[
ABSTRAKPenelitian ini membahas tentang model konfigurasi HRSG (Heat Recovery
Steam Generation) pada PLTGU (Pembangkit Listrik Tenaga Gas Uap). Dari model
konfigurasi HRSG, diperoleh perbandingan nilai efisiensi termal, kapasitas daya,
LCOE (Levelized Cost of Electricity) dan nilai keekonomian dengan pendekatan
NPV (Net Present Value), IRR (Internal Rate of Return), PBP (Pay Back Period)
dan sensitivitas keekonomian dari setiap model konfigurasi HRSG. Pengaruh
tingkat tekanan HRSG 1P (one pressure), 2P (two pressure), dan 3P (three pressure)
terhadap temperatur keluar turbin gas, analisi ekonomi dari perbandingan HRSG 2P,
3P, dan 3PHR (three pressure with reheater), dan analisis irrevesibel untuk tiga
tekanan HRSG dengan pemanasan kembali dan pendinginan udara turbin gas pada
PLTGU sudah diteliti. Pada penelitian ini, model konfigurasi HRSG yang
dibandingkan antara lain; model konfigurasi HRSG, 1PRH, 2PRH, dan 3PRH.
Model konfigurasi HRSG pada PLTGU disimulasikan dengan GateCycle Ver
6.0.0.2 dengan menggunakan turbin gas siemen V94.2. Hasil penelitian yang
diperoleh antara lain; model konfigurasi HRSG 3PRH memiliki nilai efisiensi
termal 5,59% lebih besar daripada model konfigurasi HRSG 1PRH dan 0,66% lebih
besar daripada model konfigurasi HRSG 2PRH, model konfigurasi HRSG
mempengaruhi nilai NPV, semakin besar nilai efisiensi termal dan kapasitas daya
pembangkit listrik maka nilai NPV akan semakin besar, model konfigurasi HRSG
1PRH dengan interest rate 8.4% mempunyai PBP selama 8 tahun, sedangkan model
konfigurasi HRSG 2PRH dan 3PRH mempunyai PBP selama 7 tahun, dan nilai tukar
mata uang dan harga bahan bakar memiliki nilai sensitivitas yang tinggi terhadap
nilai keekonomian apabila dibandingkan dengan nilai suku bunga bank dan biaya
investasi.
ABSTRACTThis paper presents HRSG (heat recovery steam generation) configuration models onCCGT (Combined Cycle Power Generation). In order to get the comparison of thermalefficiency, power capacity, LCOE (Levelized Cost of Electricity) and the economicvalue with approach NPV (Net Present Value), IRR (Internal Rate of Return), PBP(Pay Back Period), and economic sensitivity of each HRSG configuration models.The influence of the HRSG 1P (one pressure), 2P (two pressure) and 3P (threepressure) with the exit turbine gas temperature, the economic analysis of thecomparison HRSG 2P, 3P, and 3PHR (three pressure with reheater), and irrevesibelanalysis of the three-pressure HRSG with reheating and cooling air to the gasturbine on CCGT have been investigated. In this paper, HRSG configuration modelswhich is compared such as; configuration of HRSG 1PRH, 2PRH, and 3PRH. HRSGconfiguration models on CCGT simulated GateCycle Ver 6.0.0.2 with gas turbinesiemen V94.2. The results of this paper obtained, such as; the configuration ofHRSG 3PRH has thermal efficiency 5.59% greater than HRSG 1PRH and 0.66%greater than the HRSG 2PRH, HRSG configuration models have influence NPV,high thermal efficiency dan high power capacity shall have NPV higher than lowthermal efficiency dan low power capacity, the configuration of HRSG 1PRH withinterest rate of 8,4% has PBP for 8 years, while the HRSG 2PRH and 3PRH hasPBP for 7 years, and the sensitivity factor for currency exchange rates and fuelprices have a high sensitivity to the economic value when compared with the interestrate and the investment cost.;This paper presents HRSG (heat recovery steam generation) configuration models onCCGT (Combined Cycle Power Generation). In order to get the comparison of thermalefficiency, power capacity, LCOE (Levelized Cost of Electricity) and the economicvalue with approach NPV (Net Present Value), IRR (Internal Rate of Return), PBP(Pay Back Period), and economic sensitivity of each HRSG configuration models.The influence of the HRSG 1P (one pressure), 2P (two pressure) and 3P (threepressure) with the exit turbine gas temperature, the economic analysis of thecomparison HRSG 2P, 3P, and 3PHR (three pressure with reheater), and irrevesibelanalysis of the three-pressure HRSG with reheating and cooling air to the gasturbine on CCGT have been investigated. In this paper, HRSG configuration modelswhich is compared such as; configuration of HRSG 1PRH, 2PRH, and 3PRH. HRSGconfiguration models on CCGT simulated GateCycle Ver 6.0.0.2 with gas turbinesiemen V94.2. The results of this paper obtained, such as; the configuration ofHRSG 3PRH has thermal efficiency 5.59% greater than HRSG 1PRH and 0.66%greater than the HRSG 2PRH, HRSG configuration models have influence NPV,high thermal efficiency dan high power capacity shall have NPV higher than lowthermal efficiency dan low power capacity, the configuration of HRSG 1PRH withinterest rate of 8,4% has PBP for 8 years, while the HRSG 2PRH and 3PRH hasPBP for 7 years, and the sensitivity factor for currency exchange rates and fuelprices have a high sensitivity to the economic value when compared with the interestrate and the investment cost.;This paper presents HRSG (heat recovery steam generation) configuration models onCCGT (Combined Cycle Power Generation). In order to get the comparison of thermalefficiency, power capacity, LCOE (Levelized Cost of Electricity) and the economicvalue with approach NPV (Net Present Value), IRR (Internal Rate of Return), PBP(Pay Back Period), and economic sensitivity of each HRSG configuration models.The influence of the HRSG 1P (one pressure), 2P (two pressure) and 3P (threepressure) with the exit turbine gas temperature, the economic analysis of thecomparison HRSG 2P, 3P, and 3PHR (three pressure with reheater), and irrevesibelanalysis of the three-pressure HRSG with reheating and cooling air to the gasturbine on CCGT have been investigated. In this paper, HRSG configuration modelswhich is compared such as; configuration of HRSG 1PRH, 2PRH, and 3PRH. HRSGconfiguration models on CCGT simulated GateCycle Ver 6.0.0.2 with gas turbinesiemen V94.2. The results of this paper obtained, such as; the configuration ofHRSG 3PRH has thermal efficiency 5.59% greater than HRSG 1PRH and 0.66%greater than the HRSG 2PRH, HRSG configuration models have influence NPV,high thermal efficiency dan high power capacity shall have NPV higher than lowthermal efficiency dan low power capacity, the configuration of HRSG 1PRH withinterest rate of 8,4% has PBP for 8 years, while the HRSG 2PRH and 3PRH hasPBP for 7 years, and the sensitivity factor for currency exchange rates and fuelprices have a high sensitivity to the economic value when compared with the interestrate and the investment cost.;This paper presents HRSG (heat recovery steam generation) configuration models onCCGT (Combined Cycle Power Generation). In order to get the comparison of thermalefficiency, power capacity, LCOE (Levelized Cost of Electricity) and the economicvalue with approach NPV (Net Present Value), IRR (Internal Rate of Return), PBP(Pay Back Period), and economic sensitivity of each HRSG configuration models.The influence of the HRSG 1P (one pressure), 2P (two pressure) and 3P (threepressure) with the exit turbine gas temperature, the economic analysis of thecomparison HRSG 2P, 3P, and 3PHR (three pressure with reheater), and irrevesibelanalysis of the three-pressure HRSG with reheating and cooling air to the gasturbine on CCGT have been investigated. In this paper, HRSG configuration modelswhich is compared such as; configuration of HRSG 1PRH, 2PRH, and 3PRH. HRSGconfiguration models on CCGT simulated GateCycle Ver 6.0.0.2 with gas turbinesiemen V94.2. The results of this paper obtained, such as; the configuration ofHRSG 3PRH has thermal efficiency 5.59% greater than HRSG 1PRH and 0.66%greater than the HRSG 2PRH, HRSG configuration models have influence NPV,high thermal efficiency dan high power capacity shall have NPV higher than lowthermal efficiency dan low power capacity, the configuration of HRSG 1PRH withinterest rate of 8,4% has PBP for 8 years, while the HRSG 2PRH and 3PRH hasPBP for 7 years, and the sensitivity factor for currency exchange rates and fuelprices have a high sensitivity to the economic value when compared with the interestrate and the investment cost., This paper presents HRSG (heat recovery steam generation) configuration models onCCGT (Combined Cycle Power Generation). In order to get the comparison of thermalefficiency, power capacity, LCOE (Levelized Cost of Electricity) and the economicvalue with approach NPV (Net Present Value), IRR (Internal Rate of Return), PBP(Pay Back Period), and economic sensitivity of each HRSG configuration models.The influence of the HRSG 1P (one pressure), 2P (two pressure) and 3P (threepressure) with the exit turbine gas temperature, the economic analysis of thecomparison HRSG 2P, 3P, and 3PHR (three pressure with reheater), and irrevesibelanalysis of the three-pressure HRSG with reheating and cooling air to the gasturbine on CCGT have been investigated. In this paper, HRSG configuration modelswhich is compared such as; configuration of HRSG 1PRH, 2PRH, and 3PRH. HRSGconfiguration models on CCGT simulated GateCycle Ver 6.0.0.2 with gas turbinesiemen V94.2. The results of this paper obtained, such as; the configuration ofHRSG 3PRH has thermal efficiency 5.59% greater than HRSG 1PRH and 0.66%greater than the HRSG 2PRH, HRSG configuration models have influence NPV,high thermal efficiency dan high power capacity shall have NPV higher than lowthermal efficiency dan low power capacity, the configuration of HRSG 1PRH withinterest rate of 8,4% has PBP for 8 years, while the HRSG 2PRH and 3PRH hasPBP for 7 years, and the sensitivity factor for currency exchange rates and fuelprices have a high sensitivity to the economic value when compared with the interestrate and the investment cost.]
T45321-Kresnandar.pdf :: Unduh