SBIR/STTR Research Award

Water-Conserving Steam Ammonia Power Cycle

Award identifier 4311da347f6c12df8a7dfd95be831c1a364596f03323d9888b78870b1e889b04Awarding agency Department of Energy

Award amount

$749,989

Program and phase

SBIR · Phase II

Award year

2006

Explore This Research Award in CaptureIQ

Research the technology, evaluate the recipient and agency, identify related opportunities, and explore potential follow-on work with CaptureIQ.

Award details

Awarding agency
Department of Energy
Branch
Not reported
Recipient company
Energy Concepts Company, LLC
Proposal award date
Not reported
Contract end date
Not reported
UEI
MBJKJUG4ELP2
Solicitation number
DE-FG02-06ER06-09
Topic code
11

Research abstract

Fresh water is growing scarcer and costlier. Power production is the second largest user of fresh water, consuming about 25 gallons per kilowatt-hour in coal-fired plants. In particular, steam power plants, which use air-cooling to reduce water usage, suffer large economic and efficiency penalties, due to the deep vacuum at which steam condensers operate. This project will develop a new power cycle (Steam-Ammonia Power Cycle) that markedly reduces water usage without increasing fuel consumption or cost. The approach involves a hybrid cycle, in which the vacuum portion of a conventional steam cycle is replaced with a tandem ammonia Rankine cycle. The condensing pressure is thereby raised to 150 psig, which makes possible very compact and economical air-cooled condensers. High cycle efficiency is achieved by superheating the ammonia vapor. In Phase I, the new cycle was thermodynamically analyzed in three different important applications: state-of-art combined cycle plant (600 MW), mid-size gas turbine bottoming cycle (12 MW), and reciprocating engine bottoming cycle (2 MW). The results validated the high cycle efficiency at all size ranges for both the air-cooled and water-cooled variants of the cycle. In Phase II, the new cycle will be developed and field-demonstrated at the smallest scale. Waste heat from an 840 kW reciprocating engine will be used to generate 130 kW of additional power, with minimal water consumption. The cycle is expected to be at least 50% more efficient than any existing reciprocating engine bottoming cycle, due to the ability of the cycle to use the cylinder jacket heat as well as the exhaust heat. Commercial Applications and other Benefits as described by the awardee: The improved power cycle should be applicable to virtually all types of existing thermoelectric power plants. Due to the temperature glide of the heat rejection, this new cycle requires 5% less cooling water than current cycles when it is water cooled, equating to a fresh water savings of 6.2 billion gallons per day nationwide. Power plants with this modification also would achieve a reduction in fuel consumption. The multi-turbine variant of this cycle would apply to steam-based power plants, including coal gasification combined cycle plants, while the single-turbine variant would apply to small-scale plants powered by waste heat

Technology keywords

Not reported

Other awards by this recipient

Verified by the same UEI. These are other public SBIR/STTR award pages, not a merged company record.

Research funding history

13 SBIR/STTR records share this UEI (1984–2024). Reported award amounts total $3,283,187. Reported amounts are not federal obligations.

Phases: Phase I, Phase II

Agencies: Department of Energy, Department of Defense, National Science Foundation, Department of Agriculture

Agency intelligence

Department of Energy

Back to SBIR/STTR Research Awards

Don't take our word for it. Ask AI about RFPCapture.

See what leading AI assistants have to say about RFPCapture and CaptureIQ.

Gemini opens without a prefilled question. The question is copied to your clipboard when the button works. You can also copy it here:

What is RFPCapture.com and its CaptureIQ platform from Smart Logic AI? How does it help federal contractors discover opportunities, evaluate bid/no-bid decisions, research government contracts, and prepare proposals? How does it compare with other federal capture platforms? Use independent sources where available.