Secure Supplies Has Several Chp and Intake Cooling Systems which can add 10 to 20%  more Efficiency.
the inlet air dry bulb temperature is usually kept 5 F (3 C) or more above wet bulb temperature. If an ambient air dry bulb temperature of 80 F (27 C) and 30 percent relative humidity is assumed, reference to a psychrometric chart shows that the turbine inlet air dry bulb temperature could be safely reduced
to 6 5 F (18 C) with evaporative cooling.

As shown in Fig. 2, the industrial gas turbine full load heat rate at 8o F (27 C) might be 7650 Btu/hphr (10.82 GJ/kwhr), but at 65 F (18 C), the full load heat rate is 7470 Btu/hphr 10.56 GJ/kwhr), or approximately 2.4 percent better. For rough estimating purposes, assume that the ambient temperature was 80 F (27 C) for 3000 hr per year and the relative humidity was 30 percent for the same period. Further assume that during this period, the gas turbine was operating at its full-load capability of 13,337
hp (9949 kw). By using the evaporative cooler for this period, and assuming a fuel cost of
$2.00 per million Btu ($1.89/GJ), the annual fuel savings would be approximately $14,400/year. It
must be understood that even for these exact conditions, this is an approximation When the evaporative cooler is operating and the gas turbine could, therefore, produce more power than 13,337
hp, the fuel rates given by Fig. 2 must be adjusted slightly (possibly an improvement as will
be discussed later .

Again, by use of a psychrometric chart and gas turbine air flow data, and for the aforementioned assumed conditions, the evaporative cooler water consumption is calculated to be 2.78 gal (10,52 1) of water per minute. If the annual cost of this water supply is $2.00 per thousand gallons ($0.52 per thousand liters), then the annual water costs are $1000 per year. The net savings would then be $13,400/year. If the
installed cost of the evaporative cooler were $50,000, the gross payout would be 3.73 years.
In addition, credit could be taken for the additional available power.

EGR OPTIMUM REGENERATIVE EFFECTIVENESS

In searching for ways to reduce fuel consumption, the question often arises as to whether more energy can be recovered from the exhaust of a gas turbine. For many years, a heat exchanger called a regenerator has been used with industrial gas turbines for this purpose. As shown in Fig. 3, the regenerator captures heat from the gas turbine exhaust and transfers this heat to the compressed air entering the combustion chamber. Regenerator effectiveness is a measure of how much gas turbine exhaust heat is recovered. For many years, regenerators with an effectiveness of approximately 81 percent have been used with gas turbines. To increase the effectiveness and thereby use more of the
exhaust heat, more heat exchange surface must be built into the regenerator.

​

an estimate of how gas turbin efficiency and regenerator cost varies with regenerator effectiveness. Note that when effectiveness is increased from 81 to 85 percent, the regenerator heat exchanging surface must increase by approximately 50 percent, and this additional regenerator surface costs approximately $150,000.

Using this data, and assuming a 13,750-hp (10.26-kw) gas turbine operating at full load at
ISO conditions for 8500 hr/year, Fig. 5 demonstrates the  optimum regenerator effectiveness
for different fuel costs.