application of thermoeconomics to the design and1983

7/30/2019 Application of Thermoeconomics to the Design And1983

1/13

UNESC

O-EOLS

S

SA

MPLECH

APTER

ENERGY, ENERGY SYSTEM ANALYSIS, AND OPTIMIZATION Application of Thermoeconomics to the Design and

Synthesis of Energy Plants - G. Tsatsaronis

APPLICATION OF THERMOECONOMICS TO THE DESIGN AND

SYNTHESIS OF ENERGY PLANTS

G. Tsatsaronis

Technische Universitt Berlin, Germany

Keywords: Exergy, Thermoeconomics, Exergoeconomics, Costs of Thermodynamic

Inefficiencies, Design Improvement.

Contents

1. Introduction

2. Principles of exergoeconomics applied to design optimization

3. Cost balances and auxiliary equations

4. Optimization with exergoeconomics

5. Conclusion

Glossary

Bibliography

Biographical Sketch

To cite this chapter

Summary

Thermoeconomics, as an exergy-aided cost-reduction method, provides important

information for the design of cost-effective energy-conversion plants. The exergy

costing principle is used to assign monetary values to all material and energy streamswithin a plant as well as to the exergy destruction within each plant component. The

design evaluation and optimization is based on the trade-offs between exergy

destruction (exergetic efficiency) and investment cost for the most important plant

components. The design of an energy-conversion plant may be improved using either an

exergoeconomic iterative optimization technique or approaches of mathematical

optimization. Thermoeconomics provides the designer with information about the cost

formation process, the interactions among thermodynamics and economics and the

interactions among plant components. This information is very valuable for improving

the design of energy-conversion plants.

1. Introduction

Engineers involved in the design of energy-conversion plants want, after they have

developed a first workable design, and in order to improve this design, to know the

answers to the following questions:

1. Where do thermodynamic inefficiencies in the system occur, how high are they,and what causes them?

2. What measures or alternative designs would improve the efficiency of theoverall plant?

3. How high is the required total investment and the purchased equipment costs ofthe most important plant components?

Encyclopedia of Life Support Systems (EOLSS)


2/13

UNESC

O-EOLS

S

SA

MPLECH

APTER



4. How much do the thermodynamic inefficiencies cost the plant operator?5. What measures would improve the cost effectiveness of the overall plant?.

The answer to the first two questions is provided with the aid of an exergy analysis (see

Exergy and Thermodynamic Analysis). An economic analysis answers the thirdquestion. The last two questions can be answered with the aid of a thermoeconomic

analysis. This analysis is called here exergoeconomics, which is a more precise

characterization of every exergy-aided cost-reduction approach.

Exergoeconomics applied to design optimization represents a unique combination of

exergy analysis and cost analysis, to provide the designer of an energy-conversion plant

with information not available through conventional energy, exergy, or cost analyses,

but crucial to the design of a cost-effective plant. Design optimization of an energy-

conversion system means the selection of the structure and the design parameters (the

decision variables) of the system to minimize the total cost of the system products (over

the entire lifetime of the system) under boundary conditions associated with availablematerials, financial resources, environmental protection and government regulation as

well as with the safety, reliability, operability, maintainability, and availability of the

system. In a truly optimized system, the magnitude of every significant thermodynamic

inefficiency (exergy destruction and exergy loss) is justified by considerations related to

investment and operating costs or is imposed by at least one of the above boundary

conditions.

A thermodynamic optimization, which aims at minimizing the thermodynamic

inefficiencies, represents a subcase of the general case of design optimization. An

appropriate formulation of the optimization problem is always one of the most

important and sometimes the most difficult task in an optimization study.

Various names have already been given or could be given to various exergoeconomic

approaches proposed in the past. These names include the following:

Exergy Economics Approach (EEA) First Exergoeconomic Approach (FEA) Thermoeconomic Functional Analysis (TFA) Exergetic Cost Theory (ECT) Engineering Functional Analysis (EFA) Last-In-First-Out Approach (LIFOA) Structural Analysis Approach (SAA) SPECO Method (SPECOM)

The main differences among the approaches refer to the definition of exergetic

efficiencies, the development of auxiliary costing equations and the productive

structure.

2. Principles of Exergoeconomics Applied to Design Optimization

Exergoeconomics applied to the design and synthesis of energy-conversion plants is

based on two important principles that represent the fundamental connections between



3/13

UNESC

O-EOLS

S

SA

MPLECH

APTER



thermodynamics and economics. The first principle is common to all exergoeconomic

approaches and applications, whereas the second principle refers only to applications in

which new investment expenditures are needed. These principles are briefly discussed

in the following.

2.1. Exergy Costing

This principle states that exergy is the only rational basis for assigning monetary values

to the interactions an energy system experiences with its surroundings and to the

thermodynamic inefficiencies within the system. Mass, energy or entropy should not be

used for assigning the above mentioned monetary values because their exclusive use

results in misleading conclusions.

According to the exergy-costing principle, the cost stream (jC

) associated with an

exergy stream ( jE

) is given by

j jC c E=

j(1)

wherej

c represents the average cost associated with providing each exergy unit of the

stream jE in the plant being considered. Equation (1) is applied to the exergy

associated with streams of matter entering or exiting a system as well as to the exergy

transfers associated with the transfer of work and heat. For the cost ( ) associated with

the exergy ( ) contained within the k-th component of a system we write

kC

kE

k kC c E= k (2)

Here is the average cost per unit of exergy supplied to the k-th component.kc

Exergy costing does not necessarily imply that costs associated with streams of matter

are related only to the exergy rate of each respective stream. Nonexergy related costs

can also affect the total cost rate associated with material streams. Examples include the

cost of (a) treated water leaving a water treatment unit, (b) oxygen and nitrogen

produced in an air separation unit, (c) limestone supplied to a fluidized-bed reactor, (d)

iron used in a metallurgical process, and (e) an inorganic chemical fed into chemicalreactors. Therefore, when significant nonexergy-related costs occur in a system, the

total cost rate associated with the material streamj (denoted by ) is given byTOT

jC

TOT NE

j j jC C C= + (3)

Herej

C is the cost rate directly related to the exergy of streamj (see Eq. (1)) andNE

jC

is the cost rate due to nonexergetic effects. The term NEj

C represents a convenient way

for charging nonexergy-related costs from one component to other system components

that should bear such costs.



4/13

UNESC

O-EOLS

S

SA

MPLECH

APTER



2.2. Exergy Destruction Reduces Investment Cost

The exergy destruction represents in thermodynamics a major inefficiency and a

quantity to be minimized when the overall plant efficiency should be maximized. In the

design of a new energy-conversion plant, however, exergy destruction within acomponent represents not only a thermodynamic inefficiency but also an opportunity to

reduce the investment cost associated with the component being considered and, thus,

with the overall plant.

Figure 1 refers to a component (subscript k) of the overall plant and shows that the cost

rate CIk

Z associated with capital investment (superscript CI) decreases with increasing

exergy destruction rate ( ) within the same component. Instead of a single curve, a

shaded area is presented to denote that the investment cost could vary within a given

range for each given value of the exergy destruction. The effect of component size is

taken into consideration in Figure 1 by relating both

D,kE

CIkZ and ( ) to the exergy rate

of the product generated in this component ( ).

D,kE

P,kE

Figure 1: Expected relationship between investment cost and exergy destruction (or

exergetic efficiency) for the k-th component of an energy conversion system.

The vast majority of components in energy-conversion plants exhibits qualitatively the

behavior between CIk

Z and shown in Figure 1. Should the investment cost increase

or remain constant with increasing exergy destruction, then the component being

D,kE



5/13

UNESC

O-EOLS

S

SA

MPLECH

APTER



considered can be excluded from optimization considerations because in these cases we

would always select for this component the design point that has the lowest investment

cost and, at the same time, the lowest thermodynamic inefficiencies (i.e. the highest

exergetic efficiency).

The curves and the shaded area shown in Figure 1 are usually not known. However,

even then we can estimate the two asymptotic lines that determine the specific

unavoidable exergy destruction

UN

D,

P,

k

k

E

E

and the specific unavoidable investment cost

UNCI

P k

Z

E

.

All design improvement efforts should focus only on the avoidable parts of exergy

destruction and investment costs. These parts are calculated by subtracting theunavoidable value from the total value of the respective variable.

3. Cost Balances and Auxiliary Equations

In exergoeconomics a cost balance is formulated separately for each plant component.

Such a balance shows that the sum of cost rates associated with all exiting exergy

streams equals the sum of cost rates of all entering exergy streams plus the appropriate

charges (cost rate) due to capital investment as well as to operating and maintenance

expenses. The sum of the last two terms is denoted byk

Z and is calculated with the aid

of a detailed economic analysis. Accordingly, for the k-th component receiving a heattransfer and generating power, for example, we write

( ) ( )w, q, q,e e k k k k i i k ke i

c E c W c E c E Z + = + + k

(4)

In general, if there are exergy streams exiting the component being considered, we

need to formulate auxiliary equations. Depending on the exergoeconomic

method used, the auxiliary equations are formulated explicitly or implicitly (for

example with the aid of the so-called productive structure). For the explicit formulation

of the auxiliary equations, the so-called F and P principles (principles referring to thefuel and product, respectively that are used in the definition of exergetic efficiency)

provide general guidance: The F principle refers to the removal of exergy from an

exergy stream within the component being considered and states that the average

specific cost (cost per exergy unit) associated with this removal of exergy (which is part

of the exergy of fuel) must be equal to the average specific cost at which the removed

exergy has been supplied to the same stream in upstream components. The P principle

refers to the supply of exergy to a stream or to the generation of an exergy stream within

the component being considered and states that each exergy unit is supplied to any

stream associated with the exergetic product of the component at the same average cost

( ). Examples of auxiliary equations are found in every publication dealing with

eN

1eN

Pc



6/13

UNESC

O-EOLS

S

SA

MPLECH

APTER



exergoeconomics. It should be noted that the formulation of the auxiliary equations

should be meaningful from both the exergetic and the economic viewpoints.

With the aid of the cost balances and the auxiliary equations, the cost rates and the costs

per unit of exergy are calculated for each exergy stream (i.e. for each material andenergy stream) in the overall plant. In this way we associate with each stream not only

mass, energy, entropy and exergy but also cost. This is the first step in understanding

the cost formation process and the real cost sources and, thus, in making a well

informed decision for improving the cost effectiveness of the design of a new system.

In the so-called productive structure, the exergetic fuel and product of each component

are illustrated graphically. A productive structure, which is not necessarily needed for

every exergoeconomic method, may assist in visualizing and better understanding the

definitions of fuel and product as well as the auxiliary costing equations obtained from

the F and P principles. An appropriate development of the productive structure may

graphically illustrate the exergy balance written in terms of fuel and product as well asin terms of input and output exergy streams.

4. Optimization with Exergoeconomics

Principles of exergoeconomics may be effectively used to optimize or improve the cost

effectiveness of energy-conversion plants. The approaches used in that respect may be

divided into two groups. In the first one, the designer uses exergoeconomic variables to

improve his/her understanding of the interactions (a) between thermodynamics and

economics, and (b) among the most important plant components and to apply these

findings in an interactive procedure in which the costs of the plant products are reduced.

To the second group belong all approaches that use mathematical optimization

techniques to minimize the product costs or to maximize the profit. These two options

are briefly discussed in the following.

4.1. Exergoeconomic Variables and Iterative Improvement

The exergoeconomic evaluation is conducted at the component level with the aid of a

series of exergoeconomic variables. These include but are not limited to the variables

presented in the following Eqs. (5) to (10), (12) and (13).

The rate of exergy destruction is calculated with the aid of an exergy balance, which,after introduction of fuel and product, may be written as

D, F, P,k kE E E=

k (5)

The exergetic efficiency is the ratio between the exergy of fuel and the exergy of

product:

P, D,

F, F,

1k

k

k k

kE E

E E = =

(6)



7/13

UNESC

O-EOLS

S

SA

MPLECH

APTER



The exergy destruction ratio relates the exergy destruction in the k-th component not to

the fuel for the same component, as in the exergetic efficiency, but to the fuel of the

overall plant:

D,

D,

F,tot

k

k

Ey

E=

(7)

The cost rates and associated with the fuel and product, respectively, are

formed in the same way as the exergy rates and associated with fuel and

product. Then the average costs per unit of fuel exergy ( ) and product exergy ( )

are calculated from

F,kC

P,kC

F,kE

P,kE

F,kc

P,kc

F,

F,

F,

k

k

k

Cc E=

(8)

P,

P,

P,

k

k

k

Cc

E=

(9)

The cost rate associated with exergy destruction is estimated as follows:

D, F, D,k kC c E=

k

k

(10)

The cost balance can now be written

P, P, F, F,k k k k c E c E Z = + (11)

Here we should note that the cost of exergy destruction is hidden in the cost balance and

does not appear explicitly. The cost increase between and is caused by the cost

of exergy destruction and the investment related cost (

F,kc

P,kc

kZ ) as the relative cost difference

( )shows:kr

P, F, F, D,

F, F, P, F, P,

1k k k k k k kk

k k k k k

c c c E Z Zr

c c E c

+ = = = +

kE

(12)

Finally the exergoeconomic factork

f compares the two cost sources contributing to the

cost increase between and and shows the contribution of the investment-related

cost to the sum of cost of exergy destruction and investment-related cost:

F,kc

P,kc

F, D,

k

k

k k k

Zf

c E Z=

+

(13)



8/13

UNESC

O-EOLS

S

SA

MPLECH

APTER



The sum shown in the denominator of the above equation is a measure of the

importance of the k-th component from the cost viewpoint within the overall system

being considered.

The iterative exergoeconomic optimization technique consists of the following steps:

1. A workable design (i.e. a design that fulfils mass and energy balances) isdeveloped in the first step. Several guidelines presented in the literature may

assist in developing a workable design that is relatively close to the optimal one.

2. A detailed exergoeconomic analysis and an evaluation are conducted for thedesign developed in the previous step. The results from the exergoeconomic

analysis are used to determine design changes (changes in the structure and in

the process variables) that are expected to improve the design currently being

considered. In this step we consider only changes that affect both the exergetic

efficiency and the investment cost: For the most important plant components weask the question whether it is cost effective to reduce the capital investment at

the expense of component efficiency or whether the component efficiency (and

the investment cost) should be increased. Any sub-processes that contribute to

the exergy destruction or exergy loss from the overall plant should be eliminated

if they do not contribute to the reduction of either capital investment or fuel

costs for other components.

3. Based on the results from the previous step, a new design is developed and thevalue of the objective function is calculated for the new design. If in comparison

with the previous design this value has been improved, we may decide to

proceed with another iteration that involves step 2. If, however, the value of the

objective function is not better in the new design than in the previous one, we

may either revise some design changes and repeat step 2 or proceed with step 4.

4. In this final step we optimize the decision variables that affect the cost but notthe exergetic efficiency. After obtaining the cost optimal design, it is always

advisable to conduct a parametric study to investigate the effect on the

optimization results of some parameters used and/or assumptions made in the

optimization procedure.

When applying this methodology, the designer should recognize that the values of allexergoeconomic variables depend on the component type: heat exchanger, compressor,

turbine, pump, chemical reactor, etc. Accordingly, whether a particular value is judged

to be high or low can be determined only with reference to a particular class of

components. In that respect, combining knowledge-based and fuzzy approaches with an

iterative exergoeconomic optimization technique may be useful for the plant designer.

4.2. Approaches of Mathematical Optimization

The objective of these approaches is, as in the iterative exergoeconomic approaches, the

minimization of the total cost of owning and operating the plant over its entire life time.

However, the approaches of mathematical optimization use, in addition to the iterative



9/13

UNESC

O-EOLS

S

SA

MPLECH

APTER



approaches, cost functions that express the variation of investment cost as a function of

the decision variables used in the optimization problem. This enables the designer to

formulate a complete cost minimization problem, in which the constraints include the

plant performance equations and the cost functions for each plant component. One of

the methods used for the solution of the optimization problem is the method ofLagrange multipliers. This method can lead to the special cases of decomposition and

thermoeconomic isolation, which may also be applied in conjunction with the

thermoeconomic functional analysis (TFA) and the engineering functional analysis

(EFA) approaches that belong to the group of mathematical optimization. Each

Lagrange multiplier can be considered as the marginal cost associated with the

corresponding function.

The analysis and optimization of an energy-conversion plant consists of the following

steps.

1. The functions of the overall system and of each component are identified and aso-called functional diagram (corresponding to the productive structure) is

developed. Where required, the negentropy streams are determined.

2. The optimization problem including objective function, decision variables, costfunctions and constraint functions is formulated.

3. The system of optimization equations is solved and a parametric study isconducted.

For the mathematical optimization to demonstrate its merits, there is a need to express

the various costs (capital, natural resources, personnel, etc.) as functions of design and

operation characteristics of the components or of the overall system. These cost

functions are not always available, usually not accurate, and seldom in the required

form (a function of the decision variables). Therefore, the approaches of mathematical

optimization cannot yet be applied to very complex energy-conversion plants. For the

iterative exergoeconomic approach, however, there are no such limitations related to the

complexity of the overall plant. These notwithstanding, a systematic effort to develop

appropriate functions is justified by the very interesting results obtained when

mathematical optimization methods are successfully applied.

5. Conclusion

The design and synthesis of energy-conversion plants requires among others appropriate

trade-offs between fuel cost and investment expenditures or between cost of

thermodynamic inefficiencies and investment costs. An exergy analysis complements

and enhances an energy analysis and identifies the location, magnitude, and causes of

thermodynamic inefficiencies in each plant component. A detailed cost analysis

provides the investment cost and the operating and maintenance expenses associated

with each plant component. The appropriate trade-offs between fuel cost and investment

expenditures can be realized with the aid of an exergoeconomic approach that calculates

the costs of thermodynamic inefficiencies and compares them with the required



10/13

UNESC

O-EOLS

S

SA

MPLECH

APTER



investment cost at the plant component level. Thus, exergoeconomics identifies and

properly evaluates the real cost sources.

The exergoeconomic approaches apply the principle of exergy costing to enable the

objective costing of energy carriers and to provide effective assistance in the decision-making process and the optimization or improvement of energy-intensive plants. In

addition, exergoeconomics demonstrates that the exergy destruction plays a positive

role in the design of energy-conversion plants by helping engineers to keep the

investment costs associated with the plant components at an acceptable level.

From the thermodynamic viewpoint, the value of each unit of exergy destruction is the

same. Exergoeconomics demonstrates that the average cost per unit of exergy

destruction is different for each component and depends on the relative position of the

component within the plant: Components closer to the supply of exergy to the overall

plant have, in general, a lower cost per unit of exergy destruction than components

closer to the point of supply of the product streams from the overall plant.

By revealing the true connections between thermodynamics and economics in the

design of an energy-conversion plant, exergoeconomics enhances the knowledge,

experience, intuition and creativity of design engineers and provides students with the

appropriate tools to understand the cost interactions involved in design optimization.

Glossary

Exergy: Maximum theoretical useful work (shaft work or electric work)

obtainable from an energy system as this is brought into

thermodynamic equilibrium with the environment while the

system interacts only with this environment.

Exergy destruction: Exergy destroyed due to irreversibilities within a system.

Exergy loss: Exergy transfer to the system surroundings. This exergy transfer

is not further used in the installation being considered or in any

other installation.

Exergy of product: The desired result (expressed in exergy terms) achieved by the

system being considered.

Exergy of fuel: The exergetic resources expended to generate the exergy of

product.

Exergeticefficiency: The ratio between exergy of product and exergy of fuel.

Exergy destruction

ratio:

The ratio between the exergy destruction in a component and the

fuel exergy supplied to the overall system.

Exergoeconomics: A unique combination of exergy analysis and cost analysis in

which combination the exergy costing principle is applied.

Exergy costing

principle:

Exergy is the only rational basis for assigning monetary values

to the interactions an energy system experiences with its

surroundings and to the thermodynamic inefficiencies occurring

within the system.

Unavoidable exergy

destruction:

Exergy destruction rate that cannot be reduced due to

technological limitations (e.g., availability and costs of materials



11/13

UNESC

O-EOLS

S

SA

MPLECH

APTER



and manufacturing methods) regardless of the amount of

investment.

Unavoidable

investment cost:

A minimum cost that will always incur when a component of the

type being considered is used. This cost is independent of the

component efficiency.Cost per unit of

fuel exergy:

The average cost at which the exergy associated with the fuel is

supplied to the plant component being considered.

Cost per unit of

product exergy:

The average cost at which the exergy associated with the

product is supplied by the plant component being considered.

Exergoeconomic

factor:

The contribution of the investment-related cost to the sum of

costs associated with a plant component. The latter consists of

the sum of cost of exergy destruction and the investment-related

cost.

Productive

structure:

A graphical illustration of the fuel, product and auxiliary

equations for a plant component and the overall plant.

Negentropy: The negative value of entropy transferred from a condenser tothe productive plant components in which entropy is generated.

This generated entropy is rejected to the environment through

the condenser. A negentropy stream flows in the opposite

direction of an exergy stream.

Objective function: A mathematical function to be maximized or minimized when

solving an optimization problem.

Decision variable: An independent variable whose value is amenable to change

when solving an optimization problem.

Nomenclature

c cost per unit of exergyC cost associated with exergy

E exergy

f Exergoeconomic factor

r relative cost difference

W power

y exergy-destruction or exergy-loss ratio

Z cost rate associated with investment

Greek Letters

exergetic efficiency

Subscripts

D exergy destructionF fuel exergyk k-th system componentL exergy loss

P product exergyq exergy or cost associated with heat transfertot overall systemw exergy or cost associated with transfer of work



12/13

UNESC

O-EOLS

S

SA

MPLECH

APTER



Superscripts

CI capital investmentUN unavoidable exergy destruction or cost

Overmarks

per unit timeBibliography

Bejan, A., Tsatsaronis, G., and Moran, M. (1996). Thermal Design and Optimization. New York: JohnWiley & Sons. 542 p. [Contains an introduction to the exergy concept and the economic analysis,

applications, and exergy-aided cost minimization of energy conversion systems.]

Cziesla, F., Tsatsaronis, G. (2002). Iterative exergoeconomic evaluation and improvement of thermalpower plants using fuzzy inference systems, Energy Conversion and Management 43: 1537-1548.

[Presents a combination of an iterative exergy-aided cost minimization technique with fuzzy systems. Anapplication of this approach to the optimization of a simple cogeneration plant is discussed.]

Erlach, B., Tsatsaronis, G., and Cziesla, F. (2001). A new approach for assigning costs and fuels tocogeneration products.International Journal of Applied Thermodynamics; 4: 145-156. [Presents a novelexergy costing approach.]

Frangopoulos, C.A. (1983), Thermoeconomic functional analysis: a method for optimal design orimprovement of complex thermal systems. PhD Thesis. Georgia Institute of Technology. [Introduces theTFA]

Frangopoulos C.A. (1987). Thermoeconomic functional analysis and optimization. Energy, 12(7), 563-571. [Describes the TFA.]

Gaggioli, R.A., Wepfer, W.J. (1980). Exergy economics. Energy The International Journal; 5, 823-38.

[Presents the EEA.].

Lazzaretto, A., and Tsatsaronis, G. (2006). SPECO: A systematic and general methodology forcalculating efficiencies and costs in thermal systems. Energy The International Journal, 31:1257-1289.[Discusses the definition and calculation of exergetic efficiencies using various exergy components,

presents the SPECOM and compares the various approaches.]

Tsatsaronis, G., Lin, L. (1990). On exergy costing in exergoeconomics. In: Tsatsaronis, G., Bajura, R.A.,Kenney, W.F., Reistad, G.M., editors. Computer-aided energy systems analysis, vol. 21. New York:

ASME; p. 1-11. [Introduces the LIFOA.]

Tsatsaronis, G., Penner, S.S. (Editors) (1994). Invited Papers on Exergoeconomics, Energy TheInternational Journal, special issue, 3: 279-381. [Presents the application of four exergoeconomicapproaches to the same problem.]

Tsatsaronis G, Winhold M. (1985). Exergoeconomic analyses and evaluation of energy conversationplants.Energy The International Journal; 10: 69-94. [Introduces the FEA.]

Valero, A., Lozano, M.A., Muoz, M. (1986). A general theory of exergy savings, Part I: On the

exergetic cost, Part II: On the thermoeconomic cost, Part III: Energy savings and thermoeconomics. In:Gaggioli, R., editor. Computer-Aided Engineering of Energy Systems, vol. 2-3. New York: ASME; p. 1-21. [Introduces the ECT.]

Valero, A., Torres, C., Serra, L. (1992). A general theory of thermoeconomics: Part I: structural analysis.

In: Valero, A., Tsatsaronis, G., editors. International Symposium on Efficiency, Costs, Optimization andSimulation of Energy Systems, ECOS92. Zaragoza, Spain, June 15-18; p. 137-145. [Introduces theSAA.]



13/13

UNESC

O-EOLS

S

SA

MPLECH

APTER



Von Spakowsky, M.R. (1986). A Practical generalized analysis approach to the optimal thermoeconomicdesign and improvement of real-world thermal systems. PhD Thesis, Georgia Institute of Technology..[Introduces the EFA.]

Von Spakovsky M. R. and Evans R. B. (1993). Engineering functional analysis Parts I, II. ASME J. of

Energy Resources Technology, 115, 86-99. [Describes the EFA.].

Biographical Sketch

Professor George Tsatsaronis is the Bewag Professor of Energy Engineering and Protection of theEnvironment and the past Director of the Institute for Energy Engineering at the Technical University ofBerlin, Germany. He studied mechanical engineering at the National Technical University of Athens,Greece, receiving the Diploma in 1972. He continued at the Technical University of Aachen, Germany,where he received a Masters Degree in business administration in 1976, a Ph.D. in combustion from theDepartment of Mechanical Engineering in 1977, and a Dr. Habilitatus Degree in Thermoeconomics in

1985.In the last thirty years he has been responsible for numerous research projects and programs related tocombustion, thermoeconomics (exergoeconomics), development, simulation and analysis of various

energy-conversion processes (coal gasification, electricity generation, hydrogen production, cogeneration,solar energy-conversion, oil production in refineries and also from oil shales, carbon black production,refrigeration processes, etc) as well as optimization of the design and operation of energy systems withemphasis on power plants and cogeneration systems.He is a Fellow of the American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME) and a member of the GreekSociety of Engineers. He is a Past Chairman of the Executive Committee of the International Centre for

Applied Thermodynamics.In 1977 he received for his Ph.D. Thesis the Borchers Award from the Technical University of Aachen,Germany and in 1994 and 1999 the E.F. Obert Best Paper Award from ASME. In 1997 he became aHonorary Professor at the North China Electric Power University and in 1998 he received from ASMEthe James Harry Potter Gold Medal for his work in exergoeconomics. In 2002 he became a guestprofessor at the Zhejiang University of Technology, China, and in 2004 he received a Doctoris Honoris

Causa from the Polytechnic University of Bucharest, Rumania.

He currently serves as an associate editor ofEnergy - The International Journal (since 1986), EnergyConversion and Management(since 1995), andInternational Journal of Energy, Technology and Policy(since 2002). He is a honorary editor of the International Journal of Thermodynamics (since 2003). Heco-authored with A. Bejan and M. Moran the book Thermal Design and Optimization and publishedabout 200 papers and scientific reports. He is the co-editor of 21 conference proceedings publications.

To cite this chapter

G. Tsatsaronis,(2007),APPLICATION OF THERMOECONOMICS TO THE DESIGN ANDSYNTHESIS OF ENERGY PLANTS , in Exergy,Energy System Analysis, and Optimization, [Ed.Christos A. Frangopoulos], in Encyclopedia of Life Support Systems (EOLSS), Developed under theAuspices of the UNESCO, Eolss Publishers, Oxford ,UK, [http://www.eolss.net]


application of thermoeconomics to the design and1983

Documents