Energy Recovery from Natural Gas Pressure Reduction Stations with the Use of Turboexpanders: Static and Dynamic Simulations

Paweł Bielka and Szymon Kuczyński ()
Additional contact information
Paweł Bielka: Independent Expert, 47-330 Zdzieszowice, Poland
Szymon Kuczyński: Gas Engineering Department, Drilling, Oil and Gas Faculty, AGH University of Science and Technology, 30 Av., 30-059 Kraków, Poland

Energies, 2022, vol. 15, issue 23, 1-19

Abstract: The application of expansion turbines at natural gas pressure reduction stations (PRS) is considered in order to recover energy contained in the natural gas. This energy is irretrievably lost at the reduction stations which use the traditional pressure reducer. Expanders allow for the electricity production for PRS own needs and for resale. The paper presents an analysis of the possibility of using turboexpanders at PRS in Poland. Authors performed static simulations for the assumed data sets and dynamic simulations for annual data from selected representative natural gas reduction and measurement stations. Energy balances are presented for the discussed scenarios that compare the energy requirements of natural gas pressure reduction stations which use a classic pressure reducer or turboexpander (TE). Using static simulations, authors investigated whether the use of a turboexpander is economically justified for the case if it is used only to supply the reduction station with electricity. Dynamic analyses were carried out using real data. In addition, static analyses were performed for a natural gas reduction and measurement station using a PEM fuel cell for the production of electricity in a combined gas heating system. At higher inlet temperatures and pressures, the expansion process was more economical due to the lower heat power requirement and the greater amount of produced electricity. The PRS with the turboexpander compared to the PRS with the reducer required the supply of thermal energy which did not allow the PRS to lower operating costs for the assumed prices of heat and electricity. The reduction system with the PEM fuel cell in the combined heating system positively achieved lower operating costs of the PRS (without taking into account the investment costs). Total annual costs for PRS with a reducer was PLN 1,593,167.04, and for PRS with TE + PEM PLN 1,430,595.60—the difference was PLN 108,571.44 in favor of the arrangement with TE and PEM. The payback time should be investigated, although the use of such a system gives the impression of oversizing. An increase in the electricity purchase price and a decrease in the natural gas purchase price may contribute to the investment in the future.

Keywords: natural gas; natural gas regulation station; turboexpander; pressure regulator; energy recovery; energy conversion; energy system analysis; electricity production; fuel cells; cogeneration systems (search for similar items in EconPapers)
JEL-codes: Q Q0 Q4 Q40 Q41 Q42 Q43 Q47 Q48 Q49 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2022
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/15/23/8890/pdf (application/pdf)
https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/15/23/8890/ (text/html)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:gam:jeners:v:15:y:2022:i:23:p:8890-:d:983129

Access Statistics for this article

Energies is currently edited by Ms. Agatha Cao

More articles in Energies from MDPI
Bibliographic data for series maintained by MDPI Indexing Manager ().