yrs)
50 120 34.7 160 10.06 0.6087 5.4
50 105 25.3 159.2 9.492 0.5557 5.5
50 86.4 25 160 8.984 0.5423 5.7
50 71.02 25 160 8.454 0.5294 6.1
50 82.6 25 120 7.975 0.5134 5.8
50 50 25 120 6.964 0.4835 7.2

means that this parameter should be kept either at the highest
or lower value. LiBr mass fraction (%) would impact the results
considerably as shown in Fig. 15. As can be seen, lower values
of Y would be better as the optimum points are situated mainly
at the bottom of the studied range. The collector area is another
1793
critical parameter and by changing this parameter, the operating
condition of the system would change significantly. As illustrated
in Fig. 15, fewer collectors should be used as a higher number of
collectors increases the total cost rate dramatically, which is not
favorable.
S.H.T. Karim, T.A. Tofiq, M. Shariati et al. Energy Reports 7 (2021) 1780–1797

Fig. 13. The effect of LiBr mass fraction on the proposed system.

Fig. 14. Pareto optimal solution points of the proposed system.

6. Concluding remarks
A novel combined CCHP system is proposed by employing
evacuated tube solar collectors, and the absorption power cycle
beside an ejector refrigeration cycle for residential applications.
The proposed system is comprehensively analyzed from thermo-
dynamic and economic standpoints to check the cycle’s perfor-
mance criteria. The multi-objective genetic algorithm is applied to
1794
the proposed system to optimize the conflicting target functions.
The primary results of this paper can be summarized as:
• A comparison study is performed regarding organic working
fluid selection for the ejector refrigeration system and R124
concluded the best performance.
• At the baseline, the net electrical power, heating load, cool-
ing load, are obtained 4.25 kW, 23.77 kW and 4.03 kW,
respectively.
S.H.T. Karim, T.A. Tofiq, M. Shariati et al. Energy Reports 7 (2021) 1780–1797

• The scatter distribution of the influential variables shows

that LiBr mass fraction should be about 25% and solar col-
lector outlet temperature should be at the highest or lowest
value.

CRediT authorship contribution statement

Sarkhel H. Taher Karim: Conception and design of study, Ac-

quisition of data, Analysis and/or interpretation of data, Writing
- original draft, Writing - review & editing. Tofiq Ahmed Tofiq:
Conception and design of study, Acquisition of data, Analysis
and/or interpretation of data, Writing - original draft, Writing
- review & editing. Mortaza Shariati: Conception and design
of study, Acquisition of data, Analysis and/or interpretation of
data, Writing - original draft, Writing - review & editing. Hima
Nikafshan Rad: Conception and design of study, Acquisition of
data, Analysis and/or interpretation of data, Writing - original
draft, Writing - review & editing. Amir Ghasemi: Conception
and design of study, Acquisition of data, Analysis and/or inter-
pretation of data, Writing - original draft, Writing - review &
editing.

Declaration of competing interest

The authors declare that they have no known competing finan-

cial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared
to influence the work reported in this paper.

Acknowledgment

All authors approved the version of the manuscript to be

published.

References

Aliehyaei, M., Atabi, F., Khorshidvand, M., Rosen, M.A., 2015. Exergy, economic
and environmental analysis for simple and combined heat and power IC
engines. Sustain http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/su7044411.
Alirahmi, S.M., Rahmani Dabbagh, S., Ahmadi, P., Wongwises, S., 2020. Multi-
objective design optimization of a multi-generation energy system based on
geothermal and solar energy. Energy Convers. Manage. http://dx.doi.org/10.
1016/j.enconman.2019.112426.
Arsalis, A., Alexandrou, A.N., Georghiou, G.E., 2018. Thermoeconomic modeling
of a small-scale gas turbine-photovoltaic-electrolyzer combined-cooling-
heating-and-power system for distributed energy applications. J. Clean. Prod.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.04.001.
Asefi, G., Habibollahzade, A., Ma, T., Houshfar, E., Wang, R., 2021. Thermal
management of building-integrated photovoltaic/thermal systems: A com-
prehensive review. Sol. Energy 216, 188–210. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.
solener.2021.01.005.
Ashari, G.R., Ehyaei, M.A., Mozafari, A., Atabi, F., Hajidavalloo, E., Shalbaf, S.,
2012. Exergy, economic, and environmental analysis of a PEM fuel cell power
system to meet electrical and thermal energy needs of residential buildings.
J. Fuel Cell Sci. Technol. http://dx.doi.org/10.1115/1.4006049.
Ayompe, L.M., Duffy, A., Mc Keever, M., Conlon, M., McCormack, S.J., 2011.
Comparative field performance study of flat plate and heat pipe evacuated
Fig. 15. Scatter distribution of the selected input parameters. tube collectors (ETCs) for domestic water heating systems in a temperate
climate. Energy http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2011.03.034.
Balakheli, M.M., Chahartaghi, M., Sheykhi, M., Hashemian, S.M., Rafiee, N.,
2020. Analysis of different arrangements of combined cooling, heating and
• Overall thermal and second law efficiencies of the proposed power systems with internal combustion engine from energy, economic
CCHP energy system are 40.07% and 7.8% at the baseline. and environmental viewpoints. Energy Convers. Manage. http://dx.doi.org/
• Exergy destructions of all components are calculated and 10.1016/j.enconman.2019.112253.
Behzadi, A., Gholamian, E., Ahmadi, P., Habibollahzade, A., Ashjaee, M., 2018a.
compared and results showed that the highest exergy de- Energy, exergy and exergoeconomic (3E) analyses and multi-objective opti-
struction with the value of 65.47 kW occurred in the solar mization of a solar and geothermal based integrated energy system. Appl.
collectors. Therm. Eng. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.applthermaleng.2018.08.034.
Behzadi, A., Gholamian, E., Houshfar, E., Ashjaee, M., Habibollahzade, A., 2018b.
• The results of multi-objective optimization show that max-
Thermoeconomic analysis of a hybrid PVT solar system integrated with
imum exergetic efficiency and the system’s minimum cost double effect absorption chiller for cooling/hydrogen production. Energy
rate are 10.06% and 0.4835 $/h, respectively. Equip. Syst. 6, 413–427. http://dx.doi.org/10.22059/ees.2018.33319.

1795
S.H.T. Karim, T.A. Tofiq, M. Shariati et al.
Behzadi, A., Gholamian, E., Houshfar, E., Habibollahzade, A., 2018c. Multi-
objective optimization and exergoeconomic analysis of waste heat recovery
from Tehran’s waste-to-energy plant integrated with an ORC unit. Energy
160, 1055–1068. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2018.07.074.
Behzadi, Amirmohammad, Habibollahzade, A., Ahmadi, P., Gholamian, E., Housh-
far, E., 2019a. Multi-objective design optimization of a solar based system
for electricity, cooling, and hydrogen production. Energy 169, 696–709. http:
//dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2018.12.047.
Behzadi, A., Habibollahzade, A., Zare, V., Ashjaee, M., 2019b. Multi-objective
optimization of a hybrid biomass-based SOFC/GT/double effect absorption
chiller/RO desalination system with CO2 recycle. Energy Convers. Manage.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.enconman.2018.11.053.
Behzadi, A., Houshfar, E., Gholamian, E., Ashjaee, M., Habibollahzade, A., 2018d.
Multi-criteria optimization and comparative performance analysis of a power
plant fed by municipal solid waste using a gasifier or digester. Energy
Convers. Manage. 171, 863–878. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.enconman.2018.
06.014.
Bellos, E., Tzivanidis, C., Antonopoulos, K.A., 2016. Exergetic, energetic and
financial evaluation of a solar driven absorption cooling system with various
collector types. Appl. Therm. Eng. 102, 749–759. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.
applthermaleng.2016.04.032.
Cao, Y., Doustgani, A., Salehi, A., Nemati, M., Ghasemi, A., Koohshekan, O.,
Jamali, D.H., 2020a. The economic evaluation of establishing a plant for
producing biodiesel from edible oil wastes in oil-rich countries: Case study
Iran. Energy http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2020.118760.
Cao, Y., Nikafshan Rad, H., Hamedi Jamali, D., Hashemian, N., Ghasemi, A.,
2020b. A novel multi-objective spiral optimization algorithm for an innova-
tive solar/biomass-based multi-generation energy system: 3E analyses, and
optimization algorithms comparison. Energy Convers. Manage. 219, 112961.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.enconman.2020.112961.
Chen, Y., Wang, J., Ma, C., Gao, Y., 2019. Thermo-ecological cost assessment
and optimization for a hybrid combined cooling, heating and power system
coupled with compound parabolic concentrated-photovoltaic thermal solar
collectors. Energy http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2019.03.185.
Chu, S., Majumdar, A., 2012. Opportunities and challenges for a sustainable
energy future. Nature http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/nature11475.
Ehyaei, M.A., Ahmadi, A., El Haj Assad, M., Rosen, M.A., 2020. Investigation of an
integrated system combining an Organic Rankine Cycle and absorption chiller
driven by geothermal energy: Energy, exergy, and economic analyses and
optimization. J. Clean. Prod. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.120780.
Feliński, P., Sekret, R., 2017. Effect of PCM application inside an evacuated tube
collector on the thermal performance of a domestic hot water system. Energy
Build. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.enbuild.2017.07.065.
Garcia-Hernando, N., De Vega, M., Soria-Verdugo, A., Sanchez-Delgado, S., 2013.
Energy and exergy analysis of an absorption power cycle. Appl. Therm. Eng.
55, 69–77. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.applthermaleng.2013.02.044.
Ghaebi, H., Parikhani, T., Rostamzadeh, H., 2018. A novel trigeneration system
using geothermal heat source and liquefied natural gas cold energy recovery:
Energy, exergy and exergoeconomic analysis. Renew. Energy http://dx.doi.
org/10.1016/j.renene.2017.11.082.
Ghasemi, A., Hashemian, N., Noorpoor, A., Heidarnejad, P., 2017. Exergy
based optimization of a biomass and solar fuelled cchp hybrid seawater
desalination plant. J. Therm. Eng. http://dx.doi.org/10.18186/thermal.290251.
Ghasemi, A., Heidarnejad, P., Noorpoor, A., 2018. A novel solar-biomass
based multi-generation energy system including water desalination and
liquefaction of natural gas system: Thermodynamic and thermoeconomic
optimization. J. Clean. Prod. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.05.160.
Ghasemi, A., Shayesteh, A.A., Doustgani, A., Pazoki, M., 2021. Thermodynamic
assessment and optimization of a novel trigeneration energy system based
on solar energy and MSW gasification using energy and exergy concept. J.
Therm. Eng. http://dx.doi.org/10.18186/THERMAL.850819.
Gholamian, E., Habibollahzade, A., Zare, V., 2018a. Development and multi-
objective optimization of geothermal-based organic rankine cycle integrated
with thermoelectric generator and proton exchange membrane electrolyzer
for power and hydrogen production. Energy Convers. Manage. 174, http:
//dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.enconman.2018.08.027.
Gholamian, Ehsan, Hanafizadeh, P., Habibollahzade, A., Ahmadi, P., 2018b. Evo-
lutionary based multi-criteria optimization of an integrated energy system
with SOFC, gas turbine, and hydrogen production via electrolysis. Int. J.
Hydrog. Energy http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2018.06.130.
Ghorbani, B., Shirmohammadi, R., Mehrpooya, M., 2020. Development of an
innovative cogeneration system for fresh water and power production by
renewable energy using thermal energy storage system. Sustain. Energy
Technol. Assess. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.seta.2019.100572.
Golkar, B., Naserabad, S.N., Soleimany, F., Dodange, M., Ghasemi, A., Mokhtari, H.,
Oroojie, P., 2019. Determination of optimum hybrid cooling wet/dry param-
eters and control system in off design condition: Case study. Appl. Therm.
Eng. 149, 132–150. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.applthermaleng.2018.12.017.
Habibollahzade, Ali, 2019a. Employing photovoltaic/thermal panels as a solar
chimney roof: 3E analyses and multi-objective optimization. Energy http:
//dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2018.10.048.
1796
Energy Reports 7 (2021) 1780–1797
Habibollahzade, A., 2019b. Employing photovoltaic/thermal panels as a solar
chimney roof: 3E analyses and multi-objective optimization. Energy 166,
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2018.10.048.
Habibollahzade, A., Ahmadi, P., Rosen, M.A., 2021a. Biomass gasification using
various gasification agents: Optimum feedstock selection, detailed numerical
analyses and tri-objective grey wolf optimization. J. Clean. Prod. 284, 124718.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.124718.
Habibollahzade, A., Gholamian, E., Ahmadi, P., Behzadi, A., 2018. Multi-criteria
optimization of an integrated energy system with thermoelectric generator,
parabolic trough solar collector and electrolysis for hydrogen production. Int.
J. Hydrog. Energy 43, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2018.05.143.
Habibollahzade, Ali, Gholamian, E., Ahmadi, P., Behzadi, A., 2018a. Multi-criteria
optimization of an integrated energy system with thermoelectric generator,
parabolic trough solar collector and electrolysis for hydrogen production. Int.
J. Hydrog. Energy http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2018.05.143.
Habibollahzade, A., Gholamian, E., Behzadi, A., 2019. Multi-objective optimization
and comparative performance analysis of hybrid biomass-based solid oxide
fuel cell/solid oxide electrolyzer cell/gas turbine using different gasification
agents. Appl. Energy http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2018.10.075.
Habibollahzade, Ali, Gholamian, E., Houshfar, E., Behzadi, A., 2018b. Multi-
objective optimization of biomass-based solid oxide fuel cell integrated with
Stirling engine and electrolyzer. Energy Convers. Manage. 171, 1116–1133.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.enconman.2018.06.061.
Habibollahzade, A., Houshfar, E., 2020. Improved performance and environmental
indicators of a municipal solid waste fired plant through CO2 recycling: Ex-
ergoeconomic assessment and multi-criteria grey wolf optimisation. Energy
Convers. Manage. 225, 113451. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.enconman.2020.
113451.
Habibollahzade, Ali, Houshfar, E., Ahmadi, P., Behzadi, A., Gholamian, E., 2018c.
Exergoeconomic assessment and multi-objective optimization of a solar
chimney integrated with waste-to-energy. Sol. Energy 176, 30–41. http:
//dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.solener.2018.10.016.
Habibollahzade, Ali, Houshfar, E., Ashjaee, M., Behzadi, A., Gholamian, E.,
Mehdizadeh, H., 2018d. Enhanced power generation through integrated re-
newable energy plants: Solar chimney and waste-to-energy. Energy Convers.
Manage. 166, 48–63. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.enconman.2018.04.010.
Habibollahzade, A., Houshfar, E., Ashjaee, M., Ekradi, K., 2021b. Continuous power
generation through a novel solar/geothermal chimney system: Technical/cost
analyses and multi-objective particle swarm optimization. J. Clean. Prod. 283,
124666. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.124666.
Habibollahzade, A., Mehrabadi, Z.K., Houshfar, E., 2021c. Exergoeconomic and
environmental optimisations of multigeneration biomass-based solid oxide
fuel cell systems with reduced <scp> CO2 </scp> emissions. Int. J. Energy
Res. er.6532. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/er.6532.
Habibollahzade, A., Rosen, M.A., 2021. Syngas-fueled solid oxide fuel cell
functionality improvement through appropriate feedstock selection and
multi-criteria optimization using Air/O2-enriched-air gasification agents.
Appl. Energy 286, 116497. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2021.116497.
Hashemian, N., Noorpoor, A., 2019. Assessment and multi-criteria optimization
of a solar and biomass-based multi-generation system: Thermodynamic,
exergoeconomic and exergoenvironmental aspects. Energy Convers. Manage.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.enconman.2019.05.039.
Huang, B.J., Chang, J.M., Wang, C.P., Petrenko, V.A., 1999. 1-d analysis of ejector
performance. Int. J. Refrig. 22, 354–364. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0140-
7007(99)00004-3.
Hussain, H.A., Jawad, Q., Sultan, K.F., 2015. Int. J. Sustain. Green Energy Spec.
Issue Eng. Solut. High Perform. Sol. Energy Syst. 4, 19–28. http://dx.doi.org/
10.11648/j.ijrse.s.2015040301.14.
Ipakchi, O., Mosaffa, A.H., Garousi Farshi, L., 2019. Ejector based CO2 transcritical
combined cooling and power system utilizing waste heat recovery: A
thermoeconomic assessment. Energy Convers. Manage. http://dx.doi.org/10.
1016/j.enconman.2019.03.009.
Kalogirou, S., 2003. The potential of solar industrial process heat applications.
Appl. Energy http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0306-2619(02)00176-9.
Li, C.Y., Deethayat, T., Wu, J.Y., Kiatsiriroat, T., Wang, R.Z., 2018a. Simulation
and evaluation of a biomass gasification-based combined cooling, heating,
and power system integrated with an organic Rankine cycle. Energy http:
//dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2018.05.206.
Li, C.Y., Wu, J.Y., Chavasint, C., Sampattagul, S., Kiatsiriroat, T., Wang, R.Z., 2018b.
Multi-criteria optimization for a biomass gasification-integrated combined
cooling, heating, and power system based on life-cycle assessment. Energy
Convers. Manage. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.enconman.2018.10.043.
Liao, G., Liu, L., Zhang, F., Jiaqiang, E., Chen, J., 2019. A novel combined cooling-
heating and power (CCHP) system integrated organic Rankine cycle for waste
heat recovery of bottom slag in coal-fired plants. Energy Convers. Manage.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.enconman.2019.02.072.
Matuszewska, D., Olczak, P., 2020. Evaluation of using gas turbine to increase
efficiency of the organic Rankine cycle (ORC). Energies 13, http://dx.doi.org/
10.3390/en13061499.
S.H.T. Karim, T.A. Tofiq, M. Shariati et al.
Miar Naeimi, M., Eftekhari Yazdi, M., Reza Salehi, G., 2019. Energy, exergy, ex-
ergoeconomic and exergoenvironmental analysis and optimization of a solar
hybrid CCHP system. Energy Sources A http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/15567036.
2019.1702122.
Mohsenian, S., Ramiar, A., Ranjbar, A.A., 2016. Numerical study of laminar
non-Newtonian nanofluid flow in a T-Junction: Investigation of viscous
dissipation and temperature dependent properties. Appl. Therm. Eng. 108,
221–232. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.applthermaleng.2016.07.122.
Morrison, G.L., Tran, N.H., McKenzie, D.R., Onley, I.C., Harding, G.L., Collins, R.E.,
1984. Long term performance of evacuated tubular solar water heaters
in Sydney, Australia. Sol. Energy http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0038-092X(84)
90253-6.
Naik, B.K., Bhowmik, M., Muthukumar, P., 2019. Experimental investigation and
numerical modelling on the performance assessments of evacuated U – Tube
solar collector systems. Renew. Energy 134, 1344–1361. http://dx.doi.org/10.
1016/j.renene.2018.09.066.
Nami, H., Anvari-Moghaddam, A., 2020. Small-scale CCHP systems for waste heat
recovery from cement plants: Thermodynamic, sustainability and economic
implications. Energy http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2019.116634.
Noorpoor, A., Heidarnejad, P., Hashemian, N., Ghasemi, A., 2016. A thermody-
namic model for exergetic performance and optimization of a solar and
biomass-fuelled multigeneration system. Energy Equip. Syst. 4, 281–289.
http://dx.doi.org/10.22059/ees.2016.23044.
Parikhani, T., Ghaebi, H., Rostamzadeh, H., 2018. A novel geothermal combined
cooling and power cycle based on the absorption power cycle: Energy, ex-
ergy and exergoeconomic analysis. Energy http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.
2018.01.153.
Peng, M.Y.P., Chen, C., Peng, X., Marefati, M., 2020. Energy and exergy analysis
of a new combined concentrating solar collector, solid oxide fuel cell, and
steam turbine CCHP system. Sustain. Energy Technol. Assess. http://dx.doi.
org/10.1016/j.seta.2020.100713.
Ruangtrakoon, N., Thongtip, T., 2020. An experimental investigation to deter-
mine the optimal heat source temperature for R141b ejector operation in
refrigeration cycle. Appl. Therm. Eng. 170, 114841. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/
j.applthermaleng.2019.114841.
Saini, P., Singh, J., Sarkar, J., 2020. Proposal and performance comparison of
various solar-driven novel combined cooling, heating and power system
topologies. Energy Convers. Manage. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.enconman.
2019.112342.
Salehi, A., Karbassi, A., Ghobadian, B., Ghasemi, A., Doustgani, A., 2019. Simula-
tion process of biodiesel production plant. Environ. Prog. Sustain. Energy 38,
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/ep.13264.
Shamoushaki, M., Ghanatir, F., Ehyaei, M.A., Ahmadi, A., 2017. Exergy and
exergoeconomic analysis and multi-objective optimisation of gas turbine
power plant by evolutionary algorithms. Case study: Aliabad Katoul power
plant. Int. J. Exergy http://dx.doi.org/10.1504/IJEX.2017.083160.
1797
Energy Reports 7 (2021) 1780–1797
Sharafeldin, M.A., Gróf, G., 2018. Evacuated tube solar collector performance
using CeO2/water nanofluid. J. Clean. Prod. 185, 347–356. http://dx.doi.org/
10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.03.054.
Sharafeldin, M.A., Gróf, G., Abu-Nada, E., Mahian, O., 2019. Evacuated tube solar
collector performance using copper nanofluid: Energy and environmental
analysis. Appl. Therm. Eng. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.applthermaleng.2019.
114205.
Sharma, N., Diaz, G., 2011. Performance model of a novel evacuated-tube
solar collector based on minichannels. Sol. Energy http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/
j.solener.2011.02.001.
Shayesteh, A.A., Koohshekan, O., Ghasemi, A., Nemati, M., Mokhtari, H., 2019.
Determination of the ORC-RO system optimum parameters based on 4E
analysis; Water–Energy-Environment nexus. Energy Convers. Manage. 183,
772–790. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.enconman.2018.12.119.
Talebizadehsardari, P., Ehyaei, M.A., Ahmadi, A., Jamali, D.H., Shirmohammadi, R.,
Eyvazian, A., Ghasemi, A., Rosen, M.A., 2020. Energy, exergy, economic, ex-
ergoeconomic, and exergoenvironmental (5E) analyses of a triple cycle with
carbon capture. J. CO2 Util. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jcou.2020.101258.
Valipour, P., Tahvili, A., Mohsenian, S., Atouei, S.A., Khosravi, M., 2018. Inves-
tigation of electrospun nanofibers with an electrified non-Newtonian jet
using differential quadrature method. Int. J. Hydrog. Energy 43, 6789–6794.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2018.02.084.
Van Erdeweghe, S., Van Bael, J., Laenen, B., D’haeseleer, W., 2018. Optimal
combined heat-and-power plant for a low-temperature geothermal source.
Energy http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2018.01.136.
Wang, J., Mao, T., Wu, J., 2017. Modified exergoeconomic modeling and
analysis of combined cooling heating and power system integrated with
biomass-steam gasification. Energy http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2017.
08.030.
Wu, H., Liu, Q., Xie, G., Guo, S., Zheng, J., Su, B., 2020. Performance investigation
of a novel hybrid combined cooling, heating and power system with solar
thermochemistry in different climate zones. Energy http://dx.doi.org/10.
1016/j.energy.2019.116281.
Yang, K., Zhu, N., Ding, Y., Chang, C., Yuan, T., 2018. Thermoeconomic analysis
of an integrated combined cooling heating and power system with biomass
gasification. Energy Convers. Manage. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.enconman.
2018.05.089.
Yousefi-Lafouraki, B., Ramiar, A., Mohsenian, S., 2016. Entropy generation anal-
ysis of a confined slot impinging jet in a converging channel for a shear
thinning nanofluid. Appl. Therm. Eng. 105, 675–685. http://dx.doi.org/10.
1016/j.applthermaleng.2016.03.067.
Zambolin, E., Del Col, D., 2010. Experimental analysis of thermal performance
of flat plate and evacuated tube solar collectors in stationary standard and
daily conditions. Sol. Energy http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.solener.2010.04.020.