## 4 Discussion and Results
### Parametric Studies Results
As the input temperature of the HPST rises, the mass flow rate of CO2 at the exhaust remains constant. However, there is a slight reduction in CO2 emissions for the whole system, which is connected to the rise in the overall \(\dot{W}_{net}\) of the cycle as T1 increases. The carbon footprint rises when the HPST intake temperature falls, going from 326.3 kg CO2/MWh at 813 K to 334.7 kg CO2/MWh at 723 K.  
The effect of changing the HPST inlet pressure P1 on using the developed system, environmental impact, and cost are shown in Figure 8. The power output of the RC is directly proportional to both the mass flow rate of steam and the reduction in enthalpy across the turbine. Increasing the inlet pressures of the HPST, particularly when combined with elevated temperatures, increases the steam's specific enthalpy. This enhancement facilitates a more effective energy conversion during the expansion phase. Consequently, this typically caused increased power output and enhanced overall efficiencies of the developed system. The results indicate that the network output progressively increases with pressure, starting at 234.6 MW at 60 bar and peaking at 246.2 MW at 150 bar. Thermal efficiency rises from 58.71% to 61.63% as P1 increases, while exergy efficiency increases from 56.7% at 60 bar to 59.51% at 150 bar. These results demonstrate that more significant pressures improve the system's energy conversion efficiency, suggesting that it converts energy into usable work more efficiently. The findings also show that raising the HPST inlet pressure enhances the performance of the system's economic and environmental effects. The results show that the HPST inlet pressure boosts efficiency and lowers energy costs. Rising pressure P lowers the energy cost from 74.56 USD /MWh to 67.6 USD /MWh at 150 bar. Increasing the HPST intake pressure reduces the carbon footprint, demonstrating the environmental benefits of better efficiency. These changes increase performance and decrease CO2 emissions per unit of energy from 336 kg CO2/MWh at 60 bar to 320.1 kg CO2/MWh at 150 bar. Figure 9 shows the effect of the condenser temperature T8 on the developed system's performance, environmental effects, and cost indicators. Lowering the temperature of the condenser in a vapor power plant improves both power generation and overall system efficiency. Reduced temperatures result in a drop in turbine back pressure, enabling steam to expand farther. Consequently, this improves the means of changing heat energy into mechanical energy. Furthermore, the condensation process decreases entropy generation due to the increased heat release and higher density of steam. As a result, the exhaust temperature of the steam that exits the turbine is lower, which increases the variation in  
Figure 7: The influence of the HPST inlet temperature T1 on the developed system’s performance, environment, and cost. temperature between the heat input in the boiler and the heat output in the condenser, thus increasing thermodynamic efficiency. The findings indicate that the power output exhibits an overall drop with increasing condenser temperature, implying that the system's capacity to work diminishes at higher condenser temperatures. The output power declines from 241.6 MW at 40 \({}^{\circ}\)C to 224.1 MW at 80 \({}^{\circ}\)C. As the condenser temperature rises, both the thermal and exergy efficiency decline. The thermal efficiency decreases from 60.47% at 40 \({}^{\circ}\)C to 56.1% at 80 \({}^{\circ}\)C. The exergy efficiency consistently follows a pattern of decline, decreasing from 58.39% to 54.17% over the given temperature range. The decrease in efficiency indicates that the system's capacity to transform heat into productive work decreases with higher condenser temperatures. The results also suggest that raising the condenser temperature has a contrary effect on both energy expenditure and carbon emissions.