001.docx

CHEMICAL ENGINEERING TRANSACTIONS

VOL. 83, 2021

A publication of

The Italian Association

of Chemical Engineering
Online at www.cetjournal.it

Guest Editors: Jeng Shiun Lim, Nor Alafiza Yunus, Jiří Jaromír Klemeš
Copyright © 2021, AIDIC Servizi S.r.l.
ISBN 978-88-95608-81-5; ISSN 2283-9216

Exergy Analysis of a Natural Gas-Fired Gas Turbine
Combined Cycle Power Plant with Post-Combustion Carbon

Capture
Youning Tanga, Cheng Tung Chonga,*, Jia Lia, Jo-Han Ngb, Laura Herraizc
aChina-UK Low Carbon College, Shanghai Jiao Tong University, Lingang, Shanghai 201306, China.
bFaculty of Engineering and Physical Sciences, University of Southampton Malaysia (UoSM), 79200 Iskandar Puteri,
Johor, Malaysia.
cThe University of Edinburgh, School of Engineering, The Kings Buildings, Edinburgh EH9 3JL, United Kingdom.
ctchong@sjtu.edu.cn

Post-combustion carbon capture (PCC) plays an important role in reducing the greenhouse gas emissions. In
the present study, an exergy analysis is conducted to assess the exergy destruction and exergetic efficiency
of a natural gas-fired combined cycle gas turbine (CCGT) system coupled with the PCC unit. The overall
exergetic performance of the system is compared against the baseline CCGT by using realistic data. The
working temperature and composition of the exhaust flue gas are two critical parameters that have significant
impact on the performance of the absorption liquid and equipment operation. Results show that the highest
exergy destruction occurs in the combustion chamber and condenser are 15.69 MW and 11.78 MW,
occupying more than 45 % of the exergy destruction of the overall system for the conventional CCGT system.
For the CCGT system with PCC unit, the exergy destruction of absorber is relatively high with an exergetic
efficiency of 56.18 %. The highest exergetic efficiency is found in the units of combustion chamber and heat
recovery steam generator (HRSG), which are 90.23 % and 87.01 %, while the condenser has the lowest
efficiency. Identification of the low efficiency component presents an opportunity for improvement of the
system.

1. Introduction
Post-combustion CO2 capture (PCC) is a promising technology to reduce CO2 emissions from the power
plant, mostly via the use of monoethanolamine (MEA) to absorb CO2 (Huang, 2018). Since PCC requires only
few modifications, it is currently considered as the most practical approach to capture CO2. Although
Combined Cycle Gas Turbine (CCGT) power plant performs with high thermodynamic efficiency, the CO2
produced from the combustion process needs to be removed or captured before the flue gas is exhausted to
the atmosphere. This study examines the exergy flow of CCGT with PCC to identify the opportunity for CO2 to
be recycled and captured. Herraiz et al. (2018) analysed the impact of selective exhaust gas recirculation
(SEGR) on the power output of CCGT cycle with PCC, without analysing the exergy flow of the system.
Olaleye et al. (2015) analysed the exergy flow of a supercritical coal-fired power plant equipped with a CO2
capture system. The result shows that the highest exergy destruction occurred in the condenser section,
occupying 51.77 % of the total exergy destruction of turbine cycle. Kong et al. (2016) performed an exergy
analysis on the main components of CCGT and found that exergetic efficiency increases with increasing
turbine’s duty, while the exergy destruction increases with increasing ambient temperature. The pressure ratio
of gas turbine was found to have great effect on the thermal efficiency and exergetic efficiency, which can be
enhanced by 50 % and 47 % when the pressure ratio of gas turbine was increased to 34 % (Reddy and
Mohamed, 2007). It was shown that the inlet pressure of gas turbine has a significant effect on the exergetic
efficiency, as lower inlet pressure will result in higher exergetic efficiency of gas turbine section. These studies
serve as a useful guide to improve the performance of the system. To analyse the chemical exergy of MEA in

DOI: 10.3303/CET2183089

Paper Received: 08/07/2020; Revised: 11/09/2020; Accepted: 02/12/2020
Please cite this article as: Tang Y., Chong C.T., Li J., Ng J.-H., Herraiz L., 2021, Exergy Analysis of a Natural Gas-Fired Gas Turbine Combined
Cycle Power Plant with Post-Combustion Carbon Capture , Chemical Engineering Transactions, 83, 529-534 DOI:10.3303/CET2183089

529

the PCC unit, Gharagheizi et al. (2018) proposed the group distribution method to calculate the standard
molar chemical exergy of complicated compounds through functional groups.
The present study analyses the exergy flow of CCGT system with PCC unit, with the aim to identify the exergy
of each component. Exergy analysis is based on the second thermodynamic law, in which the exergy
destruction is determined by exergy balance equation, and exergetic efficiency can be calculated as exergy
carried by the products over the exergy carried by fuel. Exergy analysis is a typical way to show the
irreversibility of process and quality of energy, where the location, type and quantity of exergy destruction and
loss can be identified in the system (Kong et al., 2016). Further, it enables the identification of the section with
lowest utilization rate, which is the main target for energy saving measures. Exergy analysis can be utilised to
enhance the performance of the overall system in the future. The present study is intended to identify the
exergy destruction distribution and exergetic efficiency of each section in the CCGT-PCC system, and to
identify the component with the lowest utilization rate.

1.1 CCGT and PCC system

The model combined cycle gas turbine system chosen in this study is shown in Figure 1. The system is based
on the proposed model by (Herraiz et al., 2018) developed using ASPEN Plus. The net power output for the
gas turbine and steam turbine in this study are 58.225 MW and 10.019 MW. The operating conditions in the
systems such as temperature, mass flow rate and pressure are based on the actual CCGT power plant of with
rated power 30 MW (Bejan et al., 1996). The CCGT is assumed to operate with natural gas, a widely adopted
gaseous fuel due to its clean emissions characteristic and high thermal efficiency. Air and natural gas are
mixed and burned in the combustion chamber, while the exhaust gas flow expands through the turbine to
generate electricity. Subsequently, the hot gas flows through the preheater and cooled down to 1006 K. Water
is converted into steam vapour after absorbing the heat from exhaust flue gas in the HRSG. The steam
contains high enthalpy is used to drive the steam turbine to produce work. The expanded vapour then
condenses into water to be recirculated back to the HRSG for heat absorption.
The detailed post-combustion carbon capture system is shown in Figure 2. The exhaust gas exiting from the
HRSG enters the PCC system. Through booster fan and direct contactor cooler, temperature of flue gas is
decreased to 318.15 K while the pressure is increased to 1.05 bar. The exhaust flue gas in the absorber flows
from bottom to top, after contacting with the lean solvent from the top of the absorber, CO2 in the exhaust gas
is absorbed. The exhaust flue gas flows out of the absorber at the top. Rich solvent exchanges heat with lean
solvent from stripper at heat exchanger, because low temperature is required in absorber, and high
temperature is required for stripper. After decreasing the temperature, lean solvent is recycled to the absorber.
Rich solvent increases temperature to 378.15 K and enters the stripper to be desorbed. The gases after
desorption contains CO2, water vapor and little MEA. After washing, condensation and separation at the top of
stripper, water is condensed and recycled into the stripper. The CO2 is transported into the compression train
and finally be stored or transported. Part of the lean solvent from the stripper will be recycled to the stripper
after exchanging heat with steam in the reboiler, while the rest of the lean solvent will be recycled into
absorber. In this way, MEA solvent can be utilized more efficiently.

Figure 1: Overall system of combined cycle gas turbine with post-combustion carbon capture system

Post-combustion CO2
capture system

Ambient air

Natural gas

Preheater

Combustion
Chamber

Gas
Turbine

HRSG
Steam
Turbine

Condensor

CWS

CWR

CO2 depleted
gas to stack

Booster
Fan

Direct
Contactor

Cooler
Rotary

gas/gas heat
exchanger

CO2 to
compression

train

Ambient Air

Natural Gas

Exhaust Flue Gas
Carbon Dioxide

107

6
5

Cooling Water

LEGEND

Water (Steam Cycle)

Steam (Steam Cycle)

530

Figure 2: Detailed post-combustion carbon capture system

2. Exergy analysis
2.1 Physical and chemical exergy

Exergy analysis is performed to identify the component with the lowest utilization rate in the overall system,
which then enables subsequent measures to enhance the performance of the section with the highest
destruction or lowest exergetic efficiency.
In this study, the exergy flow analysis includes the physical and chemical exergy, while the potential exergy
and kinetic exergy are not calculated. System is assumed to be operating under steady state condition and
natural gas is assumed as pure methane for simplification of calculation. The physical exergy is defined as the
maximum amount of work obtainable when the flow of matters is brought from the current state to the
environment state (Po and To) (Szargut et al., 1988). The physical processes involve only thermal and
mechanical interaction with the environment (Amrollahi et al., 2011). The physical exergy can be shown as
Eq(1):

𝐸𝐸𝑝𝑝ℎ = (ℎ𝑖𝑖 − ℎ0) − 𝑇𝑇0(𝑠𝑠𝑖𝑖 − 𝑠𝑠0) (1)

Where ℎ0 and 𝑠𝑠0 are the specific enthalpy and entropy. ℎ0 = ℎ(𝑇𝑇0, 𝑝𝑝0) and 𝑠𝑠0 = 𝑠𝑠(𝑇𝑇0, 𝑝𝑝0). 𝑇𝑇0 and 𝑃𝑃0 are
ambient temperature (298.15 K) and pressure (1.013 bar).
Chemical exergy is associated with the departure of the chemical composition of a system from that of the
environment, which is caused by the heat transfer and exchange of substance with the environment (Bejan et
al. 1996). The standard chemical exergy of substances in this study are adopted from Bejan et al. (1996), and
the standard chemical exergy of gas mixture is calculated as Eq(2):

�̅�𝑒𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶 = ∑𝑥𝑥𝑘𝑘�̅�𝑒𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶 + 𝑅𝑅�𝑇𝑇0 ∑𝑥𝑥𝑘𝑘𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑥𝑥𝑘𝑘 (2)

Where x_k and e ̅^CH represent the molar fraction and standard chemical exergy of each component in the
mixture. R is universal gas constant, which is 8.314 J/(mol·K).

2.2 Group distribution method

For the solvent MEA, the group distribution method is used to calculate its standard chemical exergy. MEA
(C2H7NO) is considered to consist of two CH2RX functional groups. Using the method proposed by
(Gharagheizi et al., 2018), the standard molar chemical exergy of mixture can be shown as Eq(3):

𝜀𝜀0 = ∆𝐻𝐻𝑓𝑓
0 − 𝑇𝑇∆𝑆𝑆𝑓𝑓

0 + ∑𝑙𝑙𝑗𝑗 𝜀𝜀𝑗𝑗
0 (3)

Where ∆𝐻𝐻𝑓𝑓
0 and ∆𝑆𝑆𝑓𝑓

0 are standard enthalpy and entropy of formation, 𝑙𝑙𝑗𝑗 is number of atoms of component j, 𝜀𝜀𝑗𝑗
0

is the standard molar chemical exergy of component j. For the organic matter, the formula shown in Eq(4) is
calculated using the standard exergy values for different components (Table 1).

𝜀𝜀𝐶𝐶𝑎𝑎𝐶𝐶𝑏𝑏𝑁𝑁𝑐𝑐𝑂𝑂𝑑𝑑𝑆𝑆𝑒𝑒𝐹𝐹𝑓𝑓𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝑔𝑔𝐵𝐵𝐵𝐵ℎ𝐼𝐼𝑖𝑖𝑆𝑆𝑖𝑖𝑗𝑗
0 = ∆Hf

0 − 𝑇𝑇∆Sf
0 + 𝑎𝑎𝜀𝜀𝐶𝐶

0 + 𝑏𝑏
2
𝜀𝜀𝐶𝐶2
0 + 𝑐𝑐

2
𝜀𝜀𝑁𝑁2
0 + 𝑑𝑑

2
𝜀𝜀𝑂𝑂2
0 + 𝑒𝑒𝜀𝜀𝑆𝑆

0 + 𝑓𝑓
2
𝜀𝜀𝐹𝐹2
0 + 𝑔𝑔

2
𝜀𝜀𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶2
0 + ℎ

2
𝜀𝜀𝐵𝐵𝐵𝐵2
0 +

𝑖𝑖
2
𝜀𝜀𝐼𝐼2
0 + 𝑗𝑗𝜀𝜀𝑆𝑆𝑖𝑖

0
(4)

Exhaust flue gas

CWR
CWS

CWS
CWR

Water (Steam Cycle)

Exhaust Flue Gas
Carbon Dioxide
Cooling Water

Compression
TrainRich Solvent

Lean Solvent

Condenser

Stripper

Absorber

Lean/rich
solvent heat
exchanger

Reboiler

Lean solvent
cooler

Steam to
reboiler

Condensate
to HRSG

Steam (Steam Cycle)

LEGEND

531

After replacing the standard molar chemical exergy of the known simple substance, the formula becomes
Eq(5):

𝜀𝜀𝐶𝐶𝑎𝑎𝐶𝐶𝑏𝑏𝑁𝑁𝑐𝑐𝑂𝑂𝑑𝑑𝑆𝑆𝑒𝑒𝐹𝐹𝑓𝑓𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝑔𝑔𝐵𝐵𝐵𝐵ℎ𝐼𝐼𝑖𝑖𝑆𝑆𝑖𝑖𝑗𝑗
0 = ∆Hf

0 − 𝑇𝑇∆Sf
0 + 410.26𝑎𝑎 + 118.05𝑏𝑏 + 0.36𝑐𝑐 + 1.985𝑑𝑑 + 609.6𝑒𝑒 + 233.15𝑓𝑓 +

61.8𝑔𝑔 + 50.6ℎ + 87.35𝑖𝑖 + 854.6𝑗𝑗
(5)

Table 1: The experimental standard chemical exergies of different substances

ID Standard Molar Chemical Exergy 𝜀𝜀0 (𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘 𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑙𝑙)⁄
1 Carbon (solid, graphite) 410.26
2 H2(gas) 236.1
3 N2(gas) 0.72
4 O2(gas) 3.97
5 S (solid, rhombic) 609.6
6 F2(gas) 466.3
7 Cl2(gas) 123.6
8 Br2(gas) 101.2
9 I2(gas) 174.7
10 Si(s) 854.6

The standard enthalpy of formation is Eq(6):

∆𝐻𝐻𝑓𝑓
0 = ∆𝐻𝐻𝑓𝑓

00 + �𝑙𝑙𝑖𝑖

𝑖𝑖=1

∆𝐻𝐻𝑓𝑓
0𝑖𝑖 (6)

The standard entropy of formation is calculated as Eq(7):

∆𝑆𝑆𝑓𝑓
0 = ∆𝑆𝑆𝑓𝑓

00 + �𝑙𝑙𝑖𝑖

𝑖𝑖=1

∆𝑆𝑆𝑓𝑓
0𝑖𝑖 (7)

Where 𝑙𝑙𝑖𝑖 is the number of occurrences of the i^th functional group. ∆𝐻𝐻𝑓𝑓
0𝑖𝑖 and ∆𝑆𝑆𝑓𝑓

0𝑖𝑖 are the contribution of the 𝑖𝑖
th functional group to the enthalpy and entropy of formation. ∆𝐻𝐻𝑓𝑓

00 and ∆𝑆𝑆𝑓𝑓
00 are the coefficients (Gharagheizi

et al., 2018). MEA consists of two CH2RX functional groups. ∆𝐻𝐻𝑓𝑓
0𝑖𝑖 is -9.1154 kJ/mol, ∆𝑆𝑆𝑓𝑓

0𝑖𝑖 is -0.079kJ/mol, and
∆𝐻𝐻𝑓𝑓

00 is -23.9527kJ/mol, ∆𝑆𝑆𝑓𝑓
00 is 0.0205kJ/mol. Then, ∆Hf

0 and ∆Sf
0 of MEA is calculated as Eq(8) and Eq(9):

∆Hf
0 = ∆Hf

00 + � ni∆Hf
0i = −23.9527 + 2 × (−9.1154) = −42.1835

i=1

kJ mol⁄ (8)

∆Sf
0 = ∆Sf

00 + � ni∆Sf
0i = 0.0205 + 2 × (−0.0798) = −0.1391

i=1

kJ mol ∙ K⁄ (9)

The standard molar chemical exergy for MEA is shown calculated as Eq(10):

𝜀𝜀𝐶𝐶2𝐶𝐶7𝑁𝑁𝑂𝑂
0 = ∆Hf

0 − 𝑇𝑇∆Sf
0 + 𝑎𝑎𝜀𝜀𝐶𝐶

0 + 𝑏𝑏
2
𝜀𝜀𝐶𝐶2
0 + 𝑐𝑐

2
𝜀𝜀𝑁𝑁2
0 + 𝑑𝑑

2
𝜀𝜀𝑂𝑂2
0 = −42.1835 − 𝑇𝑇 × (−0.1391) + 410.26𝑎𝑎 +

118.05𝑏𝑏 + 0.36𝑐𝑐 + 1.985𝑑𝑑 = −42.1835 + 0.1391𝑇𝑇 + 820.52 + 826.35 + 0.36 + 1.985 (𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘 𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑙𝑙)⁄
(10)

2.3 Exergy destruction and exergetic efficiency

Exergy destruction is from the friction and the irreversibility of heat transfer, which is represented as 𝐸𝐸�̇�𝐷.
Exergy loss is the rate of exergy transfer related to the heat transfer, which is represented as 𝐸𝐸�̇�𝐿. Eq(11) and
Eq (12) show the relationship between exergy loss and exergy destruction:

𝐸𝐸𝚤𝚤̇ = 𝐸𝐸�̇�𝑒 + 𝐸𝐸�̇�𝐷 + 𝐸𝐸�̇�𝐿 (11)

�̇�𝐸𝐿𝐿 = �̇�𝑤𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐 − � �̇�𝐸𝑖𝑖
𝑖𝑖

(12)

The exergy balance equation is shown as Eq (13):

532

0 = �𝐸𝐸𝑞𝑞,𝚥𝚥̇
𝑗𝑗

− �̇�𝑊𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐 + ��̇�𝐸𝑖𝑖
𝑖𝑖

− ��̇�𝐸𝑒𝑒 −
𝑒𝑒

�̇�𝐸𝐷𝐷 (13)

Exergetic efficiency is another critical value in the exergy analysis. In this study, exergetic efficiency is defined
as the exergy of product over the exergy of fuel of a process (Bejan et al., 1996), as shown in Eq(14):

𝜂𝜂 = 𝐸𝐸𝑝𝑝𝐵𝐵𝑝𝑝𝑑𝑑𝑝𝑝𝑐𝑐𝑝𝑝/𝐸𝐸𝑓𝑓𝑝𝑝𝑒𝑒𝐶𝐶 (14)

3. Results and discussion
Applying the basic exergy formulas, the physical exergy and chemical exergy of each critical state are
determined. Each section of the system is considered as a control volume, using the inlet and outlet exergy to
calculate the exergy destruction and exergetic efficiency.
Result of exergy analysis for each component in CCGT and PCC is shown in the Table 2 and Table 3.

Table 2: Exergy analysis on CCGT system

Equipment Inlet Outlet Exergy
Destruction
(MW)

Exergetic
Efficiency
(%)

Physical
Exergy (MW)

Chemical
Exergy (MW)

Physical
Exergy (MW)

Chemical
Exergy (MW)

Compressor 0.00 0.23 14.36 0.00 15.07 49.18
Combustion Chamber 70.88 85.64 143.43 1.39 15.69 90.23
Gas Turbine 143.43 1.39 80.61 1.39 4.60 56.62
HRSG 64.04 2.39 45.86 11.95 8.63 87.01
Steam Turbine 0.99 10.56 6.23 10.56 4.70 78.14
Condenser 6.23 10.56 0.47 1.00 11.78 11.17

Table 3: Exergy analysis on PCC system

Equipment Inlet Outlet Exergy
Destruction
(MW)

Exergetic
Efficiency
(%)

Physical Exergy
(MW)

Chemical Exergy
(MW)

Physical
Exergy (MW)

Chemical
Exergy (MW)

Absorber 4.55 305.13 4.46 169.52 135.70 56.18
Stripper 0.79 169.99 3.51 172.52 8.26 95.16
Reboiler 54.60 171.60 8.66 171.65 45.89 79.71
Condenser 3.28 0.59 0.59 0.94 5.03 23.30
Compression Train 0.55 0.93 0.04 0.93 0.51 65.37

From the result, it was found that large amount of exergy destruction in the CCGT system occurs in the
combustion chamber and condenser, which are 15.69 MW and 11.78 MW, occupying over 45 % of the total
destruction of the CCGT system. The exergy destruction of combustion chamber is possibly due to the fuel
chemical reactions, as reflected in the chemical exergy changes between the inlet and outlet of the
component. It has been reported that the exergy destruction can be reduced by increasing the inlet
temperature of combustion chamber (Kong et al., 2016). For the component exergetic efficiency, combustion
chamber and HRSG have relatively high efficiency of 90.23 % and 87.01 %. The exergetic efficiency of
compressor is considerably lower due to the required work input from the environment.
For the PCC system, the largest exergy destruction occurs in the absorber due to uneven distribution of local
driving forces along the absorber (Amrollahi et al., 2011). The present analysis shows that the exergetic
efficiency of the absorber is only 56.18 %. The optimal solution is an even distribution of driving forces over
unit operation, with the corresponding system designed as such that the stream of solvent is split into two
flows, so that these two flows enter the absorber at mid-point and top-point to make the driving force more
even (Aroonwilas and Veawab, 2007). Stripper has the highest exergetic efficiency, which is about 95.16 %.
The main reason is that the chemical exergy of MEA is quite high and there is only little exergy loss caused by
CO2 and water transfer. Condenser has the lowest efficiency of 23.30 %. The exergetic efficiency of
condenser is influenced by the ambient temperature. At 298.15 K, the temperature difference between outlet
recycled water and environment is negligible, thus the specific exergy of the outlet recycled water decreases
significantly. This means that the exergy of products for condenser is significantly lower than exergy of water
inlet, hence the exergetic efficiency for the condenser is very low. This effect can be reduced by decreasing
the ambient temperature or increasing the outlet temperature of condenser (Kong et al., 2016).

533

The exergetic efficiency of the gas turbine operating with the turbine inlet condition of 1520 K and 9.14 bar is
80.01 %, the power to fuel chemical exergy ratio is 68.82 %. Ertesvåg et al. (2005) studied the exergy analysis
of CCGT and reported the power to fuel chemical exergy ratio for the turbine was 69.23 %. Their turbine inlet
condition used was 15.6 bar and 1523.15 K. Study shows that the inlet pressure of gas turbine has a
significant effect on the turbine’s efficiency. Decreasing the inlet pressure of gas turbine contributes to higher
exergetic efficiency, as higher pressure ratio usually causes an increase inlet temperature, which means more
irreversibilities will happen in the component (Reddy and Mohamed, 2007). As the inlet temperatures are fixed
almost the same between these two studies, the power to fuel chemical exergy ratios are similar.

4. Conclusions
Exergy analysis for the CCGT with PCC system shows the distribution of exergy destruction in the overall
system and the exergetic efficiency of each components. The exergy analysis can be used to identify the
component with the highest exergy destruction and the lowest exergetic efficiency. The present study focuses
on the exergy analysis of CCGT with PCC unit. Results show that: (1) the lowest exergetic efficiency occurs in
the condenser section of the two systems, which are 11.17 % for CCGT and 23.30 % for PCC. (2)
Compression train in PCC and compressor in CCGT have low exergetic efficiency due to required work input.
(3) Components with the highest exergy destruction in CCGT and PCC are the combustion chamber and
absorber, due to the reactions in combustion chamber and high and uneven distribution of local driving forces
in the absorber. Identification of the exergetic efficiency of each component in the combined cycle system
provides the opportunity to improve the performance of the system. Further exergy analysis will be conducted
on the system with selective exhaust gas recirculation to utilise the CO2 for a more efficient carbon capture
process.

Acknowledgments

The funding from Shanghai Jiao Tong University (WF220428004) is gratefully acknowledged.

References

Aroonwilas, A., Veawab, A., 2007, Integration of CO2 capture unit using single and blended-amines into
supercritical coal-fired power plants: implications for emission and energy management. International
Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control Technologies, 1(2), 143–150.

Bejan A., Tsatsaronis G., Moran M., 1996, Thermal design and optimization, John Wiley & Sons Inc, New
Jersey, US.

Ertesvåg I.S., Kvamsdal H.M., Bolland O., 2005, Exergy analysis of a gas-turbine combined-cycle power plant
with pre-combustion CO2 capture, Energy, 30(1), 5-39.

Gharagheizi F., Kashkouli P., Hedden R.C., 2018, Standard molar chemical exergy: A new accurate model,
Energy 158: 924-935.

Gonzalez-Barriuso M., Pesquera C., Gonzalez F., Yedra A., Blanco C., 2019, CO2 capture by amino-
functionalized graphene oxide, Chemical Engineering Transactions, 75, 637-642.

Herraiz L., Fernández E.S., Palfi E., Lucquiauda M., 2018, Selective exhaust gas recirculation in combined
cycle gas turbine power plants with post-combustion CO2 capture, International Journal of Greenhouse
Gas Control, 71, 303-321.

Huang Z.Y., 2018, Research on CO2 Capture and System Integration in Natural Gas-Steam Combined Cycle
Power Plant, PhD Thesis, Beijing Jiaotong University, Beijing, China.

Jassim,M.S., Rochelle, G.T., 2006, Innovative absorber/stripper configuration for CO2 capture by aqueous
monoethanolamine. Industrial & Engineering Chemistry Research, 45, 2465–2472.

Kong Y., Ma H., Si F.Q., Xia J.X., 2016, Research on variable operating condition of gas-steam combined
cycle unit based on exergy analysis, Energy Research and Utilization,35(3), 21-26.

Olaleye A.K., Wang M.H., Kelsall G., 2015, Steady state simulation and exergy analysis of supercritical coal-
fired power plant with CO2 capture, Fuel, 151, 57-72.

Plaza J.M., Wagener D.V., Rochellea G.T., 2009, Modeling CO2 capture with aqueous monoethanolamine,
Energy Procedia, 1(1), 1171-1178.

Zeinab A., Ertesvåg I.S., Bolland O., 2011, Thermodynamic analysis on post-combustion CO2 capture of
natural-gas-fired power plant, International Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control, 5(3), 422-426.

Zhang S., Tao R., Liu L., Zhang L., Du J., 2019, Economic and environmental optimisation framework for
carbon capture utilisation and storage supply chain, Chemical Engineering Transactions, 76, 1-6.

534