Analysis of EU-DEMO WCLL Power Conversion System in Two Relevant Balance of Plant Configurations: Direct Coupling with Auxiliary Boiler and Indirect Coupling

Vincenzo Narcisi, Cristiano Ciurluini, Giovanni Padula and Fabio Giannetti
Additional contact information
Vincenzo Narcisi: DIAEE—Nuclear Section, Sapienza University of Rome, Corso Vittorio Emanuele II 244, 00186 Rome, Italy
Cristiano Ciurluini: DIAEE—Nuclear Section, Sapienza University of Rome, Corso Vittorio Emanuele II 244, 00186 Rome, Italy
Giovanni Padula: DIAEE—Nuclear Section, Sapienza University of Rome, Corso Vittorio Emanuele II 244, 00186 Rome, Italy
Fabio Giannetti: DIAEE—Nuclear Section, Sapienza University of Rome, Corso Vittorio Emanuele II 244, 00186 Rome, Italy

Sustainability, 2022, vol. 14, issue 10, 1-20

Abstract: Among the Key Design Integration Issues (KDIIs) recently selected for the DEMOnstration Fusion Power Plant (DEMO), the operation of the Balance of Plant (BoP) Power Conversion System (PCS) has been recognized as a crucial aspect, due to the typical pulsed regime characterizing the fusion power plant. In the framework of the DEMO Water-Cooled Lead-Lithium Breeding Blanket (WCLL BB) concept, three BoP solutions have been recognized to be able to overcome this issue. They rely on different coupling options between the Primary Heat Transfer Systems (PHTSs) and the PCS: an Indirect Coupling Design (ICD) with Intermediate Heat Transport System (IHTS) and Energy Storage System (ESS), a Direct Coupling Design (DCD) with AUXiliary Boiler (AUXB), and a DCD with small ESS. The present paper deals with a preliminary feasibility assessment of the first two solutions. The analysis, carried out with the GateCycle TM code, referred to a preliminary design phase, devoted to the sizing of the main components, and to a second phase focused on the cycle optimization. The study demonstrated the feasibility of the two BoP concepts. They are able to produce a satisfactory average electric power (>700 MW) with an acceptable average net electric efficiency (33.6% for both concepts). For each solution, the main strengths and weaknesses are compared and discussed.

Keywords: Key Design Integration Issue; BoP; PCS; IHTS; ESS; GateCycle TM; cycle optimization (search for similar items in EconPapers)
JEL-codes: O13 Q Q0 Q2 Q3 Q5 Q56 (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/2071-1050/14/10/5779/pdf (application/pdf)
https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/10/5779/ (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:jsusta:v:14:y:2022:i:10:p:5779-:d:812448

Access Statistics for this article

Sustainability is currently edited by Ms. Alexandra Wu

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