17th. Annual (International) Conference on Mechanical Engineering-ISME2009
May, 2009, University of Tehran, Iran
Effect of key parameter on thermodynamic and thermoeconomic performance
of steam power plant
Ahmadreza Azimian1, Shoaib Khanmohammadi 2
1
2
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Isfahan University of Technology (IUT); azimian@cc.iut.ac.ir
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Isfahan University of Technology (IUT); kh_shoaib@me.iut.ac.ir
Abstract
The first law of thermodynamics is a useful tool for
thermodynamics processes analysis. The exergy
analysis of a conventional steam power plant was done.
This analysis is based on first and second law of
thermodynamics. In the present paper, a conventional
steam power plant was investigated using a
thermoeconomic analysis. Having done this analysis the
inefficient components of a steam power plant cycle
was identified. In this analysis, it was assumed that the
cycle components are adiabatic and the potential and
kinetic terms of exergy were negligible. The exergy
analysis combined with the economical aspects. These
aspects include capital investment cost, fuel cost and
operating and maintenance cost for evaluation of final
cost of product. According to this calculation exergy
destruction cost of each component in the cycle and
their role were evaluated. Based on these results the
effect of the component efficiency on the final cost of
the product and performance revealed. Effect of main
steam temperature, reheated temperature, condenser
pressure and number of the feed water heaters on cycle
performance and final electrical power cost were also
determined.
Keywords: steam power plant, exergoeconomic
analysis, exergy electricity generation cost
Introduction
Thermoeconomics is a branch of engineering sciences
that combines exergy analysis and economic principles.
This analysis enables us to determine exergy loss and
destruction cost with this two concepts. Recently there
are extensive studies that show importance of the exergy
analysis and economical cost in thermoeconomics. We
mention some of as shown. Kotas [1] and Moran [2]
considered exergoeconomic analysis and exergy
destruction evaluation for various systems. Others such
as Fischer [3] and Cihan [4] carry out exergy analysis
for some power plants, using energy analysis they
determined inefficient components.
Improve performance of these components lead to
increase in power plant cycle efficiency. The
thermodynamic cycle is optimized by minimizing
irreversibility. In full load operation pressure and
temperature of boiler must be at the highest possible
point. Antonio Vallero et al. [5] in their work consider
economic analysis of combined heat and power plant
(CGAM cycle) by using exergoeconomic analysis and
derived a series of equations to perform
exergoeconomic analysis. In another work Gorge
Tesatesarois [6] carry out exergy analysis and showed
properly thermoeconomic concept for a gas turbine
cycle. He identified this concepts in a book that write by
he and coworker. [7] Mention writer et al. [8] performed
a wide research on final generate electricity price in
EPRI research institute, they consider parameters like
components efficiency, pressure ratio, maximum cycle
temperature and etc on final cost of products. Second
law of thermodynamic was considered by Sama [9] in
which 13 methods from his work was mentioned. Kim
et al. [10] performed thermoeconomic analysis for a 500
MW combined cycle power plant, a combined product
gas turbine and 137 MW steam power plant evaluating
final cost of each power cycle per unit. Massardo and
Scialo [11] also studied some gas turbine cycle. In
another research, Dincer et al. [12] studied a steam
cycle with reheat. They carry out energy, exergy and
exergoeconomic analysis of Rankin cycle and effects of
various parameters on power output and performance of
cycle were evaluated. Aljundi [13] in a paper
investigated energy and exergy analysis of Al-Hussein
power plant in Jordan and effects of environmental
temperature variation on cycle performance were
considered. Exergy analysis for a 420 MW combined
cycle power plant was studied by Ameri et al. [14]. In
current research effects of key parameters like as main
steam temperature, reheated steam temperature,
condenser pressure and number of feed water heater on
cycle performance and final cost of electric product is
investigated.
Exergoeconomic analysis
- Exergy
Exergy is a maximum theoretical useful work
obtainable as the system interacts to equilibrium [1]. In
interact of system and environment when environment
work instead of system, exergy can be negative. In dead
state system is in thermodynamics equilibrium whit
environment and both temperature and pressure are
equal to the system and with no kinetics and potential
energy which will be chemically neutral too. Exergy
terms can be shown as follow:
E& = E& PH + E& KN + E& PT + E& CH
(1)
- Exergetic efficiency
Exergetic efficiency defines how the systems consume
the input exergy.
17th. Annual (International) Conference on Mechanical Engineering-ISME2009
May, 2009, University of Tehran, Iran
ε=
E& p
E&
(2)
s
.
In this equation Es is generated exergy in other word is
the sources exergy and E& is the generated exergy
p
which is the exergy of sink. For example in a power
plant cycle E& s is consuming fuel while E& p is the power
which is generated by power plant. For a specific part
like heat exchanger, E& s is generated exergy defined as
the exergy difference between input and output of hot
flow of this part and generated exergy defined as
increase of the cold flow exergy which is heated by hot
flow. In part such as turbine E& s indicate difference
between input and output flow exergy and E& p is turbine
generated work. The exergetic concept is useful only
when we want to compare similar systems, so
comparison between exergetic efficiency of a turbine
with combustion chamber is meaningless. Importances
of exergetic efficiency are identification of components
with high exergy loss and find their role in
thermoeconomic analysis cost.
- Exergoeconomic
Exergoeconomic is combination of exergy and
economic analysis that estimate amount of exergy cost
destruction. For analysis a system, cost rate of generated
product can be written as below:
CI
OM
($ / hr )
C& p ,tot = C& F .tot + Z&tot
+ Z&tot
C& i = ci .E& i = ci .(m& .ei )
C& = c .E& = c .(m& .e )
C& w = cw .W&
C& = c E&
e
e
q
q
e
e
i
(6)
(7)
(8)
(9)
q
ci , ce , cW , cq are the average cost per exergy unit. For
- Exergoeconomic parameters
In the economic analysis used dimensionless form of
parameters to relate quality concepts as quantity. These
parameters are:
- Relative cost difference rk
Relative cost difference rk for the k component is
defined by:
rk =
c p , k − cF , k
(10)
cF , k
In fact relative cost difference expresses the relative
increase in the average cost per exergy unit between
fuel and product of the component. With increase in
Z& and exergy destruction rate, relative cost difference
increase.
- Exergoeconomic factor f k
(3)
For a k component, this factor defined as below:
Equation (3) shows that total cost rate of product
(C& p ,tot ) equal to total cost rate of fuel (C& F ,tot ) plus capital
investment cost Z& CI and operation and maintenance
fk =
Z& k + cF ,k
Z& k
( E&
D ,k
+ E& L ,k )
(11)
tot
OM
cost Z&tot
. When one part of system consider (for
example turbine in a power plant cycle), equation (3)
can be used in which fuel and product refer to that
component. For example, in turbine fuel is difference
between input and output exergy and, product is
generated power of turbine. Terms of ( Z& CI ) and ( Z& OM )
obtain from division of total capital investment cost and
operation and maintenance cost to total hours that a
plant works in a year. Instead of the equation (3) the
following equation can be used:
Z& = Z& CI + Z& OM
(4)
It is obvious from (4) that increase in capital investment
cost and operational and maintenance cost lead to
increase in generated power cost.
- Cost balance equation
For a special part in the cycle, cost balance equation is
as the below:
∑ C&
e,k
+ C& w,k + C& q ,k = ∑ C&i ,k + Z& k
Any part of this equation is as below:
(5)
In fact, this factor expresses as a ratio the contribution
of the non-exergy–related cost to the total cost
increases. If this factor more than 0.5 it is mean that
increase in component cost due to capital investment
cost and operation and maintenance cost.
- Ratio of exergy destruction yD ,k
This factor for a k component is as below:
yD , k =
E& D ,k
E&
(12)
F , k ,tot
This equation expresses that from completely destructed
exergy, how percent allocate to k component.
In this paper exergy and exergoeconomic analysis for a
320 MW steam power plant was investigated. Power
plant had three low pressures feed water heaters, a
dearator and one high-pressure heater with a surface
condenser. In the figure 1 schematic diagram of steam
power plant is shown:
Cycle modeling
17th. Annual (International) Conference on Mechanical Engineering-ISME2009
May, 2009, University of Tehran, Iran
1
For modeling of power plant, simulating program was
used which can model the power plant cycle properly.
In the table 1 thermodynamic properties of steam power
plant is shown:
Table 1: Thermodynamic properties of steam power plant
Parameter
Heat transfer in boiler(MW)
feed water temperature (C)
HP steam mass flow rate(ton/h)
HP steam temperature(C)
Value
389.59
251.99
209
541
Reheat mass flow(ton/h)
441.1
Reheat temperature (C)
523
Reheat pressure(bar)
31
Boiler efficiency (%)
98
Power output(MW)
320
Number of feed water heater
Cooling water mass flow rate(ton/h)
5
14480
Boiler feed pump efficiency (%)
85
Condenser pressure(bar)
Ambient temperature (C)
0.1
20
Calculations of steam cycle power plant
Considering each part of cycle as a control volume and
writing the cost balance equation for each part, we
receive 16 equations and 16 unknown’s parameter. For
example cost balance equation for boiler like as below:
c1e1 − c2 e2 + Z B1 + CFB1 = 0
(13)
That c1 is related to input flow and c2 is related to output
flow that is unknown. Z B1 , C FB1 are fuel cost and
purchase boiler cost respectively that are given data of
problem. With written other same equation like above
for other component cost matrix obtain. (Fig 2)
The plant which is studied in this paper has been
working 20 years and for this reason the capital
investment cost is dissipated and has no role in
calculations. Only operation and maintenance costs
were considered for Z& which is distributed between
components properly. Generally operation and
maintenance cost is considered 0.0025 $/h per unit
kilowatt generated power. [15] Which this estimation is
depending on power plant location and management of
power plants it which may change this value. It is
notable that in any case that we want to calculate price
in Rails we must each of the price in table multiple by a
coefficient (9840 Rails).
Result and discussion
With related calculations and solve equations, flow
costs and cost formation of each processes obtain.
Regard to result of this calculation that summarized in
the table 2 electrical cost price is 9.75 $/h.
Exergy analysis for steam power plant shows that boiler
and preheater1+condenser have high exergy loss that
1-IPSE pro
boiler with 360.65 MW has high exergy destruction that
due2 to combustion process and intensity of
irreversibility in this part. Calculation of exergetic
efficiency reveals that preheater1+condenser has the
lowest exergetic efficiency that shows inefficacy of
these components. It is remarkable that however boiler
has the higher exergy loss than preheater1+condenser
but
have
a
better
performance
than
preheater1+condenser; because has more exergy
destruction compare with exergy fuel for this
component. In the sixth column of table 3 it can be seen
that boiler with 81.48% has the highest exergy
destruction whole of cycle. The result show that second
law efficiency for steam power plant is 42.02%. Result
for other components shown in table 3.
Table 3 Exergy destruction & Exergetic efficiency for
Conventional Steam Power Plant
Product Fuel
Destructed
eps
Edrel
Unit
Exergy Exergy
Exergy
(%)
(%)
(MW)
(MW)
(MW)
H.P.Turbine 100.34 108.50 8.16
92.48 1.84
I.P.Turbine
104.75 110.21 5.46
95.04 1.23
L.P.Turbine 128.93 140.59 11.66
91.71 2.63
Generator
320.80 334.02 13.23
96.04 2.99
Boiler
402.75 763.39 360.65
52.76 81.4
Preh1+cond. 16.21
55.02
38.81
29.46 8.77
Dearator
42.56
47.31
4.74
89.97 1.07
Pump2
6.14
7.71
1.56
79.70 0.35
Preheater2
11.36
13.48
2.12
84.27 0.48
Preheater3
19.05
21.28
2.23
89.51 0.50
Preheater4
11.92
13.60
1.68
87.62 0.38
System
320.80 763.39 44.02
42.02 100
Exergoeconomic analysis show that boiler and
preheater1+condenser have the highest exergy cost
destruction that boiler with 155090.8 $/h has the highest
exergy cost destruction. Also percent of exergy
destruction for boiler and preheater1+condenser are
47.24% and 5.08% respectively.
Table 4 Economic cost values and economic factors for Steam
Power Cycle
cf
Unit
cp($/GJ)
CD ($/h)
y (%)
($/GJ)
H.P.Turbine
0.85
4.92
84.78
1.07
I.P. Turbine
2.61
20.76
229.79
0.72
L.P.Turbine
0.40
21.51
459.91
1.53
Generator
5.33
1.36
159.27
1.73
Boiler
7.13
16.12
15090.80 47.24
Preh1+cond.
19.73
66.96
6056.57
5.08
Dearator
35.91
39.92
647.58
0.62
Pump2
0.01
12.02
33.83
0.20
Preheater2
7.00
8.31
58.39
0.28
Preheater3
4.55
5.09
38.74
0.29
Preheater4
4.55
5.20
29.55
0.22
Regard to this matter that condenser and boiler are key
components that have a significant effect on cycle
performance and have highest exergy destruction, so in
this section we have a special attention to the key
parameters like as pressure and temperature in these
components. One of the most important parameter that
17th. Annual (International) Conference on Mechanical Engineering-ISME2009
May, 2009, University of Tehran, Iran
determined power output is condenser pressure or
backpressure in the last stage of LP turbine. For
considering effect of this parameter on cycle
performance, carry out some analysis that describe in
following. Increase condenser pressure between 0.05
and 0.7 bars electricity cost decrease from 9.87 $ GJ to
7.81 $ GJ .(Fig 3) This is remarkable if we know that
with increase condenser pressure the first and second
low efficiency decrease.(Fig. 4) it is obvious with
increase condenser pressure as seen in the Fig. 5 exergy
destruction percent in the boiler is decrease and in the
condenser+preheater1 increase that result of this
variation lead to decrease electricity price.
power plant and cycle efficiency.[12] For this reason in
this section consider effect variation of temperature
superheat and reheat steam on electricity price. Results
shown in Fig. 6, the result shows that increase superheat
steam lead to decrease 1$/h in the electricity price while
increase reheat temperature not have a significant effect
on electricity price, this show that the temperature of
superheat steam temperature is more important than
reheat temperature and has a more effect on electricity
price. Also this it can be seen that reheat steam to
temperature higher than 523 oC lead to further decrease
in electricity price.
Figure 6 Effect of superheat and reheat steam temperature on
electricity price
Figure 3 Effect of condenser pressure on electricity
price
In this part effect number of feed water heater on
exergetic performance of cycle and final cost of
electricity consider. As shown in Fig 7 it can be seen
that increase number of feed water heater lead to
increase second law efficiency of steam power plant. A
reason for this increase is that preheating feed water
heater decrease exergy destruction in boiler and increase
exergy efficiency.
Figure 4 Effect of condenser pressure on first and
second law efficiency
Figure 7 Effect number of feed water heater on cycle exergy
efficiency
Figure 5 Effect of condenser pressure on percent exergy
destruction in components
Variation temperature of superheat steam and reheat
steam has a significant effect on power output of steam
Increase number of feed water heater lead to increase in
capital investment cost, operating and maintenance cost
and finally increase electricity price. Also increase
number of feed water heater improves exergy efficiency
of cycle. Hence consider effect number of feed water
heater on electricity price is more important. As shown
in Fig 8 increase number of feed water heater from 3 to
6 lead to decrease electricity price from 10.11 $ GJ to
8/89 $ GJ . This analysis show however increase
number of feed water heater increase capital investment
cost and operation and maintenance cost but
17th. Annual (International) Conference on Mechanical Engineering-ISME2009
May, 2009, University of Tehran, Iran
improvement of cycle performance lead to further
decrease in electricity price.
Figure 8: Effect number of feed water heater on final cost of
electricity
Conclusion
Result for exergy analysis shows that boiler and
condenser+preheater1 have the highest exergy
destruction. Regard to economic calculation for steam
cycle, result show that final cost of electricity with fuel
price 0.3$/h is 9.574$/h. In addition, result shows that
boiler and condenser+preheater1 possess the most
portion of in heat loss and exergy destruction. Decrease
pressure of condenser lead to increase the first and
second law efficiency also increase the electricity price.
As can be seen increase pressure condenser between 0.7
and 0.05 bar led to increase electricity price from
7.814 $ GJ to 9.87 $ GJ . Increase superheat steam
temperature between 500 and 600 oC lead to decrease
the electricity price 1$/h. Increase number of feed water
heater increase second law efficiency of cycle and
decrease final cost of electricity price from 10.11 $ GJ
to 8/89 $ GJ .
List of Symbols
B
C
CH
CI
E
F
KN
m
OM
P
PT
PH
q
s
w
Z
Boiler
Cost
Chemical
Capital investment cost
Exergy
Fuel
Kinetic
Mass flow
Operating and maintenance cost
Product
Potential
Physical
thermal
Source
Work
Total cost of component
Refrence
1- Kotas, TJ. The exergy method of thermal plant
analysis. Butterworths: London,1985
2- Moran, M.(1989) Availability analysis: A guide to
efficient energy use Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Princeton
Hall.
3- Fischer DW. Searching for steam system efficiency,
Plant engineering 1996; 50:64-68
4- Dincer I. Al-muslim H., Thermodynamic analysis of
reheat cycle steam power plant, Int . J. Energy Reaserch
2001; 25 :727-739.
5- Valero, A. ,Miguel, A. ,Lozano, Serra L. CGAM
Problem: definition and conventional solution, energy
Vol.19. No. 3, pp. 297-185, 1994
6- George Tastsaronis, ” Thermoeconomic Analysis
And Optimization of energy system”, Prog. Energy
Combust. Sci, 1993, Vol.19. pp. 227-257.
7- Bejan, G. Tastsaronis, M. Moran, ” Thermal Design
and Optimization”, John Wiley & Sons, Inc.,
1996,USA.
8- G. Tastsaronis and M. Winhold, ”Thermoeconomic
analysis of power plants”, Electric power Research
Institute (EPRI) report, 1984,California,USA.
9- D.A. Sama, ”The use of the second law of
thermodynamics in process design”, Journal of Energy
Resources Technology, Sep.1995, Vol.117 pp. 179-184.
10- D.J. Kim, H.S. Lee, H.Y. Kwak, J.H. Hong, ”
Thermoeconomic Analysis of Power Plants with
integratedexergy stream” AES-Vol.40, Proceedings of
the ASME-2000.
11- A.F. Massardo, M. Scialo,” Thermoeconomic
Analysis of Gas Turbine Based Cycles” Transaction of
the ASME,Vol.122,October 2000,pp. 664-671.
12- Dincer, H. Al-Muslim, Thermodynamic analysis of
reheat cycle steam power plant, International Journal of
Energy Research 25 (2001) 727–739.
13- Isam H. Aljundi. Energy and exergy analysis of a
steam power plant in Jordan. Applied thermal
engineering, Doi:10.1016.
14- Ameri M. Ahmadi P. Khanmohammadi S. Exergy
analysis for 420MW combined cycle power plant. Int. J.
energy reaserch 2008 32:175-183
15- R. Farmer, “Gas Turbine Combined-Cycle Turnkey
Budget Prices” Privat
17th. Annual (International) Conference on Mechanical Engineering-ISME2009
May, 2009, University of Tehran, Iran
Figure 1 Schematic diagram of steam power plant
⎡− e1
⎢ 0
⎢
⎢ 0
⎢
⎢ 0
⎢ 0
⎢
⎢ 0
⎢ 0
⎢
⎢ 0
⎢ 0
⎢
⎢ 0
⎢
⎢ 0
⎢ 0
⎢
⎢ 0
⎢ 0
⎢
⎢ e23
⎢ 0
⎣
e2
− e6
(e3 − e2 )
(e5 − e4 )
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
e7
0
0
0
(e8 − e7 )
0
(e10 − e9 )
0
(e12 − e11 ) 0
(e13 − e12 ) 0
(e15 − e14 ) 0
(− e15 − e32 ) e18
(− e29 − e30 ) − e18
− e27
0
(e29 − e28 )
0
0
0
0
(e 27 − e 26 − e 25 )
(e25 − e24 )
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
e19
− e19
0
0
0
0
e20
− e20
0
0
0
e21
− e21 e22
− e22
0
0
0
0
0
e33
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
e34
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
e35
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
e36
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
e37
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
e38
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
e39
0
0
0
0
0
0
− e39
0 ⎤ ⎡ c1 ⎤ ⎡ Z B1 + C F B1 ⎤
0 ⎥⎥ ⎢⎢ c 2 ⎥⎥ ⎢⎢Z B 2 + C F B 2 ⎥⎥
⎥
0 ⎥ ⎢ c7 ⎥ ⎢ Z ST 1
⎥ ⎢ ⎥ ⎢
⎥
0 ⎥ ⎢c18 ⎥ ⎢ Z ST 2 ⎥
0 ⎥ ⎢c19 ⎥ ⎢ Z ST 3 ⎥
⎥ ⎢ ⎥ ⎢
⎥
0 ⎥ ⎢c 20 ⎥ ⎢ Z ST 4 ⎥
⎥
0 ⎥ ⎢c21 ⎥ ⎢ Z ST 5
⎥ ⎢ ⎥ ⎢
⎥
0 ⎥ ⎢c 22 ⎥ ⎢ Z ST 6
⎥
×
=
⎥
0 ⎥ ⎢c33 ⎥ ⎢ Z ST 7
⎥ ⎢ ⎥ ⎢
⎥
⎥
0 ⎥ ⎢c34 ⎥ ⎢ Z DA
⎥ ⎢ ⎥ ⎢
⎥
0 ⎥ ⎢c35 ⎥ ⎢ Z PMP2 ⎥
⎥
0 ⎥ ⎢c36 ⎥ ⎢ Z DA
⎥ ⎢ ⎥ ⎢
⎥
0 ⎥ ⎢c37 ⎥ ⎢ Z PH1 ⎥
0 ⎥ ⎢c38 ⎥ ⎢ Z PH1 ⎥
⎥ ⎢ ⎥ ⎢
⎥
0 ⎥ ⎢c39 ⎥ ⎢ Z PH1 ⎥
⎥
e40 ⎥⎦ ⎢⎣c 40 ⎥⎦ ⎢⎣ Z GE
⎦
Fig 2 Matrix of cost structure for conventional steam power plant
17th. Annual (International) Conference on Mechanical Engineering-ISME2009
May, 2009, University of Tehran, Iran
Table 2 Result calculation of steam power plant
Flow
Substance
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
1
2
Water
Water
Water
Water
Water
Water
Water
Water
Water
Water
Water
Water
Water
Water
Water
Water
Water
Water
Water
Water
Water
Water
Water
Water
Water
Water
Water
Water
Water
Water
Water
Water
Shaft
Shaft
Shaft
Shaft
Shaft
Shaft
Shaft
Generator
power
boiler fuel
sp.heat fuel
Mass flow Temperature
rate (kg/s)
(C)
Pressure
(bar)
exergy (kJ/kg)
Exergy
(MW)
272.22
272.22
272.22
257.66
257.66
234.90
234.90
234.90
224.55
224.55
203.40
203.40
203.40
188.24
188.24
203.40
203.40
203.40
272.22
272.22
272.22
272.22
272.22
14.56
14.56
22.76
37.32
10.35
47.67
21.15
15.16
15.16
13.10
2.53
251.99
540.00
415.73
415.73
317.86
317.86
536.00
445.17
445.17
308.20
308.20
297.72
188.59
188.59
46.63
41.66
41.75
88.59
158.20
162.27
190.04
230.00
252.00
415.73
289.36
317.86
242.03
445.17
202.03
308.20
51.75
188.59
-
334.40
1574.54
1348.80
1348.80
1166.21
1166.21
1443.59
1249.57
1249.57
961.74
961.74
940.05
714.14
714.14
239.74
53.09
53.74
79.70
156.36
178.93
220.65
290.61
334.40
1348.80
414.52
1166.21
302.80
1249.57
225.65
961.74
56.82
714.14
51751.10
51751.10
91.03
428.62
367.17
347.53
300.49
273.94
339.10
293.52
280.59
215.96
195.62
191.21
145.26
134.43
45.13
10.80
10.93
16.21
42.56
48.71
60.06
79.11
91.03
19.64
6.04
26.54
11.30
12.93
10.76
20.34
0.86
10.83
57.12
100.34
143.93
205.09
209.26
252.15
333.20
320.00
320
639.98
123.41
186.00
171.00
76.00
76.00
36.00
36.00
31.00
17.00
17.00
6.00
6.00
5.50
2.00
2.00
0.10
0.09
6.30
6.10
5.90
186.30
186.20
186.10
186.00
76.00
75.90
36.00
35.90
17.00
16.90
6.00
1.90
2.00
-
c($/GJ)
C($/h)
21.45
4.55
7028.06
7028.06
6020.45
5698.41
4927.00
4491.79
24083.15
20846.27
19927.87
15337.68
13893.03
13579.75
10316.31
9547.40
3205.05
265.82
0.00
3907.77
6116.36
6116.36
6456.11
6804.99
7028.06
322.04
98.97
435.21
185.30
918.40
763.95
1444.66
61.17
768.91
4785.47
332.30
980.24
1368.97
6.24
555.05
1554.97
6392.68
11035.16
19591.36
3777.86
19.73
66.96
39.92
34.88
29.86
23.89
23.27
2.14
6.25
6.22
0.42
3.60
5.33
5.55
9.58
-