Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Analysis shows conversion from open to combined cycle gas plants reduces costs and emission impacts in Nigeria.
Worldwide concern about reducing global warming consequences and combating energy crisis has motivated the development of power generation technologies to move towards sustainable energy production with higher efficiency and low environmental impacts. Thisstudy evaluated the environmental and social benefits of converting open-cycle to combined-cycle gas power plants in electric power generating system in Nigeria. All the current operational open and combined cycle gas power plants were considered. Green House Gas (GHG) emission data were collected for both open and combined cycle plants. The results showed that after conversion from open cycle to combined cycle, society bears a lesser cost of generating electricity as there is a minimum difference of 3.78 N/kWh (Calabar NIPP), which is about 23.34% change in cost and a maximum of 4.00 N/kWh (Omotosho Pacific Energy plant), which is about 25.20% change in cost for a minimum range of emission cost (40USD/tCO2e). There is a minimum difference of 8.54 N/kWh (Calabar NIPP), which is about 28.57% change in cost and a maximum of 8.76 N/kWh (Omotosho Pacific Energy plant), which is about 29.64% change in cost for a maximum emission cost (100USD/tCO2e). The study concludedthatit costs less to reduce GHG and air pollution damage during the process of conversion from open cycle to combined cycle gas. Also, it is more beneficial to generate electricity using a combined gas turbine,and society bears less cost for higher electricity generation by a combined cycle when compared with an open cycle
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Fadare et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: