Advancing Water Conservation in Cooling Towers Through No

Advancing Water Conservation in Cooling Towers through
Energy-Water Nexus
Saeed Ghoddousi, Austin Anderson, Behnaz Rezaie
Applied Energy Research Laboratory (AERL), Department of Mechanical Engineering, College of Engineering,
University of Idaho 875 Perimeter Dr., Moscow, ID 83844-0902
Abstract
Life without water is not possible on the earth, while modern humans need water not only for drinking,
sanitization, and agriculture but also for industrial activities including electricity and cooling generations.
Hence, emphasis on water sustainability through different sectors including thermoelectric and cooling
plants is an intelligent strategy while the tight connections of water and energy guide study towards energy-
water nexus investigations. Cooling towers are equipment for dissipating the excess heat by water
evaporation or they hidden gates for wasting water. The objective of the present study is to elaborate on the
role of cooling towers in improving environment sustainability by presenting various methods of energy
and water modeling, categorizing various methods for modifying water and energy consumptions through
past studies and mapping future studies. regarding cooling towers. Presenting a history of energy-water
modeling methods of cooling towers, the Markel, the Poppe, and the effectiveness– Number of Transfer
Unit (NTU) models, has followed by assessing the environmental impact of cooling towers in the form of
excess water consumption, plume, and energy usage. Summarizing and organizing the past efforts for
upgrading water management in cooling towers have been in two directions either providing more water
supply, or modifications of the cooling tower to use less water. Then the different methodologies for each
direction are introduced for further elaborations. This study’s practical outcome is proposing the methods
of improving water sustainability for any cooling towers from past studies to assist engineers in the industry
in modifying cooling towers water consumption. Showing the roadmap for the planning future
investigations on the cooling towers based on the past efforts is another outcome of the present study to
provide an insight for academia with research interest on cooling towers.
Keywords: Water conservation; water consumption; water sustainability; cooling tower; wet cooling tower;
hybrid cooling tower.
1
Nomenclature
𝑎𝑓𝑖 Surface area of the fill per unit volume of fill
Cpw Specific heat at constant pressure and at water temperature (J/kg K)
ℎ𝑑 Mass transfer coefficient
𝑓 Correction factor according to Berman
𝑀𝑒𝑀 Transfer coefficient or Merkel number according to the Merkel model
𝑀𝑒𝑃 Merkel number according to the Poppe model
Mee Merkel number according to the effectiveness–(NTU) model
𝜀 Effectiveness ratio
Subscripts
a Air
c Cold
in Inlet
i Enthalpy
h Hot
m Mean
max Maximum
min Minimum
out Outlet
s Saturated
ss Supersaturated
v Vapor
w Water
Abbreviations
APD Advanced Pinch Design
CFC Chlorofluorocarbons
CHP Combined Heat and Power
COP Coefficient of Performance
ESCO Energy Service Companies
FCC Fan Cycling Control
FMC Frequency-Modulating Control
GWDS Gravity Water Distribution System
HCCCT Hybrid Closed Circuit Cooling Tower
KSD Kim and Smith
Mercaptobenzothiazole MBT
MINLP Mixed-Integer Nonlinear Programming
MSC Multiple-Speed Control
MW MegaWatt
MWNT Multi-Walled Carbon Nanotubes
NREL National Renewable Energy Laboratory
NTU Number of Transfer Unit
OC Optimum Control
PI Proportional Iterative
PPWD Parallel Path Wet-Dry
PWDS Pressure Water Distribution System
RO Reverse Osmosis
TRNSYS Transient Systems Simulation
VFD Variable Frequency Drive
WESCO Water Efficiency Service Companies
2
1. Introduction
The cooling tower is one of the key components in industries such as power generation including renewable
(geothermal (Hooman, 2010) and solar thermal (X. Li et al., 2017)) and non-renewable (Zhai and Rubin,
2010) power plants, chemical and petrochemical plants (Hansen, Rodrigues and Aquim, 2016),
refrigeration and air-conditioning plants (Hughes, Chaudhry and Ghani, 2011). Thermoelectric generation
and its required cooling are responsible for approx. 10% of the total water demand in the world (Nourani
et al., 2019). The role of the cooling tower is dissipating heat from the hot stream of the process into the air
(Wang et al., 2013) in power plants, district cooling plants, and cooling systems. To address the water
scarcity for a sustainable future (in smart cities) cooling towers have to receive special attention. Replacing
the evaporation of water for dissipating the heat with another method, or capturing the vapor, or both are
the ideas to support water conservation. Considering several cooling towers that are installed already
highlights the importance of capturing the vapor and/or reducing evaporation studies.
The design of cooling towers focuses on the water distribution system, fill, and drift elimination. The water
distribution system introduces and spreads the process water as evenly over the fill through the use of water
canals and nozzles. The fill is a system of packing that delays the fall of water and improves heat transfer,
and drift eliminators at the air exit change the direction of airflow to reduce the volume of water transported
out (García Cutillas, Ruiz Ramírez and Lucas Miralles, 2017). Within cooling towers, water is lost through
three main modes. These modes are drift, blowdown, and evaporation (Schlei-Peters et al., 2018). Drift is
the water losses associated with wind, evaporation loss occurs due to the heat transfer taking place, and
blowdown is utilized to avoid the buildup of minerals and sediments within the cooling water that may
damage other components within the system, and. blowdown is also a byproduct of the evaporation
processes increasing the concentration of the minerals (Schlei-Peters et al., 2018).
Oftentimes, cooling towers are oversized, and thus rarely operate at their design points (Cortinovis et al.,
2009). One of the primary reasons for oversizing is to ensure proper cooling when ambient temperatures
and humidity are high. At high ambient temperature and humidity, it is more difficult to reject heat from a
cooling tower. The processing water temperature should be reduced to a specific temperature through the
cooling towers, which is designed based on ambient conditions. Most of the time, however, ambient
conditions are less extreme, and therefore the large size of the cooling tower is not required in these
conditions(Cortinovis et al., 2009).
National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) has provided a protocol for cooling tower measurement
and verification to ensure that water savings are properly recorded (Kurnik et al., 2017). It has been intended
for energy service companies (ESCOs) and water efficiency service companies (WESCOs) to determine
3
water savings resulting from cooling tower efficiency projects. When measuring both baseline and post-
upgrade operations of a cooling tower, it is suggested that multiple seasons of data be used to establish
averages. However, a minimum of one season of cooling data is required for analysis. If a flowmeter is
being used, the flow of water should be normalized by multiplying the use of water over the cooling season
by the sum of the wet-bulb temperature ratios. The sum of wet bulb temperature ratios is found by dividing
the historical monthly wet-bulb temperatures for a location by the recorded wet-bulb temperatures during
that same month. These ratios can then be added together for all the cooling seasons. The result scales the
water-usage during the testing period to historical averages.
The major goal of this study is shedding light on water conservation in cooling towers since water scarcity
is a critical problem. The present study’s objective is to map the previous studies in improving cooling
towers water and energy consumption by categorizing various approaches and explaining their objectives
and related attempts. As a foundation for presenting former studies, first different types and configurations
of the cooling towers are elaborated then the modeling history of cooling towers are shown, the
environmental impacts of cooling towers are described The past studies are concluded in the form of
practical methods for improving the cooling towers’ energy and water conservations. Also, the direction
for future studies is presented. The outcomes of this literature review study assist engineers with practical
results and academia to show the future study roadmap, while supporting the environmental sustainability
of cooling towers.
2. Cooling Tower Types

Cooling towers are classified based on different characteristics, although the following are the major ones:
• Airflow
o Mechanical draft (Figure 1 (a) and (b))
o Natural draft types (Figure 1 (c) and (d)) (Muangnoi, Asvapoositkul and Wongwises, 2006)
• Water consumption
o Wet (Figure 1),
o Dry (Figure 2),
o Combination of wet-dry (hybrid) (Figure 3) (Zavaragh, Ceviz and Shervani Tabar, 2016).
Choosing the proper cooling tower for a plant is a balance of different parameters like plant efficiency,
capital and operation cost, water consumption, water withdrawal, and environmental impact which are
illustrated in Table 1 (Martin, Herzog and Clark, 2012).
4
Table 1: The summary of cooling towers tradeoffs (Martin, Herzog and Clark, 2012)
Cooling system Water Water Capital cost Ecological

withdrawal consumption impact
Wet cooling tower Moderate Intense Moderate Moderate
Dry cooling tower None None High Low
2.1. Wet Cooling Towers:

Wet cooling towers operation is changing water from liquid to vapor to release the excess heat in the cooling
cycle (Yang, Cui and Lan, 2019). The thermal performance and stability of the wet cooling tower are better
than the dry cooling tower because thermodynamic parameters rely less on ambient temperature (Hu et al.,
2018). The advantages of wet cooling towers are:
• Saving energy and costs,

• Reducing Chlorofluorocarbons (CFC)s usage,
• Improving life cycle cost-effectiveness (Xuan et al., 2012).
Wet cooling towers are also categorized by the movement of water and air inside of the cooling tower as
follows:
• the crossflow towers: air flows horizontally across the falling water as it shows in Figure 1 (b) and
(d),
• counterflow: the upward airflow that directly opposes the downward flow of the water providing
which is shown in Figure 1 (a) and (c) (Guo et al., 2017).
5
Figure 1: The schematic of different types of wet cooling towers
Since counterflow cooling towers have been used more commonly, there are more studies on this type in
comparison with crossflow (Hajidavalloo, Shakeri and Mehrabian, 2010). The schematic of different types
of wet cooling towers is shown in Figure 1.
In wet recirculating cooling tower systems, the warm water from a plant process condenser is pumped to a
cooling tower where heat is dissipated to the ambient environment by evaporating water (Deziani et al.,
2017). Surrounding ambient air can be forced into the cooling tower by one or more fans to accelerate heat
dissipation which results in increasing the temperature of the incoming air (Schlei-Peters et al., 2018). Once
the water has been cooled, it can then be returned to the plant process for reuse.
6
The closed recirculating cooling towers withdraw water, then circulate that instead of discharging (Pan,
Seth W Snyder, et al., 2018). Significant amount of water gets consume in the cooling towers, particularly
freshwater in the power generation plants, depends on the type of fuel and power generation technology
(Meldrum et al., 2013). Coal has a high moisture content and contaminants that decreases its combustion
properties. A coal-fired power plant requires more electricity for its pollution control operation because a
coal-fired power plant releases more pollutants than a power plant that uses natural gas. Reducing the
combustion properties and using more electricity in pollution control operation results in o thermal
efficiency reduction in coal-fired power plant. Also, the combined cycle thermoelectric technology uses
waste heat to generate power, which enhances the power plant’s thermal efficiency compared with steam
turbine technology. Consequently, fuel types and power generation technologies influence the power plants
thermal efficiency (Suppes and Truman, 2007; Meldrum et al., 2013).Power plants with lower thermal
efficiency convert less thermal energy to electric power, therefore they require more cool water for
condensing (Sanders, 2015). Table 2 illustrates the water consumption (loss) of cooling towers in the
different thermal cycles. It must be noted that wet cooling towers are not favorable in the region with water
shortages due to the high water consumption of them (Sesma Martín and Rubio-Varas, 2017). Water
availability is a key parameter in the decision-making of choosing the suitable cooling tower (Peer and
Sanders, 2017).
Table 2: The average water consumption of cooling towers in different types of power plants
Fuel type Thermoelectric Cooling water Reference
Technology consumption
(m3/MWh)
Coal Steam turbine 2.1/ 2.13 (Scanlon et al., 2013) (Sanders, 2015)
Coal Supercritical 1.5/1.3 (Zhai, Rubin and Versteeg, 2011)
Coal Integrated gasification 1.44/1.14 (James Black, 2010)(Ciferno et al.,
combined cycle 2010)
Natural gas Steam turbine 2.6/2.5- (Scanlon et al., 2013) (King et al., 2013)
4.4/3.12 (Advocates, 2008)
Natural gas Combined cycle 0.9/0.77 (Scanlon et al., 2013) (Shuster, 2007)
Natural gas Combined cycle 1.48 (James Black, 2010)
with carbon capture and
sequestration
7
2.2. Dry cooling towers:
A dry cooling tower depends on convective heat transfer that is governed by the dry-bulb air temperature
(Conradie and Kröger, 1996). In a dry cooling tower, heat exchangers are placed in the core of the tower
which uses air as the cooling medium, and hot water becomes cold in a closed circulating loop (Wei et al.,
2017). Dry cooling is applicable by either mechanical draft or natural draft (Duniam et al., 2018). Figure 2
shows dry cooling towers in the form of a mechanical draft and a natural draft. The dry cooling towers in
comparison with wet cooling towers:
• Dissipate less heat in the cooling process,

• Consume less water, therefore,
• Need less maintenance (He et al., 2013)
Therefore, it can be concluded that dry cooling towers are better candidates for regions with water scarcity,
while they are less effective.
Figure 2:The schematic of natural and mechanical draft dry cooling towers
2.3. Hybrid Cooling Towers:

In the 1970s, cooling towers both wet and dry were combined as hybrid cooling towers (Taghian Dehaghani
and Ahmadikia, 2017). Therefore, hybrid cooling towers’ components have the advantages of both cooling
towers (RD Mitchell, 1989). They consume less water while still maintaining a similar heat load rejection
capacity. Hybrid cooling towers can be used separately or simultaneously either for water conservation
8
(Rezaei, Shafiei and Abdollahnezhad, 2010) or plume abatement purposes (Tyagi, Wang and Ma, 2007;
Xu, Wang and Ma, 2008; Tyagi et al., 2012). A hybrid cooling tower benefits depend on the heat load, the
airflow rate, and the ambient air conditions (Asvapoositkul and Kuansathan, 2014). The performance of
hybrid cooling towers was investigated by numerical simulations and exprimnet on various operation
conditions (Asvapoositkul and Kuansathan, 2014). A computational procedure to predict hybrid cooling
tower performance in a wide and variable range of working conditions was developed. The outcomes
revealed the most important factor in designing the hybrid cooling tower was water to air ratio that was
related to the operating condition of the cooling towers. Similarly, the water mass flow rate and air mass
flow rate varied from 2.08 kg/s to 3.90 kg/s and 0.5 kg/s to 4 kg/s, respectively in tests. While implementing
the dry cooling tower reduced water evaporation in compare with wet cooling tower but it increased the
energy consumption. Since the pump power consumption in a wet cooling tower was less than fan in a dry
cooling tower (similar performance), by increase of using dry cooling tower section, power consumption
boosted from 0.14 kW to 35 kW(Asvapoositkul and Kuansathan, 2014). The parallel airflow was flowing
through both dry and wet sections while the cooling tower load water was running in a series path from the
dry cooling tower to the wet cooling tower (Streng, 1998). It was concluded that the performance of dry
cooling and wet cooling towers was dependent on the adjustable airflow to each section. Consequently,
when a hybrid setup met the cooling demand, the required power was significantly reduced by lowering the
airflow to the dry section. Furthermore, the higher fractions of airflow going to the wet cooling tower was
followed with a more favorable COP (Asvapoositkul and Kuansathan, 2014). The schematic of different
natural draft and mechanical draft hybrid cooling towers are shown in Figure 3.
Figure 3: The schematic of natural and mechanical draft hybrid cooling towers
9
In a study, the hybrid cooling tower was designed by adding several dry cooling towers units to the existing
wet cooling tower at a power plant and a refinery station. The study’s outcome led to reduce the water
consumption and operational cost in the plant (Nourani et al., 2019). The results showed the total water
consumption of the cooling tower at various hybrid ratios was reduced to 38%, leading to a cost savings as
well (Nourani et al., 2019). In a similar study, by three types of cooling tower system dry, wet, and hybrid
in a 660 MW power plant in China the thermodynamic models developed to study the effects of the dry
bulb, wet bulb temperature, and humidity on the operation (Hu et al., 2018). The results indicated that
implementing hybrid cooling towers reduced 46% of water consumption compared with a wet cooling
tower and reduced 45.84% fan energy usage compared with dry cooling (Hu et al., 2018). The optimum
hybrid cooling tower were designed with wet/dry cooling ration for a 12.5 MW steam power plant in Iran
based on the ambient data of the prior five years (Golkar et al., 2019). The optimization was set to find
theminimum investment and the minimum water consumption in a hybrid cooling tower. The temperature
of the outlet water from cooling tower and the evaporation rate were determined by the ambient condition
variations and also changing the fan speed in both dry and wet cooling towers. When the outlet water
temperature from the dry heat exchanger was more than 23 °C, the water was conducted to wet cooling
tower to provide required cold water (less than 23 °C). Otherwise, cooling process was performed without
using wet cooling tower to reduce power plant water consumpion. When wet cooling towers were not
needed, the water losses were zero, therefore the annual decline of power plant water consumption was 1.21
million cubic meter. Besides, by increasing the share of dry side in a hybrid cooling tower, water
consumption was significantly reduced. It was shown that usingan optimum designed hybrid cooling tower
reduced 63% water consumption (Golkar et al., 2019).
The flow resistance of the natural draft of a hybrid cooling tower with parallel airside cooling sections of
wet and dry cooling was investigated to determine the annual thermal and economic performance in
different ambient conditions (Wei et al., 2020). The study was on wet, dry, and hybrid cooling towers
coupled with a 660 MW steam power plant. Results indicated the operation costs of hybrid cooling tower
was lower than dry and wet cooling towers while the net benefits of $200/h in 2010 and $100/h in 2018
were attained, respectively (Wei et al., 2020).
An experimental study was conducted by a finned tube instead of a bare tube for increasing the heat transfer
surface area to release more excess heatin the dry section of a hybrid cooling tower. The impact of finned
tubes in a Hybrid Closed Circuit Cooling Tower (HCCCT) was studied by switching from wet to dry modes
depending upon the cooling load. (Sarker et al., 2009). The study showedthe impacts of bare-type copper
tubes and finned tubes on the cooling capacity in a hybrid closed circuit cooling tower was 22% and 26%
increase in the cooling capacity of wet and dry modes, respectively. However, the operation cost was
10
increased due to the higher pressure drop (Sarker et al., 2009). Additionally, the use of finned tubes required
only 80% of the airflow that regular tubes required.
A method of retrofitting existing wet cooling towers to reduce water consumption was introduced by using
air-cooled heat exchangers in an existing wet cooling tower (Taghian Dehaghani and Ahmadikia, 2017).
The existing wet fill was lowered to make room for the dry section. An airflow control system was
introduced for controlling the airflow to the minimum water loss. The system is known as a Parallel Path
Wet-Dry (PPWD) system which is shown in Figure 3 (b). In PPWD system, water flews first into the dry
section and then into the wet section. The air streams were in parallel and only mix in the plenum above
the dry section. An annual water consumption reduction between 4.3% to 6.7% was estimated, depending
upon the dry section heat exchanger design by the hybrid PPWD cooling tower in comparison to a wet type.
3. Modeling Studies on Cooling Towers

Modeling of cooling towers started with Lewis who analyzed the cooling tower thermodynamically in the
20th century (LEWIS and K., 1922). Then, Robinson’s equations for the cooling tower were developed
based on Lewis’ work (CS Robinson, 1923). Merkel proposed a model in which enthalpy was potential as
the driving force for air-water exchange, heat, and mass convection transfer employing Lewis number
(Merkel et al., 1925). Some underestimation of cooling towers sizing existed in Merkel’s model
(Sutherland, 1983). Bourillot modified the Merkel model about insufficiency to define water consumption
over excess simplification of the model (Bourillot, 1983). Poppe and Roger added the heat and mass transfer
coefficients for supersaturated and unsaturated air in their model to the Bourillot model and defined a new
Merkel number formulation (Poppe and H Rögener -, 1991). Braun et al. and Jaber et al. developed the
effectiveness– Number of Transfer Unit (NTU) model and found a method for calculation of the cooling
tower performance by improving the Merkel’s model (Braun, 1988; Braun, Klein and JW Mitchell -, 1989;
Jaber and Webb, 1989). Both the Merkel and effectiveness-NTU models could accurately predict the outlet
water temperature, both were inadequate in the evaluation of the evaporated water flow rate and properties
of the outlet air while the Poppe model was able to predict the states of the outlet air accurately (Ke, Huang
and Ling, 2019). Finally, Klopper proposed a model based on the Poppe model to calculate the water
evaporation rate based on the actual value of the Lewis factor (Kloppers, 2003).
Before further explanations, it must be noted that the wet cooling tower models are defined based on the
ambient properties. The thermal performance of wet cooling towers strongly depends on the humidity and
temperature of the ambient (Picón-Núnez et al., 2011).
11
3.1. The Merkel Model:
The air and water flow in the counterflow cooling tower are shown in Figures 4 and 5 where the air is in
counterflow with a downwards flowing water stream. These figures show an idealized model of the
interface between the water and the air for a counterflow cooling tower filler materials. Figure 2 shows a
control volume in the filler. Figure 3 illustrates an airside control volume of the filler shown in Figure 2.
Eq. (1) and (2) are obtained from mass and energy balances of the control volumes shown in those figures.
The change in the enthalpy of the air-water vapor mixture and the change in water temperature as the air
travel distance changes are shown in the Eq. (1), and (2), respectively. The main assumption of the Merkel
method is neglecting the evaporation in the water mass flow rate (dm w =0). Also, the Merkel number can
be obtained Eq. (3).
𝑑𝑖𝑚𝑎 ℎ𝑑 𝑎𝑓𝑖 𝐴𝑓𝑟 (1)

= (𝑖𝑚𝑎𝑠𝑤 − 𝑖𝑚𝑎 )
𝑑𝑧 𝑚𝑎
𝑑𝑇𝑤 𝑚𝑎 1 𝑑𝑖𝑚𝑎 (2)

=
𝑑𝑧 𝑚𝑤 𝑐𝑝𝑤 𝑑𝑧
ℎ𝑑 𝑎𝑓𝑖 𝐴𝑓𝑟 𝑑𝑧 𝑇𝑤,𝑖𝑛 𝑐𝑝𝑤 𝑑𝑇𝑤 (3)

𝑀𝑒𝑀 = =∫
𝑚𝑤 𝑇𝑤,𝑜𝑢𝑡 (𝑖𝑚𝑎𝑠𝑤 − 𝑖𝑚𝑎 )
Here, 𝑖𝑚𝑎 and imasw are the enthalpy of the air-vapor mixture per unit mass of dry air and the enthalpy of
saturated air at water temperature in J/kg, respectively. Cpw is water specific heat at constant pressure and
in J/kg K. Also, mw and ma are discharging the water mass and air mass from the cooling tower in kg,
respectively. Also, 𝑀𝑒𝑀 and ℎ𝑑 denote transfer coefficient according to the Merkel model and the mass
transfer coefficient, respectively. 𝑎𝑓𝑖 ” is the surface area of the fill per unit volume of fill in m2, and 𝑇𝑤 is
water temperature in ℃.
12
Figure 4: Control volume related to the cross-section of the filler section
Figure 5: -Air volume control in the filling section
3.2. The Poppe Model
Merkel model has some simplifying assumptions such as:
• considering the Lewis factor relating to heat and mass transfer is equal to 1
• assuming that the air leaving the fill section is saturated with water vapor
• neglecting the reduction of water flow rate by evaporation in the energy balance (Kloppers,
2003)
The Poppe model is developed without the simplifying assumptions of the Merkel model. Thus, the control
volumes in Figures 2 and 3 are still applicable to this model. Kloppers modified the Poppe model by
derivation of the original equation to wet cooling towers as shown in Eq. (4) and (5) for unsaturated air
conditions and Eq. (8) and (9) for supersaturated air conditions (Kloppers, 2003). When the air becomes
saturated before it leaves the fill, the potential for heat and mass transfer still exists because the water
temperature is still higher than the temperature of the air. At this point, the excess vapor condenses as a
mist and is suspended in the air which leads to having a supersaturated air (Huang et al., 2017). Lef is the
13
coefficient of Lewis, according to Eq. (6) for unsaturated air conditions and Eq. (10) for supersaturated air
conditions (Kloppers and Kröger, 2005). The Merkel number according to the Poppe approach is given by
Eq. (7) for unsaturated air conditions and Eq. (11) for supersaturated air conditions.
𝑚
𝑑𝑤 𝑐𝑝𝑤 𝑤 (𝑤𝑠𝑤 − 𝑤)
𝑚𝑎
=
𝑑𝑇𝑤 𝑖𝑚𝑎𝑠𝑤 − 𝑖𝑚𝑎 + (𝐿𝑒𝑓 − 1)[𝑖𝑚𝑎𝑠𝑤 − 𝑖𝑚𝑎 − (𝑤𝑠𝑤 − 𝑤)𝑖𝑣 ] − (𝑤𝑠𝑤 − 𝑤)𝑐𝑝𝑤 𝑇𝑤 ] (4)
𝑑𝑖𝑚𝑎 𝑚𝑤 𝑐𝑝𝑤 𝑐𝑝𝑤 𝑇𝑤 (𝑤𝑠𝑤 −𝑤)

= (1 + )
𝑑𝑇𝑤 𝑚𝑎 𝑖𝑚𝑎𝑠𝑤 −𝑖𝑚𝑎 +(𝐿𝑒𝑓 −1)[𝑖𝑚𝑎𝑠𝑤 −𝑖𝑚𝑎 −(𝑤𝑠𝑤 −𝑤)𝑖𝑣 ]−(𝑤𝑠𝑤 −𝑤)𝑐𝑝𝑤 𝑇𝑤 ]
(5)
𝑤 + 0.622
( 𝑠𝑤 − 1)
𝐿𝑒𝑓 = 0.865 0.667 𝑤 + 0.622
𝑤 + 0.622 (6)
ln ( 𝑠𝑤 )
𝑤 + 0.622
𝑑𝑀𝑒𝑃 𝑐𝑝𝑤 (7)

=
𝑑𝑇𝑤 𝑖𝑚𝑎𝑠𝑤 − 𝑖𝑚𝑎 + (𝐿𝑒𝑓 − 1)[𝑖𝑚𝑎𝑠𝑤 − 𝑖𝑚𝑎 − (𝑤𝑠𝑤 − 𝑤)𝑖𝑣 ] − (𝑤𝑠𝑤 − 𝑤)𝑐𝑝𝑤 𝑇𝑤 ]
𝑚
𝑑𝑤 𝑐𝑝𝑤 𝑤 (𝑤𝑠𝑤 − 𝑤𝑠𝑎 )
𝑚𝑎
=
𝑑𝑇𝑤 𝑖𝑚𝑎𝑠𝑤 − 𝑖𝑠𝑠 + (𝐿𝑒𝑓 − 1)(𝑖𝑚𝑎𝑠𝑤 − 𝑖𝑠𝑠 − (𝑤𝑠𝑤 − 𝑤𝑠𝑎 )𝑖𝑣 + (𝑤 − 𝑤𝑠𝑎 )𝑐𝑝𝑤 𝑇𝑤 ) + (𝑤 − 𝑤𝑠𝑤 )𝑐𝑝𝑤 𝑇𝑤 (8)
𝑑𝑖𝑚𝑎 𝑚𝑤 𝑐𝑝𝑤 𝑇𝑤 (𝑤𝑠𝑤 − 𝑤𝑠𝑎 )

= 𝑐𝑝𝑤 (1 + )
𝑑𝑇𝑤 𝑚𝑎 𝑖𝑚𝑎𝑠𝑤 − 𝑖𝑠𝑠 + (𝐿𝑒𝑓 − 1){𝑖𝑚𝑎𝑠𝑤 − 𝑖𝑠𝑠 − (𝑤𝑠𝑤 − 𝑤𝑠𝑎 )𝑖𝑣 + (𝑤 − 𝑤𝑠𝑎 )𝑐𝑝𝑤 𝑇𝑤 } + (𝑤 − 𝑤𝑠𝑤 )𝑐𝑝𝑤 𝑇𝑤
(9)
𝑤 + 0.622
( 𝑠𝑤 − 1)
0.667 𝑤𝑠𝑎 + 0.622
𝐿𝑒𝑓 = 0.865 (10)
𝑤 + 0.622
ln ( 𝑠𝑤 )
𝑤𝑠𝑎 + 0.622
𝑑𝑀𝑒𝑃 𝑐𝑝𝑤 (11)

=
𝑑𝑇𝑤 𝑖𝑚𝑎𝑠𝑤 − 𝑖𝑠𝑠 + (𝐿𝑒𝑓 − 1)(𝑖𝑚𝑎𝑠𝑤 − 𝑖𝑠𝑠 − (𝑤𝑠𝑤 − 𝑤𝑠𝑎 )𝑖𝑣 + (𝑤 − 𝑤𝑠𝑎 )𝑐𝑝𝑤 𝑇𝑤 ) + (𝑤 − 𝑤𝑠𝑤 )𝑐𝑝𝑤 𝑇𝑤
Where w is the amount of humidity in the cooling tower in kg. 𝑖𝑠𝑠 and 𝑖𝑣 are the enthalpy of supersaturated
air per unit mass of dry air and the enthalpy of the water vapor in J/kg, respectively. Also, 𝑤𝑠𝑤 and 𝑤𝑠𝑎
denote the ratio of water saturation at the water temperature and the humidity ratio of saturated air at
temperature Ta, respectively. Lef is Lewis factor, and 𝑀𝑒𝑃 is Merkel number according to the Poppe model.
14
3.3 The Effectiveness–(NTU) Model
According to Jaber and Webb who design cooling towers by effectiveness–(NTU) method, Eq. (12)-(19)
are developed (Jaber and Webb, 1989). Eq. (12), and (13) correspond to the differential equation of the heat
exchanger. Based on Eq. (12), “ma“ can be greater than “𝑚𝑤 𝑐𝑝𝑤 /(𝑑𝑖𝑚𝑎𝑠𝑤 /𝑑𝑇𝑤 )“ or less; Thus, Cmax is
defined as the maximum amount of these two values, and Cmin is defined as the minimum amount of these
two values. Also, Eq. (18) calculates the Merkel number according to the effectiveness–(NTU) approach
when the dry air mass flow rate (ma) is greater than “𝑚𝑤 𝑐𝑝𝑤 /(𝑑𝑖𝑚𝑎𝑠𝑤 /𝑑𝑇𝑤 )“, and Eq. (19) corresponds
to this number when ma is less than “𝑚𝑤 𝑐𝑝𝑤 /(𝑑𝑖𝑚𝑎𝑠𝑤 /𝑑𝑇𝑤 )“ (Jaber and Webb, 1989).
𝑑𝑖𝑚𝑎𝑠𝑤
𝑑(𝑖𝑚𝑎𝑠𝑤 − 𝑖𝑚𝑎 ) 𝑑𝑇𝑤 1
= ℎ𝑑 ( − ) 𝑑𝐴
(𝑖𝑚𝑎𝑠𝑤 − 𝑖𝑚𝑎 ) 𝑚𝑤 𝑐𝑝𝑤 𝑐𝑝𝑤
(12)
𝑑(𝑇ℎ − 𝑇𝑐 ) 1 1 (13)
= −𝑈 ( − ) 𝑑𝐴
(𝑇ℎ − 𝑇𝑐 ) 𝑚ℎ 𝑐𝑝ℎ 𝑚𝑐 𝑐𝑝𝑐
C=Cmin/Cmax (14)
𝑄 𝑚𝑤 𝑐𝑝𝑤 (𝑇𝑤,𝑖𝑛 − 𝑇𝑤,𝑜𝑢𝑡 ) (15)

𝜀= =
𝑄𝑚𝑎𝑥 𝐶𝑚𝑖𝑛 (𝑖𝑚𝑎𝑠𝑤,𝑖𝑛 − 𝑓 − 𝑖𝑚𝑎,𝑖𝑛 )
𝑓 = (𝑖𝑚𝑎𝑠𝑤,𝑜𝑢𝑡 +𝑖𝑚𝑎𝑠𝑤,𝑖𝑛 − 2𝑖𝑚𝑎𝑠𝑤,𝑚 )/4 (16)
1 1−𝜀𝐶
NTU= 𝑁𝑇𝑈 = ln (17)
1−𝐶 1−𝜀
𝑐𝑝𝑤 (18)
𝑀𝑒𝑒 = 𝑁𝑇𝑈
𝑑𝑖𝑚𝑎𝑠𝑤 /𝑑𝑇𝑤
𝑀𝑒𝑒 = 𝑚𝑎 𝑁𝑇𝑈/𝑚𝑤 (19)
Here, 𝜀 and 𝑓 are the effectiveness ratio and a Berman’s correction factor, respectively. 𝑖𝑚𝑎𝑠𝑤,𝑚 is the
enthalpy of saturated air at the mean water temperature in J/kg. 𝑇𝑤,𝑖𝑛 and 𝑇𝑤,𝑜𝑢𝑡 denote the inlet and outlet
𝑊
water temperature of cooling towers in ℃, respectively. U is overall heat transfer coefficient in 𝑚2 ℃ . Q is
the heat transfer rate in W. 𝑁𝑇𝑈 shows the number of transfer units, and Mee is Merkel number according
to Effectiveness–(NTU) model. The Merkel, Poppe, and e-NTU models have been implemented in many
cooling towers’ studies with different objectives. Based on the modeling types and objectives, research
papers have been summarized in Table 3,to map the applications of each cooling tower modeling methods
since 2003.
15
Several studies were conducted to compare the Merkel, Poppe, and e-NTU models through experimental
observation under test conditions. The summary of those studies can be
as the following categories:
- Air outlet temperature: When the outlet air from the cooling tower was saturated, Merkel and e-
NTU models were capable of predicting the temperature of that, while the Poppe model did not
need any assumption for estimation of the outlet air temperature from the cooling tower (Kloppers
and Krö Ger, 2005).
- Water outlet temperature: When the draft in the cooling tower was the same, the outlet water
temperature from the cooling tower in the three models were the same. A small difference in the
outlet water temperature from the cooling tower was observed in Merkel and Poppe models over
the outlet air from the cooling tower since outlet air assumed saturated in the Merkel model (Ayoub,
Gjorgiev and Sansavini, 2018).
- Heat rejected: The loss of water due to evaporation in the cooling tower reduced the water outlet
mass flow rate, which was ignored in the energy equation in the Merkel and e-NTU models while
it was seen in the Poppe model. The estimated heat rejection rate by the cooling tower was larger
by the Poppe model in comparison with Merkel and e-NTU models (Ayoub, Gjorgiev and
Sansavini, 2018).
- Evaporation rate: The water evaporation rate in the cooling tower was underestimated by the
Merkel model compared to the Poppe model (Grange, 1994). Since evaporation was an important
factor in designing the hybrid cooling towers, using the Poppe model was preferred (M Roth, 2001;
Ayoub, Gjorgiev and Sansavini, 2018).
- Lewis factor: The Poppe model proposed a reliable equation to determine the Lewis factor value
(Kloppers and Krö Ger, 2005). While in the Merkel model the Lewis factor was a constant number
of 1. Most researchers believed that Merkel's assumption was not accurate since the Lewis factor
was between 0.6 to 1.3 (Hassler, 1999).
16
Table 3: Modeling approaches and objectives of wet cooling towers studies
Study Objective Model
(Irok et al., 2003) Performance analysis Merkel
(Khan, Qureshi and Zubair, 2004) Performance analysis Effectiveness–(NTU)
(Söylemez, 2004) Performance optimization Effectiveness–(NTU)
(Papaefthimiou, Zannis and Rogdakis, 2006) Performance analysis Merkel
(Kranc, 2007) Performance analysis Merkel
(Ren, 2006) Model improvement Merkel
(Jin et al., 2007) Model improvement Merkel/Effectiveness–(NTU)
(Qi and Liu, 2008) Performance analysis Poppe
(Williamson, Behnia and Armfield, 2008) Performance analysis Merkel
(Ren, 2008) Performance analysis Effectiveness–(NTU)
(Tyagi et al., 2008) Cost optimization Effectiveness–(NTU)
(Klimanek and Białecki, 2009) Model analysis comparison Poppe
(Marmouch, Orfi and Nasrallah, 2009) Performance analysis Effectiveness–(NTU)
(Lucas, Martínez and Viedma, 2009) Performance analysis Merkel
(Rubio-Castro et al., 2011) Cost optimization Poppe /Merkel
(Pan et al., 2011) Performance optimization Merkel
(Picón-Núnez et al., 2011) Design optimal Cooling tower Effectiveness–(NTU)
(Smrekar, Kuštrin and Oman, 2011) Performance analysis Poppe
(Rao and Patel, 2011) Performance optimization Merkel
(Gololo and Majozi, 2012) Water consumption optimization Poppe
(Picardo and Variyar, 2012) Model improvement Merkel
(Pan et al., 2013) Performance optimization Merkel
(Grobbelaar, Reuter and Bertrand, 2013) Performance analysis Merkel
(Khamis Mansour and Hassab, 2014) Performance analysis Effectiveness–(NTU)
(Hernández-Calderón, Rubio-Castro and Rios- Model improvement Poppe
Iribe, 2014)
(Nasrabadi and Finn, 2014a) Performance analysis Effectiveness–(NTU)
(Nasrabadi and Finn, 2014b) Performance analysis Merkel
(Uzgoren and Timur, 2015) Performance optimization Poppe
(Wang et al., 2015) Performance analysis Poppe
(Xu et al., 2015) Performance analysis Merkel
17
(Keshtkar and Mehdi Keshtkar, 2016) Performance optimization Poppe
(Singh and Das, 2016a) Performance optimization Merkel
(Singla, Singh and Das, 2016) Performance optimization Merkel
(Llano-Restrepo and Monsalve-Reyes, 2016) Model improvement Merkel
(Qi et al., 2016) Performance analysis Poppe
(Singh and Das, 2017) Performance optimization Merkel
(Sharqawy et al., 2017) Performance analysis Effectiveness–(NTU)
(Gilani and Parpanji, 2017) Performance analysis Poppe
(Huang et al., 2017) Performance analysis Poppe
(Y. Li et al., 2017) Performance optimization Poppe
(Zhou, Zhu and Ding, 2017) Performance analysis Poppe
(Ayoub, Gjorgiev and Sansavini, 2018) Model improvement Merkel/ Poppe/ Effectiveness–(NTU)
(Mishra, Srivastava and Yadav, 2019) Performance analysis Merkel
(González Pedraza et al., 2018) Model improvement Merkel
(Liao et al., 2019) Performance optimization Poppe
(Jes´ et al., 2019) Model improvement Poppe
(Ke, Huang and Ling, 2019) Performance analysis Merkel
(Gilani, Doustani Hendijani and Shirmohammadi, Performance optimization Poppe
2019)
4. Environmental Impact
Using wet cooling towers has some negative impacts on the environment. However, using wet cooling
towers reduces the emission of CFCs into the atmosphere, which are strongly harmful to the Ozon layer.
The major categories that wet cooling towers cause negative impacts on the environments are with respect
to water, plume, and energy.
4.1. Water
The wet cooling towers are widely used and considering the high water consumption in this type of cooling
towers, and they are not desired in zones with water resources limitation (Ma et al., 2018). Many ideas have
been proposed and investigated as mitigation strategies for resolving water consumption issues. All
approaches are in two categories:
• Improving the design parameters, operations, structure of the cooling towers to reduce water
consumption. Many of these studies are explained under improving water conservation in the
present study.
• Focusing on the circulating water in the cooling tower for lesser evaporation through different
approached.
18
Some of these methods have been detailed in improving water conservation.
4.2. Plume
Cooling towers have environmental impacts by changing the ambient conditions, such as making visible
plumes (Lindahl and Jameson, 1995) and releasing hazardous materials (Isozumi et al., 2005). When a wet
cooling tower releases the moisture, it mixes with cooler atmospheric air while the vapor closely approaches
the saturation point, the plume moisture condenses quickly and generates a visible plume (Michioka et al.,
2007). Visible plume is not considered air pollutant but sometimes contains minerals and chemicals that
can be hazardous (Meroney, 2006). For safety purposes, some countries have regulated the visible plume
by cooling towers (Mantelli, 2016). Using hybrid towers instead of evaporative towers reduces the plume
by enhancing the performance of cooling towers (Tyagi et al., 2012).
The fog harvesting and Atmospheric Water Harvesting (AWH) for capturing the vapor to produce water
were new approaches for plume abatement (Ghosh and Ganguly, 2019; Kim et al., 2020). Experimental
data from outlet fog harvester systems demonstrate that the rate of water collection in cooling tower fog
harvester was 3 to 5 times more than atmospheric air fog harvester due to a high relative humidity (RH)
level in cooling towers. Moreover, the fog source in cooling towers was more permanent than atmospheric
air in providing sufficient fog for harvester during the year (Ghosh and Ganguly, 2018). Zapping the fog
with the beam charged particles (ions) of electrically has improved capturing water droplets from fog
harvester by directing droplets to the storage in a low-cost and low-energy method for collecting of 20% to
30% of wastewater in cooling towers(Damak and Varanasi, 2018).
4.3. Energy
Using a Variable Frequency Drive (VFD) fan saves energy in cooling towers which have been studied as a
Proportional Iterative (PI) feedback controller with a temperature zone setting to manage the water outlet
temperature (Chang et al., 2015). The goal was to reduce energy consumption and reduce or eliminate
frequent on/off fan switch that was typical in cooling towers. The control strategy reduced energy
consumption by 38% within the simulations and result was validated by using the experimental data. The
study of seasonal climate change impact on the cooling tower performance for reducing its power
consumption by using VFD reduced up to 60% of annual power consumption in different weather
conditions (Pontes, Yamauchi and Silva, 2019). A novel counterflow cooling tower that utilizes a VFD fan,
a by-pass loop equipped with microfilters and UV lights was proposed in a study (Chang and Lin, 2016).
UV lights kept the water at cleaner levels and reduced required blowdown water in the cooling tower. The
results of the experiment indicated that at 50% capacity, the upgraded cooling tower had an energy savings
19
of 76% with an overall water savings of 23% in comparison with the original design, a single-stage fan and
no water filtration system(Chang and Lin, 2016).
5. Water Conservation
To advancing the technology of the cooling towers for reducing water consumption studies with different
approaches have been completed. Some of the studies were focusing on advancing the structure of cooling
tower, some aiming at operation parameters, and some finding more water. The methodologies for the
investigations were in a wide range including experiment, modeling, simulation, and optimization, and
modifications.
In the following paragraphs, the major studies have been classified and elaborated. Finally, the methods of
water consumption reduction in wet cooling towers have been summarized.
5.1. Water Focus

The circulating water is the medium that carries the cooling and exchanges it for the heat in the buildings
in a cooling cycle. The cooling load and the volume of circulating water needs to be adjusted regularly to
maintain the cooling performance of the cooling cycle. The lost water due to evaporation in blowdown, and
piping leakages must be compensated via make-up water in cooling towers (Botermans and Smith, 2008).
Filtration of water is a widespread practice in the industry to soften the water to reduce the make-up water
and protect equipment and pipes from fouling and corrosion. The excess water consumption and
maintenance of equipment are costly for any energy/cooling plant. Also, governmental incentives are
always an effective means for enticing customers to adopt water-saving methods. Generally, various options
available for reducing make-up water within wet cooling towers are as follow (Stahl et al., 2015):
• Soft water make-up: removing calcium and magnesium, which are two main formers of scale. This
reduces blowdown requirements while increases the pipe corrosion and the cost of producing make-
up water,
• Acid Feed: increasing solubility of calcium and magnesium for allowing more cycles of
concentration. Although the acid may present a safety concern or corrosion,
• Reverse Osmosis (RO) Concentrate: blending with potable water for make-up,
• Rainwater: collecting and using rainwater as make-up water, some anti-bacterial process may be
required,
• Air Handling Condensate: replacing other equipment in large quantities of condensate,
• Fixing Leaks: repairing leaks always reduce water usage. They are wasteful and oftentimes can be
overlooked if small, but their waste adds up over time.
20
A relatively new type of cooling tower known as a water-jet cooling tower was used for the experiment and
numerical simulations study (Muangnoi, Asvapoositkul and Hungspreugs, 2014). It was designed with a
significant advantage over traditional wet cooling towers for contaminated water such as seawater or oil-
water mixtures. In this study, the packing material was substituted with fine water droplets, made from
special high-pressure nozzles (Muangnoi, Asvapoositkul and Hungspreugs, 2014). The thermodynamical
study results on heat rejection load, wet-bulb temperature, water to air ratio, tower spray zone height, droplet
diameter, discharge droplet velocity, and air velocity in water-jet cooling tower showed that the droplet was
diameter increased while exergy efficiency was decreased. By the increase of water to air ratio, the exergy
efficiency for a smaller droplet size increased while the heat transfer decreased. The feasibility of using
seawater instead of freshwater in circulating wet cooling tower in an experimental work showed the impact
of saltwater concentrations on the cooling tower performance (Qi et al., 2016). The study presented a
valuable theoretical basis for developing seawater cycling instead of freshwater usage which causes to
decrease 9.86% of the cooling tower performance (Qi et al., 2016). In another study, the effect of
thermophysical properties of seawater on the thermal performance of the cooling tower caused efficiency
reduction of the cooling tower for 5-20% (Sharqawy, Lienhard V and Zubair, 2011).
The study of water harvesting from cooling towers fog was conducted in an experiment by mounting woven
metal meshes at the outlet plane of the cooling tower cell. The fog droplet capture efficiency was analyzed
by using different mesh configurations. Varying the geometry of the net frame and changing the spacing
between adjacent wires in the woven mesh led to the total water reduction by 40% in a 500 MW power
plant in the optimal case (Ghosh, Ray and Ganguly, 2015).
The influence of the wettability of a mildly hydrophilic metal mesh for fog harvesting purposes in cooling
towers was experimentally investigated on a small scale. The outcome indicated that from 8% to 23% of
water content in the fog flow stream was collected (Ghosh et al., 2020).
Multi-walled carbon nanotubes (MWNTs) and nanoporous graphene nanoparticles within a cooling tower
were investigated experimentally to understand the effects on energy and water conservation performance
of a mechanical wet cooling tower (Askari et al., 2016). The cooling tower thermal efficiency increased by
dispersing nanoparticles in water which enhanced its water thermal conductivity. Therefore, the heat
transfer increased through the cooling tower. For inlet water temperatures of 40 ˚C, the use of MWNTs and
nano-porous graphene nanoparticles with a 0.1% mass concentration caused water reduction by 10% to
19%. The water saving was due to the increase of sensible heat effect and reduction in the latent heat effect.
Reduction in the latent heat effect was due to the surface tension change of water as nanoparticles were
created resistance against evaporation (Askari et al., 2016). Another experimental study on the performance
of cooling towers in six different beds by using nanofluid showed the metal reticular bed as the most suitable
21
bed when using nanofluids because using ZnO/water nanofluid instead of pure water in the cooling tower
improved the thermal efficiency of the tower up to 9.45% (Imani-Mofrad, Saeed and Shanbedi, 2016).
However, the economic analysis of this idea, particularly for largescale cooling towers, hazardous impacts
of using nanofluids in the water, and the feasibility of performing in the real plant were neglected by the
authors.
The effects of increasing the cycles of concentration (cycles of concentration refers to the concentration of
dissolved solids in the cooling tower water) within a power plant cooling system for reducing water
consumption were investigated by increasing the cycles of concentration in blowdown which led to overall
water usage reduction (Rahmani, 2017). The used water was flew through pretreatment, pH adjustments,
chlorination control, and adding inhibitors for improving the quality of water for reusing. It was concluded
that despite the treatments, phosphate deposits were observed at higher cycles of concentration. Corrosion
and scale control using MBT and ZnSO4 effectively were reduced corrosion in the carbon steel and brass
pipes of the heat exchangers. Increasing the cycles of concentration from 6.5 to 9 resulted a water savings
of 1.1× 106 m3 of water per year while cooling requirements were satisfied.
A lab-scale experimental study was conducted to recover evaporated water in the cooling tower by
implementing an independent cold-water circulating loop through an array of copper tubes on both sides of
the tower, led to the capture of 11% of vapor. Also, a combination of copper tubes assisted with metal
foams improved the result (Pozzobon, Mantelli and Da Silva, 2016).
5.2. Cooling Towers Modifications

To capture the vapor out of the cooling tower, a design was utilized for cooling sprays of water drawn by
pumps from the bottom of the cooling tower to condense water vapor that flew under vacuum conditions
through the vertical channel. The study was on a wet cooling tower which was equipped with an air to air
heat exchanger to cool the hot and humid exiting air (Deziani et al., 2017). When the warm-wet air out of
the tower was cooled through heat exchanger by an auxiliary fan more condensed water was collected
through the cooling tower. 35.4% of evaporation was saved when the temperature difference between the
warm humid air and the cooler ambient air was 15˚C. At a temperature difference of 3˚C, water savings
was 15.1%.
TRNSYS (Transient Systems Simulation) was used for modeling, simulation, and evaluation of a cooling
tower to study its performance and water loss in four control strategies and six different drift eliminators
with two different water distribution systems. The control strategies were Fan Cycling Control (FCC),
Multiple-speed fan motor control (MSC), Frequency-modulating control (FMC), and Optimum Control
(OC) (García Cutillas, Ruiz Ramírez and Lucas Miralles, 2017). The two different distribution systems
22
were the Pressure Water Distribution System (PWDS) and Gravity Water Distribution System (GWDS).
FCC was a capacity control method on cooling towers that kept the system working until the thermostat
sent a signal once the hotel’s set-point temperature was reached. MSC strategy controlled outlet-water
temperature- by adjusting the suitable fan rotational speed in three stages of velocity to meet the set-point
value. FMC used VFD coupled with a standard fixed-pitch fan to control outlet-water-temperature by
modifying the fan rotational speed in the various stages (more than three stages compared to MSC). This
work also presented the new strategy called OC to find an optimum operating point for a coupled chiller
and cooling tower. Three of the drift eliminators were composed of a zig-zag structure and fiberglass plates
separated at distances of 55, 37, and 30 mm, respectively. The remaining drift eliminators utilized a plastic
honeycomb structure, a 45֯ tilted rhomboid mesh, a 45֯ tilted lower half, and a 135֯ tilted upper half. The
results concluded that the best FCC control strategy operation for reducing water loss was FMC, OC, and
MSC following close behind. There were no substantial benefits between the controls due to most of the
water loss occurring in blowdown (70%) while only 0.3% accounted for drifting. Also, the annual energy
cost savings in the selected hotel in the southeast region of Spain was up to 3240 € by using the FMC control
method. (García Cutillas, Ruiz Ramírez and Lucas Miralles, 2017).
The heat transfer characteristics and pressure drop of a cooling tower were studied theoretically and
experimentally (Naphon, 2005). The experiments were testing the changes in the inlet/outlet air flow rate
and inlet temperature and flow rate of water. It was found that increasing the airflow rate into the cooling
tower resulted in decreased exiting temperature and decreased outlet water temperature (Naphon, 2005).
However, the outlet air temperature approached a minimum amount as the airflow was increased, and the
pressure drop across the cooling tower rapidly was increased as the airflow was increased in the tower
(Naphon, 2005).
A study of hybrid cooling towers concerning water conservation was conducted by numerical simulation
and experiment on parallel and series configurations of a hybrid system in Tabriz Refinery (Tabriz, Iran)
(Rezaei, Shafiei and Abdollahnezhad, 2010). Based on the heat exchanger area of the refinery, the water
consumption reduction was between 37% to 23% during the summer months for the series and parallel
configuration, respectively. Additionally, the payback period for recovering the costs of the upgrades was
around seven years for series configuration, while the parallel configuration did not return the initial
investment. The impact of heat-exchangers arrangement and hybrid ratio on water loss in different seasons
at Tabriz refinery plant is shown in Figure 6 (Rezaei, Shafiei and Abdollahnezhad, 2010). The method of
retrofitting an existing wet cooling tower into a hybrid cooling tower with PPWD configuration to reduce
make-up water was developed in unit five of the Isfahan (Isfahan, Iran) thermal power plant (Taghian
Dehaghani and Ahmadikia, 2017). The goal was to modify the system with minimal effort from the plant
23
personnel labor and cost. The first hybrid used the existing wet towers packing in the same place, while the
second one lowered the packing by 1.4 m to increase the dry section cooling area. Under identical scenarios,
the first hybrid setup lowered water consumption by 7.0 % while the second setup, with the larger fraction
of total cooling, lowered water consumption by 9.4% (Taghian Dehaghani and Ahmadikia, 2017).
300
Hybrid Ratio=0.2
250 Hybrid Ratio=0.4
Total water loss (m3/h)
Hybrid Ratio=0.6
200
Hybrid Ratio=0.8
150
100
50
0
Parallel Series Parallel Series
Arrangement Arrangement Arrangement Arrangement
(Summer) (Summer) (Winter) (Winter)
Figure 6: The impact of heat-exchangers arrangement and hybrid ratio on water loss in different seasons at Tabriz refinery plant
(Rezaei, Shafiei and Abdollahnezhad, 2010)
5.3. Optimization Approach

Optimization as a tool for finding the optimum parameters for the ideal performance has been applied in
some cooling tower studies. It should be noted that the optimization of cooling towers and related systems
by using air volumetric flow and cooling water flowrate as parameters have three main shortcomings:
• Optimization models often are assumed that process parameters can be modified at any time.
Adjustments in process parameters of existing cooling towers require input from operators and
equipment manufacturers.
• Fluctuations in environmental conditions are often disregarded.
• There is a lack of systematic identification and assessment of efficiency measures (Schlei-Peters et
al., 2018).
A dynamic model was developed to determine the impact of air temperature and humidity ratio in a power
plant’s cooling tower performance. The 24-hours information of the ambient weather condition, cooling
tower water temperature, and its water mass flow rate have was collected to develop a dynamic model. The
model was developed based on Poppe model for unsaturated and supersaturated air conditions. (Dhorat, Al-
Obaidi and Mujtaba, 2019). Three objective functions were defined for minimizing operating cost,
24
minimizing the accumulation of water in the tank, and minimizing makeup water flowrate. The results
indicated that the makeup water flow rate could be reduced up to 57% while the costs and energy usage
were at minimum possible value (Dhorat, Al-Obaidi and Mujtaba, 2019). Optimization of a cooling tower
in 90 kW pilot power plant for minimal operating cost by considering fan’s speed, make-up water mass
flow rate, and valve positions were conducted (Cortinovis et al., 2009). It was observed that the outlet
temperature of the cooling tower had to keep as high as the heat load to minimize the cost of system. The
most economically minimizing action was to increase the cooling tower water mass flow rate when the load
demand was increased and then increase the fan speed by an increase of cooling demand. The reduction in
water and energy consumption in the cooling tower was estimated to save $0.05 per hour in an optimized
pilot plan. The worst scenario was using additional makeup water in the cooling tower which led to a $0.68
per hour increase in operating cost compared with the non-optimal scenario (Cortinovis et al., 2009).
The mathematical model for designing a sustainable natural draft wet cooling tower was developed to
estimate water consumption as a function of the power plant location in Spain (Guerras and Martín, 2020).
The objective functions were defined to find the optimum water consumption, tower size, and cost as a
function of humidity, temperature, and atmospheric pressure for different power plant sizes ranged from 40
to 450 MW. The study has compared the effect of different weather conditions in designing natural draft of
wet cooling tower to reduce water consumption in power plants. The outcomes showed a reasonable
agreement between the calculated results and the practical ones, plus the higher level of temperature and
humidity led to higher water consumption in wet cooling towers. A power plant in the southeast region of
Spain with higher temperature and humidity range consumed around 2 L/kWh water, while a similar plant
in the northwest of Spain with lower temperature and humidity used about 1.5 L/kWh water at the same
time. (Guerras and Martín, 2020).
The optimization of a cooling water system using mixed-integer nonlinear programming (MINLP) model
was performed to reduce water consumption, improve the system operation, and reduce the capital cost of
a cooling network using series, parallel, as well as combined series and parallel configurations (Liu et al.,
2019). When their MINLP optimization algorithm was employed, the combined series and parallel
configuration had minimized the cost (Liu et al., 2019).
A cooling tower using Advanced Pinch Design (APD) to allow for maximum amounts of heat transfer to
occur within a system optimized. The APD algorithm let interaction between the cooling tower performance
and heat-exchanger network configuration to be considered simultaneously. The objective function was to
minimize the cooling tower annual cost which was depending on water consumption, pump power
consumption, cooling tower approach temperature, and the ambient wet bulb temperature. In the traditional
dry cooling system, parallel configuration was used in heat-exchangers network. However, APD suggested
25
heat exchangers network for the minimum energy and water consumption by maximizing water re-use in
the cooling tower. Figure 7 shows the parallel, KSD method, and APD method configuration of the heat
exchangers network. APD arrangement was determined as an optimal heat exchanger network in this study
because APD provided the minimum annual cost for the cooling tower compared with parallel arrangement
an KSD method arrangement. Optimal heat-exchanger arrangement was achieved through an advanced
synthesis algorithm using pinch point temperature in heat-exchangers network with four units. The
synthesis algorithm adjusts water inlet temperature, water outlet temperature, and pinch point temperature
to minimize the cooling tower total annual cost as well as its water consumption. In comparing APD to
another optimization algorithm known as the Kim and Smith (KSD) method costs were decreased from
$72,000 per year and $59,000 per year for the conventional and KSD systems respectively, to $52,000 for
the APD system. The APD algorithm was then modified to optimize for minimal make-up water, which
resulted in costs of $39,000 per year while 46% of make-up water was saved (Panjeshahi et al., 2009).
Figure 7: Different heat exchangers network configurations (Panjeshahi et al., 2009)
The optimizing heat transfer in a cooling tower by studying the water distribution system was conducted
by measuring the water inlet velocity and temperature fields by using a mobile robot equipped with high-
quality sensors (Smrekar, Oman and Širok, 2006). The ambient air velocity as well as the air temperature
and density in the vicinity of the cooling tower were measured. It was concluded that the optimal water/air
mass flow ratio should be small and uniform across the entire area of the cooling tower. By keeping the
water/air mass flow ratio constant, entropy generation, and thus exergy destruction, was minimized which
resulted in lower outlet water temperature and greater efficiency of the cooling tower (Smrekar, Oman and
Širok, 2006). Multi-objective optimization and experimental evaluation of a forced draft cooling tower
using different fill options have been conducted (Singh and Das, 2016b). The fills were wooden splash,
wire mesh, and honeycomb. Objective functions for tower range (temperature difference between inlet
26
water and outlet water), Merkel number, effectiveness, and evaporation rate were formulated using
experimental data and then simultaneously optimized using genetic algorithm and different water and air
flow rates. The most optimal combination of mass flow rates of water and air with wire mesh packing type
provided a 5.8% increase in the effectiveness of the cooling tower as well as a 18.4% reduction in water
consumption (Singh and Das, 2016b).
6. Research Trend
Going through a comprehensive literature reviewing on cooling towers with the focus on water
sustainability in the present study suggests the opportunity for mapping the completed studies. The authors
present the conclusion of their study in the form of the research trends to facilitate the future study plans
for advancing water conservations in cooling towers. Figure 8 illustrates the map of the research trend in
advancing sustainability in wet cooling towers.
Optimization
(Using Models)
Improving Improving the Heat

Cooling Towers Transfer
Water Thermodynamics
Increasing Water Consumption Parameter
Conservation
Finding New Proposing the New
Resources for Auxiliary
Make-up Water
Enhancing
Sustainability of
Methods of
Cooling Towers
Decreasing
Make-up Water
Reducing Energy Optimization

Usage (Using Models)
Proposing the
New Auxiliary
Figure 8: Research map for enhancing sustainability of cooling towers
27
Finally, the proven effort for decreasing water usage in cooling towers from the past studies can be
concluded as:
• Deploying cooling loops by reuse or recycle water (Pan, Seth W. Snyder, et al., 2018),
• Changing wet cooling tower to hybrid or dry cooling tower (Deziani et al., 2017),
• Adding the dry cooling section to current wet cooling towers (Pan, Seth W. Snyder, et al., 2018),
• Using air to air heat exchanger on the cooling tower (Deziani et al., 2017),
• Applying the airflow control method by taking advantage of fan VFD to reduce the water and
energy consumption of cooling towers (Pan, Seth W Snyder, et al., 2018),
• Installing a RO water filtration system or other water filtering systems to reduce required blowdown
(Schlei-Peters et al., 2018),
• Reduction in blowdown with increasing of concentration cycles (Deziani et al., 2017),
• Decreasing pump power demand by installing a new pump motor for improved efficiency (Schlei-
Peters et al., 2018),
• Reduction of the number of backwashing cycles (Schlei-Peters et al., 2018),
• Changing the fan control mode to variable speed with parallel fan combination (Schlei-Peters et
al., 2018).
7. Conclusions
Considering the dependency of life to water and its scarcity reveals the urgency of studying on reducing
water consumption in the cooling towers since cooling towers are the gate for the invisible dissipation of
water. The present study elaborated on the roles of cooling towers in cooling cycles while narrated the
history of energy-water modeling methods of cooling towers through the Markel, the Poppe, and the
Effectiveness–(NTU) Models since water and energy are deeply connected in cooling towers. The major
classifications and configurations of cooling towers showed the wet cooling towers consume the highest
water while dry cooling towers use the minimum water in a trade-off with performance. The hybrid cooling
towers have the advantages of both while they are more costly. The past challenges for boosting water
conservation in cooling towers were allocated in focusing on water supply sources or modifications of the
cooling tower. There are some practical approaches to reduce the environmental impact of cooling towers
such as using VFD, adding a dry section, and employing water filtration to reduce its water and energy
consumption. Finally, the trend of future studies presents the potential investigations for water and energy
reduction opportunities in the light of water-energy nexus. Proposing the new auxiliary equipment, finding
methods of decreasing make-up water, and optimization of the energy models are the major path for future
investigation to reduce energy consumption in cooling towers. Similarly, optimizing cooling towers water
28
consumption, improving the heat transfer parameters in cooling towers, proposing the new auxiliary
equipment, and findings new make-up water resources are future paths for boosting water conservations in
cooling towers.
Acknowledgments
The authors would like to acknowledge the financial support of the Navy SMART graduate scholarship,
and the University of Idaho, College of Engineering Graduate Student Funds, The Col. James and Col.
Betty Lee Raymer Endowment for Learning.
References:
Advocates, W. (2008) A Sustainable Path: Meeting Nevada’s Water and Energy Demands (Boulder, CO:
Western Resource Advocates).
Askari, S., Lotfi, R., Seifkordi, A., Rashidi, A. M. and Koolivand, H. (2016) ‘A novel approach for
energy and water conservation in wet cooling towers by using MWNTs and nanoporous graphene
nanofluids’, Energy Conversion and Management. Pergamon, 109, pp. 10–18. doi:
10.1016/J.ENCONMAN.2015.11.053.
Asvapoositkul, W. and Kuansathan, M. (2014) ‘Comparative evaluation of hybrid (dry/wet) cooling tower
performance’, Applied Thermal Engineering, 71(1), pp. 83–93. doi:
10.1016/j.applthermaleng.2014.06.023.
Ayoub, A., Gjorgiev, B. and Sansavini, G. (2018) ‘Cooling towers performance in a changing climate:
Techno-economic modeling and design optimization’, Energy, 160, pp. 1133–1143. doi:
10.1016/j.energy.2018.07.080.
Botermans, R. and Smith, P. (2008) ‘Cooling Towers’, in Advanced Piping Design., pp. 177–182. doi:
10.1016/B978-1-933762-18-0.50016-7.
Bourillot, C. (1983) Hypotheses of calculation of the water flow rate evaporated in a wet cooling tower.
Available at: https://www.osti.gov/biblio/5350107 (Accessed: 9 March 2020).
Braun, J. E. (1988) Methodologies for the Design and Control of Central Cooling Plants. UNIVERSITY
OF WISCONSIN - MADISON. Available at:
https://minds.wisconsin.edu/bitstream/handle/1793/46694/Braun1988.pdf?sequence=1 (Accessed: 9
March 2020).
Braun, J., Klein, S. and JW Mitchell - (1989) ‘Effictiveness models for cooling towers and cooling coils’,
29
ASHRAE Transactions (American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning Engineers);
(USA), 95. Available at: https://www.osti.gov/biblio/5770692 (Accessed: 9 March 2020).
Chang, C. C., Shieh, S. S., Jang, S. S., Wu, C. W. and Tsou, Y. (2015) ‘Energy conservation
improvement and ON-OFF switch times reduction for an existing VFD-fan-based cooling tower’, Applied
Energy, 154, pp. 491–499. doi: 10.1016/j.apenergy.2015.05.025.
Chang, T.-B. and Lin, T.-M. (2016) ‘Water and energy conservation for a counterflow cooling tower
using UV light disinfection and variable speed fan’, Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical
Engineers, Part E: Journal of Process Mechanical Engineering, 230(3), pp. 235–243. doi:
10.1177/0954408914546358.
Ciferno, J., Munson, R., Murphy, J., Power, B. L.- and 2010, undefined (2010) ‘Determining Carbon
Capture and Sequestration’s Water Demands’, cheric.org. Available at:
https://www.cheric.org/research/tech/periodicals/view.php?seq=1029654 (Accessed: 20 March 2020).
Conradie, A. E. and Kröger, D. G. (1996) ‘Performance evaluation of dry-cooling systems for power
plant applications’, Applied Thermal Engineering, 16(3), pp. 219–232. doi: 10.1016/1359-
4311(95)00068-2.
Cortinovis, G. F., Paiva, J. L., Song, T. W. and Pinto, J. M. (2009) ‘A systemic approach for optimal
cooling tower operation’, Energy Conversion and Management. Pergamon, 50(9), pp. 2200–2209. doi:
10.1016/J.ENCONMAN.2009.04.033.
CS Robinson (1923) ‘The design of cooling towers’, Mech Eng, 15, pp. 99–102.
Damak, M. and Varanasi, K. K. (2018) ‘Electrostatically driven fog collection using space charge
injection’, Science Advances. American Association for the Advancement of Science, 4(6), p. eaao5323.
doi: 10.1126/sciadv.aao5323.
Deziani, M., Rahmani, K., Mirrezaei Roudaki, S. J. and Kordloo, M. (2017) ‘Feasibility study for reduce
water evaporative loss in a power plant cooling tower by using air to Air heat exchanger with auxiliary
Fan’, Desalination. Elsevier, 406, pp. 119–124. doi: 10.1016/j.desal.2015.12.007.
Dhorat, A., Al-Obaidi, M. A. and Mujtaba, I. M. (2019) ‘Dynamic modelling and operational
optimisation of natural draft cooling towers’, Thermal Science and Engineering Progress, 9, pp. 30–43.
doi: 10.1016/j.tsep.2018.10.013.
Duniam, S., Jahn, I., Hooman, K., Lu, Y. and Veeraragavan, A. (2018) ‘Comparison of direct and indirect
natural draft dry cooling tower cooling of the sCO 2 Brayton cycle for concentrated solar power plants’,
30
Applied Thermal Engineering, 130, pp. 1070–1080. doi: 10.1016/j.applthermaleng.2017.10.169.
García Cutillas, C., Ruiz Ramírez, J. and Lucas Miralles, M. (2017) ‘Optimum Design and Operation of
an HVAC Cooling Tower for Energy and Water Conservation’, Energies. Multidisciplinary Digital
Publishing Institute, 10(3), p. 299. doi: 10.3390/en10030299.
Ghosh, R. and Ganguly, R. (2018) ‘Harvesting Water from Natural and Industrial Fogs—Opportunities
and Challenges’, in. Springer, Singapore, pp. 237–266. doi: 10.1007/978-981-10-7233-8_9.
Ghosh, R. and Ganguly, R. (2019) ‘Fog harvesting from cooling towers using metal mesh: Effects of
aerodynamic, deposition, and drainage efficiencies’, J Power and Energy. doi:
10.1177/0957650919890711.
Ghosh, R., Patra, C., Singh, P., Ganguly, R., Sahu, R. P., Zhitomirsky, I. and Puri, I. K. (2020) ‘Influence
of metal mesh wettability on fog harvesting in industrial cooling towers’, Applied Thermal Engineering.
Pergamon, 181, p. 115963. doi: 10.1016/j.applthermaleng.2020.115963.
Ghosh, R., Ray, T. K. and Ganguly, R. (2015) ‘Cooling tower fog harvesting in power plants e A pilot
study’, Energy, pp. 1–11. doi: 10.1016/j.energy.2015.06.050.
Gilani, N., Doustani Hendijani, A. and Shirmohammadi, R. (2019) ‘Developing of a novel water-efficient
configuration for shower cooling tower integrated with the liquid desiccant cooling system’, Applied
Thermal Engineering journal, 154, pp. 180–195. doi: 10.1016/j.applthermaleng.2019.03.043.
Gilani, N. and Parpanji, F. (2017) ‘Parametric study on the outlet water temperature in a shower cooling
tower and its application in different Iranian provincial capitals’, International Journal of Thermal
Sciences, 124, pp. 174–186. doi: 10.1016/j.ijthermalsci.2017.10.017.
Golkar, B., Naserabad, S. N., Soleimany, F., Dodange, M., Ghasemi, A., Mokhtari, H. and Oroojie, P.
(2019) ‘Determination of optimum hybrid cooling wet/dry parameters and control system in off design
condition: Case study’, Applied Thermal Engineering. Elsevier, 149(December 2018), pp. 132–150. doi:
Gololo, K. V and Majozi, T. (2012) ‘Complex Cooling Water Systems Optimization with Pressure Drop
Consideration’, Industrial & Engineering Chemistry Research, (Special Issue). doi: 10.1021/ie302498j.
González Pedraza, O. J., Pacheco Ibarra, J. J., Rubio-Maya, C., Galván González, S. R. and Rangel
Arista, J. A. (2018) ‘Numerical study of the drift and evaporation of water droplets cooled down by a
forced stream of air’, Applied Thermal Engineering. Elsevier, 142(July), pp. 292–302. doi:
31
Grange, J. L. (1994) ‘Calculating the evaporated water flow in a wet cooling tower’. Available at:
http://inis.iaea.org/Search/search.aspx?orig_q=RN:27048131 (Accessed: 25 September 2020).
Grobbelaar, P. J., Reuter, H. C. R. and Bertrand, T. P. (2013) ‘Performance characteristics of a trickle fill
in cross- and counter-flow configuration in a wet-cooling tower’, Applied Thermal Engineering journal,
50, p. 475e484 Contents. doi: 10.1016/j.applthermaleng.2012.06.026.
Guerras, L. S. and Martín, M. (2020) ‘On the water footprint in power production : Sustainable design of
wet cooling towers’, Applied Energy. Elsevier, 263. doi: 10.1016/j.apenergy.2020.114620.
Guo, Y., Wang, F., Jia, M. and Zhang, S. (2017) ‘Parallel hybrid model for mechanical draft counter flow
wet-cooling tower Parallel hybrid model for mechanical draft counter flow wet-cooling tower’, Applied
Thermal Engineering, 125, pp. 1379–1388. doi: 10.1016/j.applthermaleng.2017.07.138.
Hajidavalloo, E., Shakeri, R. and Mehrabian, M. A. (2010) ‘Thermal performance of cross flow cooling
towers in variable wet bulb temperature’, Energy Conversion and Management, 51, pp. 1298–1303. doi:
10.1016/j.enconman.2010.01.005.
Hansen, E., Rodrigues, M. A. S. and Aquim, P. M. de (2016) ‘Wastewater reuse in a cascade based
system of a petrochemical industry for the replacement of losses in cooling towers’, Journal of
Environmental Management. Academic Press, 181, pp. 157–162. doi: 10.1016/j.jenvman.2016.06.014.
Hassler, R. , (1999) Einfluss von Kondensation in der Grenzschicht auf die Waerme-und
Stoffuebertragung an einem Rieselfilm, VDI VERLAG.
He, S., Gurgenci, H., Guan, Z. and Alkhedhair, A. M. (2013) ‘Pre-cooling with Munters media to
improve the performance of Natural Draft Dry Cooling Towers’, Applied Thermal Engineering, 53(1), pp.
67–77. doi: 10.1016/j.applthermaleng.2012.12.033.
Hernández-Calderón, O. M., Rubio-Castro, E. and Rios-Iribe, E. Y. (2014) ‘Solving the heat and mass
transfer equations for an evaporative cooling tower through an orthogonal collocation method’,
Computers and Chemical Engineering, 71, pp. 24–38. doi: 10.1016/j.compchemeng.2014.06.008.
Hooman, K. (2010) ‘Dry cooling towers as condensers for geothermal power plants’, International
Communications in Heat and Mass Transfer. Pergamon, 37(9), pp. 1215–1220. doi:
10.1016/j.icheatmasstransfer.2010.07.011.
Hu, H., Li, Z., Jiang, Y. and Du, X. (2018) ‘Thermodynamic characteristics of thermal power plant with
hybrid (dry/wet) cooling system’, Energy, 147, pp. 729–741. doi: 10.1016/j.energy.2018.01.074.
32
Huang, X., Li, Y., Ke, T., Ling, X. and Liu, W. (2017) ‘Thermal investigation and performance analysis
of a novel evaporation system based on a humidification-dehumidification process’, Energy Conversion
and Management journal, 147, pp. 108–119. doi: 10.1016/j.enconman.2017.05.036.
Hughes, B. R., Chaudhry, H. N. and Ghani, S. A. (2011) ‘A review of sustainable cooling technologies in
buildings’, Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, pp. 3112–3120. doi: 10.1016/j.rser.2011.03.032.
Imani-Mofrad, P., Saeed, H. and Shanbedi, M. (2016) ‘Experimental investigation of filled bed effect on
the thermal performance of a wet cooling tower by using ZnO/water nanofluid’, Energy Conversion and
Management, 127, pp. 199–207. doi: 10.1016/j.enconman.2016.09.009.
Irok, B., Blagojevi, B., Novak, M., Hoevar, M. and Jere, & F. (2003) ‘Energy and Mass Transfer
Phenomena in Natural Draft Cooling Towers’, Heat Transfer Engineering, 24(3), pp. 66–75. doi:
10.1080/01457630304061.
Isozumi, R., Ito, Y., Ito, I., Osawa, M., Hirai, T., Takakura, S., Iinuma, Y., Ichiyama, S., Tateda, K.,
Yamaguchi, K. and Mishima, M. (2005) ‘An outbreak of Legionella pneumonia originating from a
cooling tower’, Scandinavian Journal of Infectious Diseases, 37, pp. 709–711. doi:
10.1080/00365540510012143.
Jaber, H. and Webb, R. L. (1989) ‘Design of cooling towers by the effectiveness-NTU method’, Journal
of Heat Transfer. American Society of Mechanical Engineers Digital Collection, 111(4), pp. 837–843.
doi: 10.1115/1.3250794.
James Black (2010) Cost and Performance Baseline for Fossil Energy Plants Volume 1: Bituminous Coal
and Natural Gas to Electricity Revision 2. Available at: www.netl.doe.gov (Accessed: 20 March 2020).
Jes´, J., Ortiz-Del-Castillo, J. R., Hernándezhern´hernández-Calderón, O. M., Calderón, C., Rios-Iribe, E.

Y., Gonzálezgonz´gonzález-Llanes, M. D., Rubio-Castro, E. and Cervantes-Gaxiola, M. E. (2019)
‘Analytical solution of the governing equations for heat and mass transfer in evaporative cooling process’,
International Journal of Refrigeration-cess, 111, pp. 178–187. doi: 10.1016/j.ijrefrig.2019.11.019.
Jin, G.-Y., Cai, W.-J., Lu, L., Lock Lee, E. and Chiang, A. (2007) ‘A simplified modeling of mechanical
cooling tower for control and optimization of HVAC systems’, Energy Conversion and Management, 48,
pp. 355–365. doi: 10.1016/j.enconman.2006.07.010.
Ke, T., Huang, X. and Ling, X. (2019) ‘Numerical and experimental analysis on air/water direct contact
heat and mass transfer in the humidifier’, Applied Thermal Engineering journal, 156, pp. 310–323. doi:
33
Keshtkar, M. M. and Mehdi Keshtkar, M. (2016) ‘Performance Analysis of a Counter Flow Wet Cooling
Tower and Selection of Optimum Operative Condition by MCDM-TOPSIS Method’, Applied Thermal
Engineering. doi: 10.1016/j.applthermaleng.2016.12.043.
Khamis Mansour, M. and Hassab, M. A. (2014) ‘Innovative correlation for calculating thermal
performance of counterflow wet-cooling tower’, Energy, 74(C), pp. 855–862. doi:
10.1016/j.energy.2014.07.059.
Khan, J. U. R., Qureshi, B. A. and Zubair, S. M. (2004) ‘A comprehensive design and performance
evaluation study of counter flow wet cooling towers’, International Journal of Refrigeration, 27(8), pp.
914–923. doi: 10.1016/j.ijrefrig.2004.04.012.
Kim, H., Rao, S. R., LaPotin, A., Lee, S. and Wang, E. N. (2020) ‘Thermodynamic analysis and
optimization of adsorption-based atmospheric water harvesting’, International Journal of Heat and Mass
Transfer, 161, p. 120253. doi: 10.1016/j.ijheatmasstransfer.2020.120253.
King, C. W., Stillwell, A. S., Twomey, K. M. and Webber, M. E. (2013) ‘Coherence between Water and
Energy Policies’, Natural Resources Journal, 53. Available at:
https://heinonline.org/HOL/Page?handle=hein.journals/narj53&id=125&div=7&collection=journals
(Accessed: 20 March 2020).
Klimanek, A. and Białecki, R. A. (2009) ‘Solution of heat and mass transfer in counterflow wet-cooling
tower fills’, International Communications in Heat and Mass Transfer, 36, pp. 547–553 Contents. doi:
10.1016/j.icheatmasstransfer.2009.03.007.
Kloppers, J. C. (2003) A critical evaluation and refinement of the performance prediction of wet-cooling
towers. University of Stellenbosch. Available at: http://scholar.sun.ac.za/handle/10019.1/1476 (Accessed:
9 March 2020).
Kloppers, J. C. and Krö Ger, D. G. (2005) ‘Cooling Tower Performance Evaluation: Merkel, Poppe, and
e-NTU Methods of Analysis’, asmedigitalcollection.asme.org. doi: 10.1115/1.1787504.
Kloppers, J. C. and Kröger, D. G. (2005) ‘The Lewis factor and its influence on the performance
prediction of wet-cooling towers’, International Journal of Thermal Sciences. Elsevier Masson, 44(9), pp.
879–884. doi: 10.1016/j.ijthermalsci.2005.03.006.
Kranc, S. C. (2007) ‘Optimal spray patterns for counterflow cooling towers with structured packing’,
Applied Mathematical Modelling, 31, pp. 676–686. doi: 10.1016/j.apm.2005.11.027.
Kurnik, C. W., Boyd, B., Stoughton, K. M. and Lewis, T. (2017) Cooling Tower (Evaporative Cooling
34
System) Measurement and Verification Protocol. Golden, CO (United States). doi: 10.2172/1412805.
LEWIS and K., W. (1922) ‘The evaporation of a liquid into a gas.’, Trans. ASME., 44, pp. 325–340.
Li, X., Gurgenci, H., Guan, Z., Wang, X. and Duniam, S. (2017) ‘Measurements of crosswind influence
on a natural draft dry cooling tower for a solar thermal power plant’, Applied Energy, 206, pp. 1169–
1183. doi: 10.1016/j.apenergy.2017.10.038.
Li, Y., Huang, X., Peng, H., Ling, X. and Tu, S. (2017) ‘Energy Simulation and optimization of
humidification-dehumidification evaporation system’, Energy, 145, pp. 128–140. doi:
10.1016/j.energy.2017.12.119.
Liao, J., Xie, X., Nemer, H., Claridge, D. E. and Culp, C. H. (2019) ‘A simplified methodology to
optimize the cooling tower approach temperature control schedule in a cooling system’, Energy
Conversion and Management. Elsevier, 199(August), p. 111950. doi: 10.1016/j.enconman.2019.111950.
Lindahl, P. A. J. and Jameson, R. W. (1995) Plume abatement and water conservation with the wet/dry
cooling tower (Technical Report) | OSTI.GOV. United States. Available at:
https://www.osti.gov/biblio/48147 (Accessed: 16 March 2020).
Liu, S., Song, J., Shi, J. and Yang, B. (2019) ‘An improved series-parallel optimization approach for
cooling water system’, Applied Thermal Engineering. Pergamon, 154, pp. 368–379. doi:
10.1016/J.APPLTHERMALENG.2019.03.048.
Llano-Restrepo, M. and Monsalve-Reyes, R. (2016) ‘Modeling and simulation of counterflow wet-

cooling towers and the accurate calculation and correlation of mass transfer coefficients for thermal
performance prediction’, International Journal of Refrigeration, 74, pp. 47–72. doi:
10.1016/j.ijrefrig.2016.10.018.
Lucas, M., Martínez, P. J. and Viedma, A. (2009) ‘Experimental study on the thermal performance of a
mechanical cooling tower with different drift eliminators’, Energy Conversion and Management, 50(3),
pp. 490–497. doi: 10.1016/j.enconman.2008.11.008.
M Roth (2001) ‘Fundamentals of heat and mass transfer in wet cooling towers. All well known or are
further developments necessary?’, in Proceedings of 12th IAHR Cooling Tower and Heat Exchangers.
UTS, Sydney, Australia.
Ma, H., Si, F., Zhu, K. and Wang, J. (2018) ‘The adoption of windbreak wall partially rotating to improve
thermo-flow performance of natural draft dry cooling tower under crosswind’, International Journal of
Thermal Sciences. Elsevier Masson SAS, 134, pp. 66–88. doi: 10.1016/j.ijthermalsci.2018.08.005.
35
Mantelli, M. H. B. (2016) ‘Development of porous media thermosyphon technology for vapor recovering
in cross-current cooling towers’, Applied Thermal Engineering, 108, pp. 398–413. doi:
Marmouch, H., Orfi, J. and Nasrallah, S. Ben (2009) ‘Experimental study of the performance of a cooling
tower used in a solar distiller’, Desalination, 250, pp. 456–458. doi: 10.1016/j.desal.2009.09.073.
Martin, A. D., Herzog, H. J. and Clark, J. P. (2012) Water Footprint of Electric Power Generation:
Modeling its use and analyzing options for a water-scarce future L.__LBRA RIES ARCHivES. Available
at: https://dspace.mit.edu/handle/1721.1/72886 (Accessed: 12 March 2020).
Meldrum, J., Nettles-Anderson, S., Heath, G. and Macknick, J. (2013) ‘Life cycle water use for electricity
generation: a review and harmonization of literature estimates’, Environmental Research Letters , 8. doi:
10.1088/1748-9326/8/1/015031.
Merkel, F., VDI-Verlag, V. V.-, Berlin, undefined and 1925, undefined (1925) ‘Forschungsarbeiten No.
275’.
Meroney, R. N. (2006) ‘CFD prediction of cooling tower drift’, Journal of Wind Engineering and
Industrial Aerodynamics, 94, pp. 463–490. doi: 10.1016/j.jweia.2006.01.015.
Michioka, T., Sato, A., Kanzaki, T. and Sada, K. (2007) ‘Wind tunnel experiment for predicting a visible
plume region from a wet cooling tower’, Journal of Wind Engineering and Industrial Aerodynamics, 95,
pp. 741–754. doi: 10.1016/j.jweia.2007.01.005.
Mishra, B., Srivastava, A. and Yadav, L. (2019) ‘Performance analysis of cooling tower using desiccant’,
Heat and Mass Transfer/Waerme- und Stoffuebertragung. Springer, pp. 1–17. doi: 10.1007/s00231-019-
02759-y.
Muangnoi, T., Asvapoositkul, W. and Hungspreugs, P. (2014) ‘Performance characteristics of a

downward spray water-jet cooling tower’, Applied Thermal Engineering. Pergamon, 69(1–2), pp. 165–
176. doi: 10.1016/J.APPLTHERMALENG.2014.04.019.
Muangnoi, T., Asvapoositkul, W. and Wongwises, S. (2006) ‘An exergy analysis on the performance of a
counterflow wet cooling tower’, Applied Thermal Engineering, 27, pp. 910–917. doi:
Naphon, P. (2005) ‘Study on the heat transfer characteristics of an evaporative cooling tower’,
International Communications in Heat and Mass Transfer. Pergamon, 32(8), pp. 1066–1074. doi:
10.1016/J.ICHEATMASSTRANSFER.2005.05.016.
36
Nasrabadi, M. and Finn, D. P. (2014a) ‘Mathematical modeling of a low temperature low approach direct
cooling tower for the provision of high temperature chilled water for conditioning of building spaces’,
Applied Thermal Engineering journal, 64, pp. 273–282. doi: 10.1016/j.applthermaleng.2013.12.025.
Nasrabadi, M. and Finn, D. P. (2014b) ‘Performance analysis of a low approach low temperature direct
cooling tower for high-temperature building cooling systems’, Energy and Buildings, 84, pp. 674–689.
doi: 10.1016/j.enbuild.2014.09.019.
Nourani, Z., Naserbegi, A., Tayyebi, S. and Aghaie, M. (2019) ‘Thermodynamic evaluation of hybrid
cooling towers based on ambient temperature’, Thermal Science and Engineering Progress. Elsevier,
14(March), p. 100406. doi: 10.1016/j.tsep.2019.100406.
Pan, S.-Y., Snyder, Seth W., Packman, A. I., Lin, Y. J. and Chiang, P.-C. (2018) ‘Cooling water use in
thermoelectric power generation and its associated challenges for addressing water-energy nexus’, Water-
Energy Nexus. Elsevier BV, 1(1), pp. 26–41. doi: 10.1016/j.wen.2018.04.002.
Pan, S.-Y., Snyder, Seth W, Packman, A. I., Lin, Y. J. and Chiang, P.-C. (2018) ‘Cooling Water Use in
Thermoelectric Power Generation and its Associated Challenges for Addressing Water-Energy Nexus’,
Water-Energy Nexus. Water-Energy Nexus, 1, pp. 26–41. doi: 10.1016/j.wen.2018.04.002.
Pan, T.-H., Shieh, S.-S., Jang, S.-S., Tseng, W.-H., Wu, C.-W. and Ou, J.-J. (2011) ‘Statistical multi-
model approach for performance assessment of cooling tower’, Energy Conversion and Management, 52,
pp. 1377–1385. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enconman.2010.09.036.
Pan, T., Xu, D., Li, Z., Shieh, S.-S. and Jang, S.-S. (2013) ‘Efficiency improvement of cogeneration
system using statistical model’, Energy Conversion and Management journal, 68, pp. 169–176 Contents.
doi: 10.1016/j.enconman.2012.12.026.
Panjeshahi, M. H., Ataei, A., Gharaie, M. and Parand, R. (2009) ‘Optimum design of cooling water
systems for energy and water conservation’, Chemical Engineering Research and Design. Elsevier, 87(2),
pp. 200–209. doi: 10.1016/J.CHERD.2008.08.004.
Papaefthimiou, V. D., Zannis, T. C. and Rogdakis, E. D. (2006) ‘Thermodynamic study of wet cooling
tower performance’, International Journal of Energy Research, 30(6), pp. 411–426. doi: 10.1002/er.1158.
Peer, R. A. and Sanders, K. T. (2017) ‘The water consequences of a transitioning US power sector’,
Applied Energy, 210, pp. 613–622. doi: 10.1016/j.apenergy.2017.08.021.
Picardo, J. R. and Variyar, J. E. (2012) ‘The Merkel equation revisited: A novel method to compute the
packed height of a cooling tower’, Energy Conversion and Management, 57, pp. 167–172. doi:
37
10.1016/j.enconman.2011.12.016.
Picón-Núnez, M., Polley, G. T., Canizalez-Dávalos, L., Martín Medina-Flores, J., Norte, U., Juan Alonso,
L. and Gto, C. (2011) ‘Short cut performance method for the design of flexible cooling systems’, Energy,
36, p. 4646e4653 Contents. doi: 10.1016/j.energy.2011.04.041.
Pontes, R. F. F., Yamauchi, W. M. and Silva, E. K. G. (2019) ‘Analysis of the effect of seasonal climate
changes on cooling tower efficiency, and strategies for reducing cooling tower power consumption’,
Applied Thermal Engineering, 161, p. 114148. doi: 10.1016/j.applthermaleng.2019.114148.
Poppe, M. and H Rögener - (1991) Berechnung von rückkühlwerken, Springer Berlin.
Pozzobon, J. C., Mantelli, M. B. H. and Da Silva, A. K. (2016) ‘Experimental study of unstructured

porous media inserts for water recovery in a reduced scale, crossflow cooling tower’, Applied Thermal
Engineering, 96, pp. 632–639. doi: 10.1016/j.applthermaleng.2015.11.039.
Qi, X., Liu, Y., Guo, Q., Yu, J. and Yu, S. (2016) ‘Performance prediction of seawater shower cooling
towers’, Energy, 97, pp. 435–443. doi: 10.1016/j.energy.2015.12.125.
Qi, X. and Liu, Z. (2008) ‘Further investigation on the performance of a shower cooling tower’, Energy
Conversion and Management, 49, pp. 570–577. doi: 10.1016/j.enconman.2007.07.038.
Rahmani, K. (2017) ‘Reducing water consumption by increasing the cycles of concentration and
Considerations of corrosion and scaling in a cooling system’, Applied Thermal Engineering. Pergamon,
114, pp. 849–856. doi: 10.1016/J.APPLTHERMALENG.2016.12.075.
Rao, R. V and Patel, V. K. (2011) ‘Optimization of mechanical draft counter flow wet-cooling tower
using artificial bee colony algorithm’, Energy Conversion and Management, 52, pp. 2611–2622 Contents.
doi: 10.1016/j.enconman.2011.02.010.
RD Mitchell (1989) Survey of water-conserving heat rejection systems. Available at:

https://www.osti.gov/biblio/6183566.
Ren, C. (2006) ‘An Analytical Approach to the Heat and Mass Transfer Processes in Counterflow
Cooling Towers’, J. Heat Transfer, 128(11), pp. 1142–1148. doi: 10.1115/1.2352780.
Ren, C. Q. (2008) ‘Corrections to the simple effectiveness-NTU method for counterflow cooling towers
and packed bed liquid desiccant-air contact systems’, International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer.
Pergamon, 51(1–2), pp. 237–245. doi: 10.1016/j.ijheatmasstransfer.2007.04.028.
Rezaei, E., Shafiei, S. and Abdollahnezhad, A. (2010) ‘Reducing water consumption of an industrial plant
38
cooling unit using hybrid cooling tower’, Energy Conversion and Management, 51(2), pp. 311–319. doi:
10.1016/j.enconman.2009.09.027.
Rubio-Castro, E., Serna-González, M., Ponce-Ortega, J. M. and Morales-Cabrera, M. A. (2011)

‘Optimization of mechanical draft counter flow wet-cooling towers using a rigorous model’, Applied
Thermal Engineering, 31(16), pp. 3615–3628. doi: 10.1016/j.applthermaleng.2011.07.029.
Sanders, K. T. (2015) ‘Critical Review: Uncharted Waters? The Future of the Electricity-Water Nexus’,
Environ. Sci. Technol, 49, pp. 51–66. doi: 10.1021/es504293b.
Sarker, M. M. A., Shim, G. J., Lee, H. S., Moon, C. G. and Yoon, J. I. (2009) ‘Enhancement of cooling
capacity in a hybrid closed circuit cooling tower’, Applied Thermal Engineering. Pergamon, 29(16), pp.
3328–3333. doi: 10.1016/j.applthermaleng.2009.05.012.
Scanlon, B. R., Reedy, R. C., Duncan, I., Mullican, W. F. and Young, M. (2013) ‘Controls on water use
for thermoelectric generation: Case study Texas, U.S.’, Environmental Science and Technology.
American Chemical Society, 47(19), pp. 11326–11334. doi: 10.1021/es4029183.
Schlei-Peters, I., Wichmann, M. G., Matthes, I.-G., Gundlach, F.-W. and Spengler, T. S. (2018)
‘Integrated Material Flow Analysis and Process Modeling to Increase Energy and Water Efficiency of
Industrial Cooling Water Systems’, Journal of Industrial Ecology, 22(1), pp. 41–54. doi:
10.1111/jiec.12540.
Sesma Martín, D. and Rubio-Varas, M. del M. (2017) ‘Freshwater for Cooling Needs: A Long-Run
Approach to the Nuclear Water Footprint in Spain’, Ecological Economics. Elsevier B.V., 140, pp. 146–
156. doi: 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2017.04.032.
Sharqawy, M. H., Al-Shalawi, I., Antar, M. A. and Zubair, S. M. (2017) ‘Experimental investigation of
packed-bed cross-flow humidifier’, Applied Thermal Engineering, 117, pp. 584–590. doi:
Sharqawy, M. H., Lienhard V, J. H. and Zubair, S. M. (2011) ‘On thermal performance of seawater
cooling towers’, Journal of Engineering for Gas Turbines and Power. American Society of Mechanical
Engineers Digital Collection, 133(4). doi: 10.1115/1.4002159.
Shuster, E. (2007) Estimating freshwater needs to meet future thermoelectric generation requirements.
2007 update. National Energy Technology Laboratory,.
Singh, K. and Das, R. (2016a) ‘An experimental and multi-objective optimization study of a forced draft
cooling tower with different fills’, Energy Conversion and Management, 111, pp. 417–430. doi:
39
10.1016/j.enconman.2015.12.080.
Singh, K. and Das, R. (2016b) ‘An experimental and multi-objective optimization study of a forced draft
cooling tower with different fills’, Energy Conversion and Management. Pergamon, 111, pp. 417–430.
doi: 10.1016/J.ENCONMAN.2015.12.080.
Singh, K. and Das, R. (2017) ‘Simultaneous optimization of performance parameters and energy
consumption in induced draft cooling towers’, Chemical Engineering Research and Design, 123, pp. 1–
13. doi: 10.1016/j.cherd.2017.04.031.
Singla, R. K., Singh, K. and Das, R. (2016) ‘Tower characteristics correlation and parameter retrieval in
wet-cooling tower with expanded wire mesh packing’, Applied Thermal Engineering, 96, pp. 240–249.
doi: 10.1016/j.applthermaleng.2015.11.063.
Smrekar, J., Kuštrin, I. and Oman, J. (2011) ‘Methodology for evaluation of cooling tower performance
â€“ Part 1: Description of the methodology’, Energy Conversion and Management, 52, pp. 3257–3264
Contents. doi: 10.1016/j.enconman.2011.05.005.
Smrekar, J., Oman, J. and Širok, B. (2006) ‘Improving the efficiency of natural draft cooling towers’,
Energy Conversion and Management. Pergamon, 47(9–10), pp. 1086–1100. doi:
10.1016/J.ENCONMAN.2005.07.012.
Söylemez, M. S. (2004) ‘On the optimum performance of forced draft counter flow cooling towers’,
Energy Conversion and Management. Pergamon, 45(15–16), pp. 2335–2341. doi:
10.1016/j.enconman.2003.11.023.
Stahl, E., Ziemann, S., Galliher, W., Wiebe, P., Gauley, B. and Williams, A. (2015) Final Literature
Review on Best Practices of Water Conservation & Efficiency , guelph.ca. Guelph. Available at:
https://guelph.ca/wp-content/uploads/WESU_Draft_Final_AppendixF_TechnicalResearch.pdf#page=48
(Accessed: 24 February 2021).
Streng, A. (1998) ‘Combined Wet/Dry Cooling Towers of Cell-Type Construction’, Journal of Energy
Engineering, 124(3), pp. 104–121. doi: 10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9402(1998)124:3(104).
Suppes, G. and Truman, S. (2007) ‘Production of Electricity’, in Sustainable Nuclear Power. Elsevier,
pp. 185–200. doi: 10.1016/b978-012370602-7/50024-7.
Sutherland, J. (1983) ‘Analysis of mechanical-draught counterflow air/water cooling towers’, J. Heat

Transfer, 105(3), pp. 576–583. doi: 10.1115/1.3245624.
40
Taghian Dehaghani, S. and Ahmadikia, H. (2017) ‘Retrofit of a wet cooling tower in order to reduce
water and fan power consumption using a wet/dry approach’, Applied Thermal Engineering. Pergamon,
125, pp. 1002–1014. doi: 10.1016/J.APPLTHERMALENG.2017.07.069.
Tyagi, S. K., Pandey, A. K., Pant, P. C. and Tyagi, V. V. (2012) ‘Formation, potential and abatement of
plume from wet cooling towers: A review’, Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 16(5), pp. 3409–
3429. doi: 10.1016/j.rser.2012.01.059.
Tyagi, S. K., Wang, S. and Ma, Z. (2007) ‘Prediction, potential and control of plume from wet cooling
tower of commercial buildings in Hong Kong: A case study’, International Journal of Energy Research,
31(8), pp. 778–795. doi: 10.1002/er.1269.
Tyagi, S. K., Wang, S., Park, S. R., Sharma, A. and Kong, H. (2008) ‘Economic considerations and cost
comparisons between the heat pumps and solar collectors for the application of plume control from wet
cooling towers of commercial buildings’, Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 12, pp. 2194–
2210. doi: 10.1016/j.rser.2007.03.012.
Uzgoren, E. and Timur, E. (2015) ‘A methodology to assess suitability of a site for small scale wet and
dry CSP systems’, International Journal of Energy Research, 39(8), pp. 1094–1108. doi:
10.1002/er.3314.
Wang, J.-G., Shieh, S.-S., Jang, S.-S. and Wu, C.-W. (2013) ‘Discrete model-based operation of cooling
tower based on statistical analysis’. doi: 10.1016/j.enconman.2013.04.025.
Wang, Y., Wang, L., Huang, Q. and Cui, Y. (2015) ‘Experimental and theoretical investigation of cross-
flow heat transfer equipment for air energy high efficient utilization A Combined Experimental and
Theoretical Investigation for Cross-flow Heat-collecting Equipment’, Applied Thermal Engineering
journal, 98, pp. 1231–1240. doi: 10.1016/j.applthermaleng.2015.12.129.
Wei, H., Du, X., Yang, L. and Yang, Y. (2017) ‘Entransy dissipation based optimization of a large-scale
dry cooling system’, Applied Thermal Engineering, 125, pp. 254–265. doi:
Wei, H., Huang, X., Chen, L., Yang, L. and Du, X. (2020) ‘Performance prediction and cost-effectiveness
analysis of a novel natural draft hybrid cooling system for power plants’, Applied Energy journal, 262.
doi: 10.1016/j.apenergy.2020.114555.
Williamson, N., Behnia, M. and Armfield, S. (2008) ‘Comparison of a 2D axisymmetric CFD model of a
natural draft wet cooling tower and a 1D model’, International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer, 51,
41
pp. 2227–2236. doi: 10.1016/j.ijheatmasstransfer.2007.11.008.
Xu, X., Wang, S. and Ma, Z. (2008) ‘Evaluation of plume potential and plume abatement of evaporative
cooling towers in a subtropical region’, Applied Thermal Engineering, 28, pp. 1471–1484. doi:
Xu, Y.-J., Zhang, S.-J., Chi, J.-L. and Xiao, Y.-H. (2015) ‘Steady-state off-design thermodynamic
performance analysis of a SCCP system’, Applied Thermal Engineering, 90, pp. 221–231. doi:
Xuan, Y. M., Xiao, F., Niu, X. F., Huang, X. and Wang, S. W. (2012) ‘Research and application of
evaporative cooling in China: A review (I) – Research’, Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 16,
pp. 3535–3546. doi: 10.1016/j.rser.2012.01.052.
Yang, Y., Cui, G. and Lan, C. Q. (2019) ‘Developments in evaporative cooling and enhanced evaporative
cooling - A review’, Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 113(June 2016), p. 109230. doi:
10.1016/j.rser.2019.06.037.
Zavaragh, H. G., Ceviz, A. and Shervani Tabar, M. (2016) ‘Analysis of windbreaker combinations on
steam power plant natural draft dry cooling towers’, Applied Thermal Engineering, 99, pp. 550–559. doi:
Zhai, H. and Rubin, E. S. (2010) ‘Performance and cost of wet and dry cooling systems for pulverized
coal power plants with and without carbon capture and storage’, Energy Policy, 38(10), pp. 5653–5660.
doi: 10.1016/j.enpol.2010.05.013.
Zhai, H., Rubin, E. S. and Versteeg, P. L. (2011) ‘Water use at pulverized coal power plants with
postcombustion carbon capture and storage’, Environmental Science and Technology, 45(6), pp. 2479–
2485. doi: 10.1021/es1034443.
Zhou, Y., Zhu, X. and Ding, X. (2017) ‘Theoretical investigation on thermal performance of new
structure closed wet cooling tower’, Heat Transfer Engineering, 39(5), pp. 1–11. doi:
10.1080/01457632.2017.1312899.
42

Advancing Water Conservation in Cooling Towers Through No

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Advancing Water Conservation in Cooling Towers Through No

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Advancing Water Conservation in Cooling Towers Through No

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Advancing Water Conservation in Cooling Towers through

2. Cooling Tower Types

Cooling system Water Water Capital cost Ecological

2.1. Wet Cooling Towers:

• Saving energy and costs,

• Dissipate less heat in the cooling process,

2.3. Hybrid Cooling Towers:

3. Modeling Studies on Cooling Towers

𝑑𝑖𝑚𝑎 ℎ𝑑 𝑎𝑓𝑖 𝐴𝑓𝑟 (1)

𝑑𝑇𝑤 𝑚𝑎 1 𝑑𝑖𝑚𝑎 (2)

ℎ𝑑 𝑎𝑓𝑖 𝐴𝑓𝑟 𝑑𝑧 𝑇𝑤,𝑖𝑛 𝑐𝑝𝑤 𝑑𝑇𝑤 (3)

Figure 5: -Air volume control in the filling section

3.2. The Poppe Model

Merkel model has some simplifying assumptions such as:

𝑑𝑖𝑚𝑎 𝑚𝑤 𝑐𝑝𝑤 𝑐𝑝𝑤 𝑇𝑤 (𝑤𝑠𝑤 −𝑤)

𝑑𝑀𝑒𝑃 𝑐𝑝𝑤 (7)

𝑑𝑖𝑚𝑎 𝑚𝑤 𝑐𝑝𝑤 𝑇𝑤 (𝑤𝑠𝑤 − 𝑤𝑠𝑎 )

𝑑𝑀𝑒𝑃 𝑐𝑝𝑤 (11)

𝑄 𝑚𝑤 𝑐𝑝𝑤 (𝑇𝑤,𝑖𝑛 − 𝑇𝑤,𝑜𝑢𝑡 ) (15)

𝑓 = (𝑖𝑚𝑎𝑠𝑤,𝑜𝑢𝑡 +𝑖𝑚𝑎𝑠𝑤,𝑖𝑛 − 2𝑖𝑚𝑎𝑠𝑤,𝑚 )/4 (16)

𝑀𝑒𝑒 = 𝑚𝑎 𝑁𝑇𝑈/𝑚𝑤 (19)

as the following categories:

5.1. Water Focus

5.2. Cooling Towers Modifications

5.3. Optimization Approach

Figure 7: Different heat exchangers network configurations (Panjeshahi et al., 2009)

Improving Improving the Heat

Reducing Energy Optimization

Figure 8: Research map for enhancing sustainability of cooling towers

Jes´, J., Ortiz-Del-Castillo, J. R., Hernándezhern´hernández-Calderón, O. M., Calderón, C., Rios-Iribe, E.

Llano-Restrepo, M. and Monsalve-Reyes, R. (2016) ‘Modeling and simulation of counterflow wet-

Muangnoi, T., Asvapoositkul, W. and Hungspreugs, P. (2014) ‘Performance characteristics of a

Poppe, M. and H Rögener - (1991) Berechnung von rückkühlwerken, Springer Berlin.

Pozzobon, J. C., Mantelli, M. B. H. and Da Silva, A. K. (2016) ‘Experimental study of unstructured

RD Mitchell (1989) Survey of water-conserving heat rejection systems. Available at:

Rubio-Castro, E., Serna-González, M., Ponce-Ortega, J. M. and Morales-Cabrera, M. A. (2011)

Sutherland, J. (1983) ‘Analysis of mechanical-draught counterflow air/water cooling towers’, J. Heat

You might also like