Avestia Publishing

Journal of Fluid Flow, Heat and Mass Transfer (JFFHMT)

Volume 11, Year 2024
ISSN: 2368-6111
DOI: 10.11159/jffhmt.2024.012

Techno-Economic Comparison Of The ORC And The

PEORC For Low-Temperature Industrial Waste Heat
Recovery
Anastasios Skiadopoulos1, Dimitrios Manolakos1
1Agricultural University of Athens, Department of Natural Resources Utilization and Agricultural Engineering
75 Iera Odos, Athens, Attica, Greece 11855
tskiado@aua.gr; dman@aua.gr

Abstract - In this paper, the Organic Rankine Cycle (ORC) and Unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium
the Partially Evaporated Organic Rankine Cycle (PEORC) are are permitted, provided the original work is properly cited.
techno-economically compared for low-temperature waste heat
recovery, with a particular focus on industrial applications. 1. Introduction
Numerical models of the two power cycles were developed, while The optimal utilization of energy sources is a
a dedicated two-phase expansion model simulating the
prerequisite in the global effort to increase the
performance of an industrial expander in the two-phase region
was applied to estimate more precisely the efficiency of the sustainability of modern societies. One of the pillars on
PEORC. Different WFs, temperatures of the heat source, and which this effort must be based is the improvement of
waste heat transfer rates were considered for a complete the primary energy conversion efficiency of major
mapping of the power cycles’ efficiency. The PEORC power cycle energy consumers, such as in the industrial sector. In the
simulations indicate that its heat-to-power efficiency is highly industry, energy efficiency can be substantially
dependent on the performance of the two-phase expander, with increased by utilizing the large amounts of waste heat
vapor quality at the evaporator outlet identified as the most generated from processes. Industrial waste heat is
crucial operating parameter. The efficiency comparison estimated to approach, on a global scale, nearly 70% of
between the two alternative power cycle architectures reveals the primary energy input [1], with the highest share
that the PEORC performs consistently better, achieving thermal
(rising to over 60% [1], [2]) rejected at heat source
efficiencies between 2.28% and 7.75%, whereas the respective
values for the ORC are in the range of 1.25% to 7.13%. Both the temperatures lower than 100oC, a range commonly
ORC and the PEORC demonstrate favorable financial designated as low-temperature heat.
performance for the studied operating conditions. By applying A common technological solution for the
the PEORC, the Levelized Cost Of Electricity (LCOE) for the exploitation of low-temperature waste heat, directly
industry is expected to fluctuate between 0.015 and 0.119 applicable in the industry, is the installation of a
€/kWh, 16-17% lower than the values estimated with the ORC. bottoming power cycle. A well-established power cycle
Favorable PayBack Periods (PBP) (4-5 years) and Net Present in the low-temperature heat range is the Organic
Values (NPV) (260-480k€) are expected when the PEORC is Rankine Cycle (ORC), which can be driven by different
applied, always higher than the respective values for the ORC heat sources, including waste heat, solar irradiance,
because of its increased energy efficiency.
geothermal power, and biomass. The ORC operates on
the same principle as the steam Rankine Cycle, but the
Keywords: Industrial waste heat, ORC, PEORC, Energy
Working Fluid (WF) can be selected among a variety of
efficiency, Financial performance.
substances, such as refrigerants and hydrocarbons, with
low boiling temperatures at high pressures. This
© Copyright 2024 Authors - This is an Open Access article
published under the Creative Commons Attribution flexibility in WF selection constitutes the main
License terms (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0). advantage of the ORC. This is because the design of the
power cycle can be adapted to the characteristics of the
Date Received: 2023-10-05 116
Date Revised: 2024-05-17
Date Accepted: 2024-05-27
Date Published: 2024-06-14
heat source. Furthermore, the type of power generator maximum temperature of the heat source and heat duty
can be selected to maximize the efficiency of the ORC, at the evaporator reaching 100oC and 300 kWth,
with turbines typically applied in large-scale systems, respectively. At first, the efficiency of the two power
and volumetric expanders, such as piston, twin-screw, cycles in recovering a heat source with the
scroll, and rotary vane, used in small-scale units [3]. The aforementioned range of characteristics is compared.
flexible design of the ORC has led to its wide-scale These results are used to compare the financial
application, and it is now considered a mature and performance of the two different power cycles and
robust technology with low operating and maintenance quantify the respective potential benefits for an
costs, and nearly unsupervised operation [4]. industrial unit. For this research work, a numerical
The main drawback of the ORC is the increased model simulating the operation of the two power cycles
exergy losses of the heat source during the evaporation under different temperatures of the heat source, heat
of the WF [5]. The exploitation of the heat source’s duties at the evaporator, and different WFs was
exergy can be increased by omitting the evaporation of developed. A main novelty of the presented herein work
the WF, in which case the power cycle assumes a is the utilization of a novel semi-empirical low-order
trilateral shape, and an optimal match between the thermodynamic model to simulate two-phase expansion
temperature profiles of the heat source and the WF is in a twin-screw expander [13] in PEORC power cycle
accomplished. The trilateral cycle is known as the simulations. The application of this numerical tool allows
Trilateral Flash Cycle (TFC), and it was originally for a better estimation of the two-phase expansion
conceived for the maximization of power generation in efficiency, the phenomenon that mainly affects the
geothermal power plants [6], [7]. The TFC consists of the performance of the PEORC. In this way, the PEORC
same WF thermodynamic processes as the ORC, but the potential as an ORC alternative for industrial waste heat
WF flows out of the evaporator in the saturated liquid recovery applications can be assessed more realistically.
state, and, thereafter, it undergoes two-phase expansion The power cycles’ simulations indicate that the PEORC
in the power generator. The TFC is realized by increasing outperforms, in terms of heat-to-power conversion
the mass flow rate of the WF, which leads to the efficiency, the ORC for all the studied operating
absorption of higher amounts of heat from the WF, and, scenarios. Both the ORC and the PEORC demonstrate
as a result, to the generated power maximization. The favorable financial performance for the studied
risk of erosion by liquid droplets renders turbines applications. However, the increased energy efficiency of
unsuitable for two-phase expansion [8]. On the other the PEORC is depicted systematically in the estimated
hand, twin-screw expanders are indicated in the values of all the utilized financial indexes. The
literature as the ideal expansion machine for the TFC [9] methodology and results presented in this work may be
because of their ability to handle two-phase flows and utilized by the industry as a guide when assessing
operate at high rotational speeds with minimum friction different technological solutions to exploit waste heat
losses. However, the very high volume ratios of the WF from processes.
in the TFC cannot be easily handled by state-of-the-art
twin-screw expanders applied in ORC units, with very 2. Methodology
low isentropic efficiencies documented in the literature 2. 1. Thermodynamic modeling
when the expansion of the WF starts from the saturated Qualitative Temperature-entropy (T-s) diagrams
liquid state [10], [11]. To overcome this shortcoming of of the PEORC and the ORC are presented in Figure 1,
the TFC, the Partially Evaporating ORC (PEORC) power where the thermodynamic processes undergone by the
cycle was introduced[12]. In this power cycle Heat Transfer Fluid (HTF) and the Cooling Fluid (CF) are
architecture, only a fraction of the WF’s mass is also drawn. As mentioned in the Introduction, the
evaporated, resulting in intermediate volume ratios thermodynamic processes of the WF are the same for
during two-phase expansion. The PEORC combines the both power cycles, namely a) 1→2: Adiabatic pumping,
advantages of the ORC and the TFC, featuring increased b) 2→3: Heat absorption at the evaporator, c) 3→4:
heat source utilization compared to the ORC, and higher Adiabatic expansion, and d) 4→1: Heat rejection at the
two-phase expansion efficiency than the TFC. condenser. The values of the parameters used for the
In this study, the PEORC and the ORC are techno-
economically compared for low-temperature waste heat
recovery applications, relevant to the industry, with the

117
simulations presented herein, along with their Table 1: Parameters for PEORC and ORC simulations.
descriptions, symbols, and units are listed in Table 1. Parameter Description [Units] Value
R245fa,
WF Working Fluid [-] R1234ze(Z),
R1234ze(E)
HTF Heat Transfer Fluid [-] H2O
Mass flowrate of the
𝑚̇𝐻𝑇𝐹 2
HTF [kg/s]
ℎ𝑒ℎ𝑡𝑓 HTF pump head [m] 10
Pinch point at the
𝑃𝑃𝑒𝑣 5
evaporator [oC]
Pinch point at the
𝑃𝑃𝑐𝑜𝑛 5
condenser [oC]
HTF temperature at
𝑇𝐻𝑇𝐹,𝑖𝑛 the evaporator inlet 80-100
Figure 1. Qualitative T-s diagrams of the PEORC and the
[oC]
ORC. CF temperature at the
𝑇𝐶𝐹,𝑖𝑛 30
condenser inlet [oC]
In the evaporator, the temperature of the HTF Heat duty at the
drops from 𝑇𝐻𝑇𝐹,𝑖𝑛 to 𝑇𝐻𝑇𝐹,𝑜𝑢𝑡 . The temperature of the CF 𝑄̇𝑒𝑣 100-300
evaporator [kWth]
at the inlet of the condenser is equal to 𝑇𝐶𝐹,𝑖𝑛 , and it rises 𝐶𝐹 Cooling Fluid [-] Air
to 𝑇𝐶𝐹,𝑜𝑢𝑡 at the condenser pinch point, as in Eq. 1. The Temperature rise of
condensation temperature 𝑇𝑐𝑜𝑛 of the WF is then given 𝛥𝑇𝐶𝐹 10
the CF [oC]
by Eq. 2. The calculation of 𝑇𝑐𝑜𝑛 leads to the WF sub-cooling at the
determination of the WF condensation pressure 𝑝𝑐𝑜𝑛 . 𝛥𝑇𝑠𝑢𝑏 5
condenser [oC]
𝑇𝐶𝐹,𝑜𝑢𝑡 = 𝑇𝐶𝐹,𝑖𝑛 + 𝛥𝑇𝐶𝐹 (1) WF superheat at the
𝑇𝑐𝑜𝑛 = 𝑇𝐶𝐹,𝑜𝑢𝑡 + 𝑃𝑃𝑐𝑜𝑛 (2) 𝛥𝑇𝑠𝑝 1-5
evaporator in ORC [oC]
The heat duty 𝑄̇𝑒𝑣 at the evaporator is given by Eq. Quality of the WF at
3, where 𝑐𝑝,𝐻𝑇𝐹 is the specific heat, under constant 𝑥3 the onset of expansion 0.1-0.9
pressure, of the HTF, and 𝑇𝐻𝑇𝐹,𝑜𝑢𝑡 its temperature at the in PEORC [-]
evaporator outlet. Ignoring the heat losses at the Pump isentropic
𝜂𝑝𝑢,𝑖𝑠 70
evaporator, 𝑄̇𝑒𝑣 is also given by Eq. 4, where 𝑚̇𝑊𝐹 is the efficiency [%]
mass flowrate of the WF, whereas ℎ2 and ℎ3 denote its Electromechanical
𝜂𝑒𝑚 90
specific enthalpy at states 2 and 3, respectively. efficiency [%]
𝑄̇𝑒𝑣 = 𝑚̇𝐻𝑇𝐹 𝑐𝑝,𝐻𝑇𝐹 (𝑇𝐻𝑇𝐹,𝑖𝑛 − 𝑇𝐻𝑇𝐹,𝑜𝑢𝑡 ) (3) By inspecting Eqs. 3 to 6, two unknown variables
̇ (ℎ
𝑄𝑒𝑣 = 𝑚̇𝑊𝐹 3 − ℎ2 ) (4) are identified, namely 𝑚̇𝑊𝐹 and 𝑝𝑒𝑣 . Moreover, a degree
By applying Eq. 5, the temperature 𝑇𝐻𝑇𝐹,𝑝𝑟 of the of freedom is also pinpointed, i.e. the value of 𝑥3 for the
HTF at the end of preheating is calculated, for a given PEORC and of 𝛥𝑇𝑠𝑝 for the ORC. By specifying the desired
value of the WF evaporation pressure 𝑝𝑒𝑣 . In Eq. 5, values for 𝑥3 and 𝛥𝑇𝑠𝑝 (within the ranges prescribed in
𝑇𝑊𝐹,𝑠𝑎𝑡 (𝑝𝑒𝑣 ) is the saturation temperature of the WF at Table 1), the solution of the set of Eqs. 3 to 6 leads to the
𝑝𝑒𝑣 . The heat duty 𝑄̇𝑝𝑟 of the evaporator is given by Eq. calculation of 𝑚̇𝑊𝐹 and 𝑝𝑒𝑣 for a given value of 𝑄̇𝑒𝑣 .
6, where ℎ𝑙,𝑠𝑎𝑡 (𝑝𝑒𝑣 ) represents the specific enthalpy of The isentropic efficiency 𝜂𝑒𝑥,𝑖𝑠 of the expander is
the saturated liquid WF at 𝑝𝑒𝑣 . given by Eq. 7, where ℎ4 is the WF’s specific enthalpy at
𝑃𝑃𝑒𝑣 = 𝑇𝐻𝑇𝐹,𝑝𝑟 − 𝑇𝑊𝐹,𝑠𝑎𝑡 (𝑝𝑒𝑣 ) (5) state, and ℎ4,𝑖𝑠 is its specific enthalpy corresponding to
𝑄̇𝑒𝑣 = 𝑚̇𝐻𝑇𝐹 𝑐𝑝,𝐻𝑇𝐹 (𝑇𝐻𝑇𝐹,𝑝𝑟 − 𝑇𝐻𝑇𝐹,𝑜𝑢𝑡 ) = its isentropic expansion from state 3 to 𝑝𝑐𝑜𝑛 . In ORC
(6) simulations, a fixed value, equal to 0.70, is used for 𝜂𝑒𝑥,𝑖𝑠 ,
= 𝑚̇𝑊𝐹 (ℎ𝑙,𝑠𝑎𝑡 (𝑝𝑒𝑣 ) − ℎ2 )
and Eq. 7 is used to calculate ℎ4 . On the other hand, in
PEORC simulations the semi-empirical thermodynamic

118
model (details about the methodology in Ref. [13]) is run 𝐸𝑡𝑜𝑡 are considered constant throughout the thermal
to simulate two-phase expansion as a function of 𝑥3 , engine’s operating lifetime. Finally, in Eqs. 14 and 15, 𝑅𝑅
𝑚̇𝑊𝐹 , 𝑝𝑒𝑣 , and 𝑝𝑐𝑜𝑛 . In this case, ℎ4 is an output of the stands for the annual estimated avoided cost for the
two-phase expansion model, and Eq. 7 is applied to industrial unit operation.
calculate 𝜂𝑒𝑥,𝑖𝑠 . 𝐼𝑖𝑛𝑣 and 𝑅𝑅 are given by Eqs. 16 and 17,
𝜂𝑒𝑥,𝑖𝑠 = (ℎ3 − ℎ4 )⁄(ℎ3 − ℎ4,𝑖𝑠 ) (7) respectively. In Eq. 16, 𝑐𝑖𝑛𝑣 is the power-specific capital
The shaft power 𝑤̇𝑒𝑥 generated by the twin-screw investment cost for the thermal engine, whereas 𝑃𝑛𝑜𝑚 is
expander, and the power 𝑤̇𝑝𝑢 absorbed by the WF pump its nominal electric capacity. In this work, 𝑃𝑛𝑜𝑚 is taken
are given by Eqs. 8 and 9, respectively. The value of ℎ2 in as the highest of the 𝑤̇𝑛𝑒𝑡 values of the PEORC and ORC
Eq. 9 is calculated by applying Eq. 10, where ℎ2,𝑖𝑠 stands power cycles at their best efficiency points for the
for the specific enthalpy of the WF corresponding to its selected operating conditions. In Eq. 17, 𝑐𝑒𝑙 represents
isentropic pumping from state 1 to 𝑝𝑒𝑣 . On the other the electricity price from the power grid. On the other
hand, ℎ1 in Eq. 9 is calculated as a function of 𝑝𝑐𝑜𝑛 and hand, 𝐸𝑡𝑜𝑡 is given by Eq. 18, assuming that the thermal
𝛥𝑇𝑠𝑢𝑏 . The power 𝑤̇ℎ𝑡𝑓 absorbed by the HTF pump is engine operates at a constant best-efficiency point for ℎ𝑟
calculated by Eq. 11, where 𝑔 is the gravitational hours in a year.
acceleration. Finally, the thermal efficiency 𝜂𝑡ℎ of the
power cycle is given by Eq. 12, where 𝑤̇𝑛𝑒𝑡 represents the 𝐼𝑖𝑛𝑣 = 𝑐𝑖𝑛𝑣 𝑃𝑛𝑜𝑚 (16)
net generated power. 𝑅𝑅 = 𝐸𝑡𝑜𝑡 𝑐𝑒𝑙 − 𝑀 (17)
𝑤̇𝑒𝑥 = 𝑚̇𝑊𝐹 (ℎ3 − ℎ2 )𝜂𝑒𝑚 (8)
𝐸𝑡𝑜𝑡 = 𝑤̇𝑛𝑒𝑡 ℎ𝑟 (18)
𝑤̇𝑝𝑢 = 𝑚̇𝑊𝐹 (ℎ2 − ℎ1 )⁄𝜂𝑒𝑚 (9)
𝜂𝑝𝑢,𝑖𝑠 = (ℎ2,𝑖𝑠 − ℎ1 )⁄(ℎ2 − ℎ1 ) (10) The target of the analysis is to compare, by
𝑤̇ℎ𝑡𝑓 = 𝑚̇𝐻𝑇𝐹 ℎ𝑒ℎ𝑡𝑓 𝑔⁄𝜂𝑒𝑚 (11) estimating the 𝐿𝐶𝑂𝐸, 𝑃𝐵𝑃, and 𝑁𝑃𝑉 indices’ values, the
𝜂𝑡ℎ = 𝑤̇𝑛𝑒𝑡 ⁄𝑄̇𝑒𝑣 = financial benefit for the industrial unit by applying the
(12) PEORC and the ORC for waste heat recovery. The
= (𝑤̇𝑒𝑥 − 𝑤̇𝑝𝑢 − 𝑤̇ℎ𝑡𝑓 )⁄𝑄̇𝑒𝑣
analysis is parametric, with 𝑐𝑖𝑛𝑣 , 𝑐𝑒𝑙 , and ℎ𝑟, designated
as the degrees of freedom. For this work, a
2. 2. Financial analysis
representative test case is considered, where the heat
The financial performance of the ORC and the
PEORC as industrial waste heat recovery solutions is transfer rate 𝑄̇𝑒𝑣 at the evaporator, and the temperature
compared by estimating the values of the Levelized Cost 𝑇ℎ𝑡𝑓,𝑖𝑛 of the heat source at the evaporator inlet are equal
Of Electricity (𝐿𝐶𝑂𝐸), the PayBack Period (𝑃𝐵𝑃), and the to 300 kWth, and 100oC, respectively. The utilized
Net Present Value (𝑁𝑃𝑉). 𝐿𝐶𝑂𝐸, 𝑃𝐵𝑃, and 𝑁𝑃𝑉 are parameters, along with their description, applied values,
calculated by Eqs. 13, 14, and 15, respectively. and symbols, for the financial analysis are listed in Table
2.
𝑁 𝑀
𝑙𝑡
𝐼𝑖𝑛𝑣 + ∑𝑖=1 Table 2. Parameters of the financial analysis.
(1+𝑖)𝑟
𝐿𝐶𝑂𝐸 = (13)
∑𝑁 𝑙𝑡 Parameter Description [Units] Value
𝑖=1 𝐸𝑡𝑜𝑡
𝐼𝑖𝑛𝑣 𝑁𝑙𝑡 Operating lifetime [Yrs] 20
𝑃𝐵𝑃 = (14) 𝑟 Interest rate [%] 4
𝑅𝑅
Annual maintenance cost
𝑁𝑙𝑡 𝑀 0.01𝐼𝑖𝑛𝑣
𝑅𝑅 [€]
𝑁𝑃𝑉 = ∑ − 𝐼𝑖𝑛𝑣 (15) Nominal power-specific
(1 + 𝑖)𝑟
𝑖=1
𝑐𝑖𝑛𝑣 thermal engine capital 2000-4000
investment cost [€/kWel]
In Eqs. 13, 14, and 15, 𝐼𝑖𝑛𝑣 represents the initial Power grid electricity price
capital investment cost. In Eqs. 13 and 15, 𝑁𝑙𝑡 is the total 𝑐𝑒𝑙 0.15-0.25
[€/ kWh]
anticipated operating lifetime of the engine, whereas 𝑟 is ℎ𝑟 Annual operation hours [h] 2000-8000
the interest rate. In Eq. 13, 𝑀 and 𝐸𝑡𝑜𝑡 are the
maintenance cost and the electricity produced in year 𝑖, 4. Results and discussion
respectively. It must be noted that, in this work, 𝑀 and 4. 1. ORC and PEORC thermodynamic performance

119
 At first, the variation of 𝜂𝑒𝑥,𝑖𝑠 in the PEORC based other hand, at higher 𝑄̇𝑒𝑣 the thermal efficiency
on the operating conditions is analyzed. This brief decreases. This is caused by the deterioration of the two-
analysis is presented, taking into account that the phase expander efficiency as 𝑚̇𝑊𝐹 increases because of
efficiency of two-phase expansion has the most the negative effect of increased leakage flow rates are
significant impact on the PEORC thermal efficiency, and, higher [13] on 𝜂𝑒𝑥,𝑖𝑠 . For 𝑄̇𝑒𝑣 equal to 100 kWth the
as a result, on its competitiveness against the standard optimal value of 𝜂𝑡ℎ is obtained at 𝑥3 approaching 0.6
ORC. The effect of 𝑥3 and 𝑇ℎ𝑡𝑓,𝑖𝑛 on 𝜂𝑒𝑥,𝑖𝑠 in the PEORC is regardless of 𝑇ℎ𝑡𝑓,𝑖𝑛 and the type of the WF. On the other
presented in Figure 2. As 𝑥3 increases over 0.1 the hand, for 𝑄̇𝑒𝑣 equal to 300 kWth, there is a variation of the
isentropic efficiency of the expander is improved until value of 𝑥3 for which the higher 𝜂𝑡ℎ is calculated.
the optimal value of 𝜂𝑒𝑥,𝑖𝑠 is achieved for a vapor quality Specifically, as 𝑇ℎ𝑡𝑓,𝑖𝑛 drops, the optimal 𝑥3 is reduced to
between 0.6 and 0.7. This behavior of 𝜂𝑒𝑥,𝑖𝑠 indicates that values as low as 0.2. Concerning the WF selection, the
at this 𝑥3 range the WF volume ratio approaches the simulations indicate that R1234ze(Z) and R245fa
built-in volume ratio of the modeled expander (details in perform almost identically, and, in any case, more
Ref. [13]). As 𝑇ℎ𝑡𝑓,𝑖𝑛 increases, higher 𝜂𝑒𝑥,𝑖𝑠 values are efficiently or equivalently to R1234ze(E).
calculated by the two-phase expansion model, indicating
that higher operating pressure ratios, within the
examined range of heat source characteristics, are
favorable. This occurs because a better match between
the pressure at the end of expansion and the pressure at
the discharge line can be achieved as the temperature of
the heat source increases (under-expansion losses are
minimized). Finally, it must be noted that the effect of the
WF on 𝜂𝑒𝑥,𝑖𝑠 is negligible, and, therefore, not presented
herein.

Figure 3. 𝜂𝑡ℎ as a function of 𝑥3 in PEORC for different

WFs and values of 𝑇ℎ𝑡𝑓,𝑖𝑛 . 𝑄̇𝑒𝑣 = 100 𝑘𝑊𝑡ℎ .

Overall, it is estimated that the PEORC can achieve

a maximum 𝜂𝑡ℎ equal to 7.75%, 6.34%, and 4.80% for
𝑇ℎ𝑡𝑓,𝑖𝑛 equal to 100oC, 90oC, and 80oC, respectively, when
𝑄̇𝑒𝑣 equals 100 kWth. The respective values of 𝜂𝑡ℎ when
𝑄̇𝑒𝑣 is equal to 300 kWth are 5.96%, 3.96%, and 2.28%.
The effect of 𝛥𝛵𝑠𝑝 and 𝑇ℎ𝑡𝑓,𝑖𝑛 on 𝜂𝑡ℎ for the ORC
operation is presented in Figures 5 and 6, for 𝑄̇𝑒𝑣 equal
Figure 2. 𝜂𝑒𝑥,𝑖𝑠 as a function of 𝑥3 and 𝑇ℎ𝑡𝑓,𝑖𝑛 in PEORC. to 100 kWth and 300 kWth, respectively. The variation of
𝜂𝑡ℎ as a function of 𝛥𝛵𝑠𝑝 is negligible because the
respective difference in the value of 𝑝𝑒𝑣 is slight. As
In Figures 3 and 4, 𝜂𝑡ℎ is plotted versus 𝑥3 for 𝑇ℎ𝑡𝑓,𝑖𝑛 is reduced, 𝜂𝑡ℎ diminishes because the operating
different values of 𝑇ℎ𝑡𝑓,𝑖𝑛 when 𝑄̇𝑒𝑣 is equal to 100 and pressure ratio of the power cycle is reduced, with a
300 kWth, respectively, in the PEORC. As anticipated, negative effect on the enthalpy drop of the WF. As 𝑄̇𝑒𝑣
based on analysis of the two-phase expansion efficiency, increases, 𝜂𝑡ℎ drops because the value of 𝑝𝑒𝑣 is reduced
increasing 𝑇ℎ𝑡𝑓,𝑖𝑛 leads to improved values of 𝜂𝑡ℎ . On the for the same value of 𝛥𝛵𝑠𝑝 at the suction port of the

120
expander. As observed in the case of the PEORC, 4. 2. ORC and PEORC financial performance
R1234ze(Z) outperforms or, in the worst case, is as comparison
efficient as the other examined WFs for all the examined As mentioned in Section 2.2, the target of the
operating conditions. financial analysis is to compare the potential benefit for
an industrial unit resulting from the application of the
PEORC and the ORC to exploit the available waste heat
from processes. An indicative case study was considered
for the results presented in this Section, where the
available waste heat for the thermal engine is equal to
300 kWth, and the temperature of the heat source
reaches 100oC. By examining the results presented in
Section 4.1 (see Figure 4 and Figure 6) for the
abovementioned thermodynamic characteristics of the
heat source, the maximum achievable thermal efficiency
𝜂𝑡ℎ for the ORC and PEORC, with R1234ze(Z) as the WF,
is equal to 5.06% and 5.96%, respectively. Hence, 𝑤̇𝑛𝑒𝑡 is
equal to 15.18 and 17.88 kWel, for the ORC and PEORC,
respectively, and the value of 18 kWel is used for 𝑃𝑛𝑜𝑚 in
the performed financial analysis calculations.

Figure 4. 𝜂𝑡ℎ as a function of 𝑥3 in PEORC for different

WFs and values of 𝑇ℎ𝑡𝑓,𝑖𝑛 . 𝑄̇𝑒𝑣 = 300 𝑘𝑊𝑡ℎ .

Figure 6. 𝜂𝑡ℎ as a function of 𝛥𝛵𝑠𝑝 in ORC for different

WFs and values of 𝑇ℎ𝑡𝑓,𝑖𝑛 . 𝑄̇𝑒𝑣 = 300 𝑘𝑊𝑡ℎ .

In Figure 7a and Figure 7b, 𝐿𝐶𝑂𝐸 is presented

versus 𝑐𝑖𝑛𝑣 for different values of the total annual
Figure 5. 𝜂𝑡ℎ as a function of 𝛥𝛵𝑠𝑝 in ORC for different operating hours ℎ𝑟 for the ORC and PEORC, respectively.
WFs and values of 𝑇ℎ𝑡𝑓,𝑖𝑛 . 𝑄̇𝑒𝑣 = 100 𝑘𝑊𝑡ℎ . At this point, it must be noted that similar 𝐿𝐶𝑂𝐸 values
were estimated for different thermodynamic
Quantitatively, the standard ORC can accomplish a
characteristics of the heat source. Hence, the presented
𝜂𝑡ℎ equal to 7.13%, 6.00%, and 4.66% when 𝑇ℎ𝑡𝑓,𝑖𝑛
results may be considered representative across the
equals 100oC, 90oC, and 80oC, respectively, and the heat spectrum of the examined operating scenarios in Section
duty at the evaporator reaches 100 kWth. When 𝑄̇𝑒𝑣 is 4.1. The positive impact of 𝑐𝑖𝑛𝑣 reduction and ℎ𝑟 increase
equal to 300 kWth, the respective values for the thermal on the 𝐿𝐶𝑂𝐸 is obvious for both configurations.
efficiency are 5.06%, 3.34%, and 1.25%. Regarding the comparison between the two power
cycles, the application of the PEORC leads to 𝐿𝐶𝑂𝐸 values

121
that are lower by 16 to 17%. Both power cycles can industrial sector. The PEORC appears as a more
accomplish competitive 𝐿𝐶𝑂𝐸 values for industrial promising technological solution than the ORC in terms
waste heat recovery, between 0.018 and 0.143 €/kWh in of the 𝑁𝑃𝑉, as previously shown for the 𝐿𝐶𝑂𝐸 and 𝑃𝐵𝑃
the case of the ORC, and 0.015 and 0.119 €/kWh when indexes. The estimated 𝑁𝑃𝑉 values are higher in the case
the PEORC is applied. of the PEORC by 18 to 23% because of the increased
𝑃𝐵𝑃 contours in the 𝑐𝑖𝑛𝑣 - 𝑐𝑒𝑙 plane are plotted in heat-to-power ratio its implementation induces. The
Figure 8a and Figure 8b for the PEORC and the ORC, superiority of the PEORC becomes more pronounced as
respectively, considering that, indicatively, the total 𝑐𝑒𝑙 becomes higher because the avoided annual cost 𝑅𝑅
annual operating hours ℎ𝑟 are 6000. Favorable 𝑃𝐵𝑃 are for the industry is substantially increased.
expected for both power cycle architectures, even for
increased values of 𝑐𝑖𝑛𝑣 and 𝑐𝑒𝑙 prices rather high,
compared to electricity prices in the energy market of
most countries in the European Union. Its increased
thermal efficiency leads to lower 𝑃𝐵𝑃 for the PEORC,
indicating it can become a competitive alternative to the
ORC for low-temperature waste heat recovery. Overall,
in the most adverse scenario, the anticipated 𝑃𝐵𝑃 for the
ORC and PEORC is expected to reach approximately 5.2
and 4.1 years, respectively.

Figure 8. 𝑃𝐵𝑃 as a function of 𝑐𝑖𝑛𝑣 and 𝑐𝑒𝑙 for a) the

PEORC, and b) the ORC. 6000 total annual operating hours ℎ𝑟.

Figure 7. 𝐿𝐶𝑂𝐸 as a function of 𝑐𝑖𝑛𝑣 for a) the PEORC,

and b) the ORC, for different total annual operating hours ℎ𝑟.
A clearer view of the financial benefit as a result of
applying the PEORC instead of the ORC for waste heat
recovery can be provided by estimating the 𝑁𝑃𝑉,
because this index takes into account the time value of
money as well. 𝑁𝑃𝑉 as a function of 𝑐𝑖𝑛𝑣 and 𝑐𝑒𝑙 is
presented in Figure 9a and Figure 9b for the PEORC and
the ORC, respectively. Again, 6000 annual operating Figure 9. 𝑁𝑃𝑉 as a function of 𝑐𝑖𝑛𝑣 and 𝑐𝑒𝑙 for a) the
hours ℎ𝑟 were considered for the presented results. PEORC, and b) the ORC. 6000 total annual operating hours ℎ𝑟.
Positive 𝑁𝑃𝑉 values are calculated for both the
examined power cycles, regardless of the 𝑐𝑖𝑛𝑣 and 𝑐𝑒𝑙 5. Conclusions
values, highlighting that they can be an attractive In the present work, a techno-economic
investment for energy efficiency improvement in the comparison between the PEORC and ORC power cycles

122
for low-temperature waste heat recovery was 10.1016/J.APPLTHERMALENG.2018.04.043.
performed, with operating scenarios relevant to the [3] V. Lemort and A. Legros, “12 - Positive
industrial sector. Numerical models of the two power displacement expanders for Organic Rankine
cycle architectures were developed to simulate their Cycle systems,” E. Macchi and M. B. T.-O. R. C.
operation for different WFs, temperatures of the heat (ORC) P. S. Astolfi, Eds., Woodhead Publishing,
source, and heat duties at the evaporator. The numerical 2017, pp. 361–396. doi:
expimeriments indicate that the PEORC performs better https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-08-100510-
than the standard ORC under all the examined operating 1.00012-0.
scenarios. The PEORC and ORC can achieve thermal [4] B. F. Tchanche, G. Lambrinos, A. Frangoudakis,
efficiency values in the range of 2.28% to 7.75%, and and G. Papadakis, “Low-grade heat conversion
1.25% to 7.13%, respectively. Regarding the financial into power using organic Rankine cycles – A
performance of the ORC and PEORC, the results indicate review of various applications,” Renewable and
that both power cycles can be competitive technologies Sustainable Energy Reviews, vol. 15, no. 8, pp.
for industrial waste heat recovery. However, the PEORC 3963–3979, Oct. 2011, doi:
outperforms the ORC because of the higher achievable 10.1016/J.RSER.2011.07.024.
heat-to-power values. In terms of 𝐿𝐶𝑂𝐸, the PEORC can [5] A. Schuster, S. Karellas, and R. Aumann,
achieve values as low as 0.015 to 0.119 €/kWh, which “Efficiency optimization potential in supercritical
are consistently higher, by 16-17%, than the values Organic Rankine Cycles,” Energy, vol. 35, no. 2, pp.
estimated for the ORC. Maximum 𝑃𝐵𝑃 for the ORC and 1033–1039, Feb. 2010, doi:
PEORC is expected to reach 5.2 and 4.1 years, 10.1016/J.ENERGY.2009.06.019.
respectively, whereas positive 𝑁𝑃𝑉 values were [6] R. DiPippo, “Ideal thermal efficiency for
calculated for all the examined scenarios. The financial geothermal binary plants,” Geothermics, vol. 36,
performance of the power cycles improves as their no. 3, pp. 276–285, Jun. 2007, doi:
annual operating hours and the cost of electricity from 10.1016/J.GEOTHERMICS.2007.03.002.
the power grid increase. Finally, it must be noted that [7] I. K. Smith, “Development of the trilateral flash
additional PEORC experimental data are necessary to cycle system: Part 1: Fundamental
consolidate its superiority against the ORC, the considerations,” Proceedings of the Institution of
performance of which is documented in the literature Mechanical Engineers, Part A: Journal of Power
and real-world applications. and Energy, vol. 207, no. 3, pp. 179–194, 1993, doi:
10.1243/PIME_PROC_1993_207_032_02.
Acknowledgment [8] M. T. White, “Cycle and turbine optimisation for
This research work was supported by the Hellenic an ORC operating with two-phase expansion,”
Foundation for Research and Innovation (H.F.R.I.) under Applied Thermal Engineering, vol. 192, p. 116852,
the “First Call for H.F.R.I. Research Projects to support 2021, doi:
Faculty members and Researchers and the procurement https://doi.org/10.1016/j.applthermaleng.2021.
of high-cost research equipment grant” (Project 116852.
Number: 1087, Acronym: SOL-art). [9] G. Bianchi, S. Kennedy, O. Zaher, S. A. Tassou, J.
Miller, and H. Jouhara, “Numerical modeling of a
References two-phase twin-screw expander for Trilateral
[1] C. Forman, I. K. Muritala, R. Pardemann, and B. Flash Cycle applications,” International Journal of
Meyer, “Estimating the global waste heat Refrigeration, vol. 88, pp. 248–259, Apr. 2018, doi:
potential,” Renewable and Sustainable Energy 10.1016/J.IJREFRIG.2018.02.001.
Reviews, vol. 57, pp. 1568–1579, 2016, doi: [10] H. Öhman and P. Lundqvist, “Experimental
10.1016/j.rser.2015.12.192. investigation of a Lysholm Turbine operating with
[2] M. Papapetrou, G. Kosmadakis, A. Cipollina, U. La superheated, saturated and 2-phase inlet
Commare, and G. Micale, “Industrial waste heat: conditions,” in Applied Thermal Engineering,
Estimation of the technically available resource in Pergamon, Jan. 2013, pp. 1211–1218. doi:
the EU per industrial sector, temperature level 10.1016/j.applthermaleng.2012.08.035.
and country,” Applied Thermal Engineering, vol. [11] I. K. Smith, N. Stošić, and C. A. Aldis, “Development
138, pp. 207–216, Jun. 2018, doi: of the trilateral flash cycle system. Part 3: The

123
 design of high-efficiency two-phase screw
expanders,” Proceedings of the Institution of
Mechanical Engineers, Part A: Journal of Power
and Energy, vol. 210, no. 1, pp. 75–92, Aug. 1996,
doi: 10.1243/pime_proc_1996_210_010_02.
[12] S. Lecompte, M. van den Broek, and M. De Paepe,
“Thermodynamic analysis of the partially
evaporating trilateral cycle,” 2nd International
Seminar on ORC Power Systems, Proceedings,
2013, Accessed: Feb. 09, 2023. [Online]. Available:
http://hdl.handle.net/1854/LU-4166776
[13] A. Skiadopoulos, G. Kosmadakis, S. Lecompte, M.
De Paepe, and D. Manolakos, “Numerical
modeling of flashing in TFC expanders for the
efficient exploitation of low-grade heat,” Thermal
Science and Engineering Progress, p. 102171,
2023, doi:
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsep.2023.102171.

124