Chemical process optimization problems often have multiple and conflicting objectives, such as capital cost, operating cost, production cost, profit, energy consumptions, and environmental impacts. In such cases, multi-objective optimization (MOO) is suitable in finding many Pareto optimal solutions, to understand the quantitative tradeoffs among the objectives, and also to obtain the optimal values of decision variables. Gaseous fuel can be converted into heat, power, and electricity, using combustion engine, gas turbine (GT), or solid oxide fuel cell (SOFC). Of these, SOFC with GT has shown higher thermodynamic performance. This hybrid conversion system leads to a better utilization of natural resource, reduced environmental impacts, and more profit. This study optimizes performance of SOFC–GT system for maximization of annual profit and minimization of annualized capital cost, simultaneously. For optimal SOFC–GT designs, the composite curves for maximum amount of possible heat recovery indicate good performance of the hybrid system. Further, first law energy and exergy efficiencies of optimal SOFC–GT designs are significantly better compared to traditional conversion systems. In order to obtain flexible design in the presence of uncertain parameters, robust MOO of SOFC–GT system was also performed. Finally, Pareto solutions obtained via normal and robust MOO approaches are considered for parametric uncertainty analysis with respect to market and operating conditions, and solution obtained via robust MOO found to be less sensitive.

References

References
1.
Sharma
,
S.
, and
Rangaiah
,
G. P.
,
2013
, “
Multi-Objective Optimization Applications in Chemical Engineering
,”
Multi-Objective Optimization in Chemical Engineering: Developments and Applications
,
G. P.
,
Rangaiah
and
A.
,
Bonilla-Petriciolet
, eds.,
Wiley
, Chichester, UK.
2.
Facchinetti
,
E.
,
Favrat
,
D.
, and
Maréchal
,
F.
,
2014
, “
Design and Optimization of an Innovative Solid Oxide Fuel Cell–Gas Turbine Hybrid Cycle for Small Scale Distributed Generation
,”
Fuel Cells
,
14
(
4
), pp.
595
606
.
3.
Ramadhani
,
F.
,
Hussain
,
M. A.
,
Mokhlis
,
H.
, and
Hajimolana
,
S.
,
2017
, “
Optimization Strategies for Solid Oxide Fuel Cell (SOFC) Application: A Literature Survey
,”
Renewable Sustainable Energy Rev.
,
76
, pp.
460
484
.
4.
Marchetti
,
A.
,
Gopalkrishnan
,
A.
,
Chachuat
,
B.
,
Bonvin
,
D.
,
Tsikonis
,
L.
,
Nakajo
,
A.
,
Wuillemin
,
Z.
, and
Van herle
,
J.
,
2011
, “
Robust Real-Time Optimization of a Solid Oxide Fuel Cell Stack
,”
ASME J. Fuel Cell Sci. Technol.
,
8
(
5
), p. 051001.
5.
Hajabdollahi
,
Z.
, and
Fu
,
P. F.
,
2017
, “
Multi-Objective Based Configuration Optimization of SOFC-GT Cogeneration Plant
,”
Appl. Therm. Eng.
,
112
, pp.
549
559
.
6.
Tock
,
L.
, and
Maréchal
,
F.
,
2015
, “
Decision Support for Ranking Pareto Optimal Process Designs Under Uncertain Market Conditions
,”
Comput. Chem. Eng.
,
83
, pp.
165
175
.
7.
Mitra
,
K.
,
2013
, “
Chance Constrained Programming to Handle Uncertainty in Nonlinear Process Models
,”
Multi-Objective Optimization in Chemical Engineering: Developments and Applications
,
G. P.
,
Rangaiah
and
A.
,
Bonilla-Petriciolet
, eds.,
Wiley
, Chichester, UK.
8.
Palazzi
,
F.
,
Autissier
,
N.
,
Maréchal
,
F.
, and
Favrat
,
D.
,
2007
, “
A Methodology for Thermo-Economic Modeling and Optimization of Solid Oxide Fuel Cell Systems
,”
Appl. Therm. Eng.
,
27
(
16
), pp.
2703
2712
.
9.
Caliandro
,
P.
,
Tock
,
L.
,
Ensinas
,
A. V.
, and
Maréchal
,
F.
,
2014
, “
Thermo-Economic Optimization of a Solid Oxide Fuel Cell—Gas Turbine System Fueled With Gasified Lignocellulosic Biomass
,”
Energy Convers. Manage.
,
85
, pp.
764
773
.
10.
Deb
,
K.
, and
Gupta
,
H.
,
2006
, “
Introducing Robustness in Multi-Objective Optimization
,”
Evol. Computation
,
14
(
4
), pp.
463
494
.
11.
Sharma
,
S.
,
Celebi
,
A. D.
, and
Maréchal
,
F.
,
2017
, “
Robust Multi-Objective Optimization of Gasifier and Solid Oxide Fuel Cell Plant for Electricity Production Using Wood
,”
Energy
,
137
, pp.
811
822
.
12.
Van herle
,
J.
,
Maréchal
,
M.
,
Leuenberger
,
S.
, and
Favrat
,
D.
,
2003
, “
Energy Balance Model of a SOFC Cogenerator Operated With Biogas
,”
J. Power Sources
,
118
(
1–2
), pp.
375
383
.
13.
Pelster
,
S.
,
1998
, “
Environomic Modeling and Optimization of Advanced Combined Cycle Cogeneration Power Plants Including CO2 Separation Options
,” Ph.D. thesis, École Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne, Lausanne, Switzerland, pp.
89
90
.
14.
Maréchal
,
F.
,
Palazzi
,
F.
,
Godat
,
J.
, and
Favrat
,
D.
,
2004
, “
Thermo-Economic Modelling and Optimization of Fuel Cell Systems
,”
Fuel Cells
,
5
(
1
), pp.
5
24
.
15.
Turton
,
R.
,
Bailie
,
R. C.
,
Whiting
,
W. B.
, and
Shaeiwitz
,
J. A.
,
2012
,
Analysis, Synthesis and Design of Chemical Processes
,
4th ed.
,
Prentice Hall
, Upper Saddle River, NJ.
16.
Rangaiah
,
G. P.
,
Sharma
,
S.
, and
Sreepathi
,
B. K.
,
2015
, “
Multi-Objective Optimization for the Design and Operation of Energy Efficient Chemical Processes and Power Generation
,”
Curr. Opin. Chem. Eng.
,
10
, pp.
49
62
.
17.
Wang
,
Z.
, and
Rangaiah
,
G. P.
,
2017
, “
Application and Analysis of Methods for Selecting an Optimal Solution From the Pareto-Optimal Front Obtained by Multi-Objective Optimization
,”
Ind. Eng. Chem. Res.
,
56
(
2
), pp.
560
574
.
18.
Kirschner
,
M.
,
2012
,
Oxygen. In: Ullmann's Encyclopedia of Industrial Chemistry
,
Wiley-VCH
, Weinheim, Germany.
You do not currently have access to this content.