Professor helping academics & researchers publish and build careers that make an impact beyond academia without sacrificing research time | Research Career Club Founder | LinkedIn & Paper Writing Training
Middlesbrough, England, United Kingdom
59K followers
500+ connections
About
You've done the hard part. You've put in the research hours. The papers are coming, slowly, but coming. The grant applications are submitted. The supervision duties are managed, just about.
But somehow none of it feels like enough.
You're invisible outside your own department. Citations are lower than you hoped. The career trajectory feels less certain than when you started. And nobody at your institution ever sat you down and explained how an academic career actually gets built.
That's not a personal failure. It's a gap in the system.
I'm Dawid. I'm a Professor of Decarbonisation at Teesside University and a research-active academic with 75+ peer-reviewed publications and £9 million in funded projects. I still run simulations, write papers, and supervise PhDs.
For the past six years, I have also been helping researchers do the same — and more.
It started with a hard lesson. My first published paper felt like the biggest achievement of my career. Until I realised almost nobody read it. No citations. No speaking invitations. No meaningful impact.
The moment I started talking about my work, everything changed. Collaborations, funding, and meaningful research impact followed.
So many researchers stay invisible, not because their work isn't good, but because nobody knows it exists.
That is why I founded Motivated Academic and built the Research Career Club.
WHAT I DO
I work with PhDs, early-career researchers, and mid-career academics through the Research Career Club: a community built on practical training, live coaching, and frameworks you can apply in a working academic schedule.
We cover:
→ Paper writing and publishing
→ Building an academic profile and visibility without becoming a content creator
→ Research planning and productivity, protecting output without burning out
I also deliver bespoke training programmes directly to universities and research institutes.
WHAT OTHERS SAY
"Dr Hanak has been my PhD supervisor for the last two years. Following his approach to structure my writing makes this genuinely hard task easier." — Monica, PhD student, Cranfield University
"He helped me with informative feedback from brainstorming and mind-mapping to paragraphing and revising. He teaches you to fish instead of giving you a fish." — Navid, Research Assistant, University of Manchester
HOW TO GET STARTED
→ Free Community: Join 650+ researchers in the Research Career Club — free tier always open
→ Inner Circle: live coaching + courses + templates
→ University training or speaking enquiries: contact@drhanak.com
Services
Articles by Dawid
Activity
59K followers
-
Dawid Hanak shared thisThis year, I helped 3 working academics land their first Q1 paper. (After 2+ years of rejections on the same manuscripts.) All they had to do was follow the 3-step protocol I've been using myself, and when coaching other researchers for a decade (it never fails). For context, most of them had full teaching loads, young kids, and zero "protected" writing time. Many of them were stuck in revision hell with R&R letters that kept getting returned. This is the protocol (Save and ♻️ repost for later) 1. Block TWO 90-minute writing slots per week. Same day, same time, phone off. Not daily writing. Protect time to make progress in your writing. 2. Stop rewriting and editing each section as you write. Write very rough draft first, correct it later. Done is better than perfect, and it actually takes much less time. 3. Find ONE person who asks you every week: "what's the smallest thing you can finish in the next 7 days?" Not a life coach. An accountable peer. 3 is my favourite. It breaks more stuck papers than the first two combined. I applied all 3 in my own PhD and every paper since. You CAN still publish. And you WILL. You just need the right support. I challenge you to book your 90-minute block before April ends. PS: I opened my Inner Circle TODAY. Weekly live coaching with me, a classroom with paper writing resources, and templates. 30 founding seats at a reduced rate, first-come, first-served. Grab your seat: https://lnkd.in/e4CM4ATr #Scientist #Science #EarlyCareerResearcher #MotivatedAcademic #PhD #Postdoc #Professor #Publishing
-
Dawid Hanak reposted this5 steps that cut the time I spend on responses to reviewers for my academic journal submissions from 3 weeks to 4 days. (Steps 4 and 5 are the ones nobody teaches.) Most researchers treat "major revisions" as a near-rejection. It isn't. It is an invitation to publish, with conditions. Here are the rules I use, and now teach my PhDs and postdocs. 1) Triage before you feel Open the decision letter and make three columns: factual errors to fix, reframing the reviewer wants, and objections you will push back on. No emotion on this pass. 2) Write a one-line summary of each reviewer "R1: wants a broader intro, sceptical of the sample size. R2: accepts the contribution, wants tighter results. R3: silent on methods, has issues with our writing." Knowing who each reviewer is before you write the response saves you from arguing with the wrong one. 3) Answer in their order, not yours Reviewers reread their own comments. If your response letter jumps around, they scan for their point and get annoyed when they can't find it. Mirror the structure of the original report. 4) Quote, then respond Paste each reviewer comment verbatim in a different colour or italics. Respond underneath. As journals are short of good reviewers, such an approach will lower their cognitive load, and they can approve your work in a single pass. 5) Thank, then push back When you disagree, open with one sentence that names the merit of the reviewer's point, and then lay out your counter-evidence. Never use flat "no". Use a specific "I hear the concern, and here is why the data point the other way". One paper. Cleaner response letter. Faster turnaround. Save this for your next major revisions letter. #Publishing #PeerReview #Academic #Scientist #PhD #Professor #Postdoc #Postgraduate #MotivatedAcademic
-
Dawid Hanak shared thisI'm going to show you exactly how I grew my LinkedIn from 2,000 followers to 60,000+ as a working professor. Three moves. No paid ads. No "growth hacks". Most academics refuse to make them. Socialinsider's 2026 benchmarks show only about 3% of LinkedIn members post more than once per week. That tiny fraction regularly shows in your feed. If you are an academic, that is your opportunity. The hard part is that the three moves feel uncomfortable, which is why most researchers skip them. Move 1. Swap the "institution first" headline for a reader-first one. Most academic headlines read: "Professor of X, University of Y". That tells the reader about you. Change it to what the reader gets: "Professor helping academics & researchers publish and build careers that make an impact beyond academia without sacrificing research time." Reader first, credential second. A small grammatical flip, a large change in profile-click conversion. Move 2. Post one thought, not one essay. The academic instinct is to write the full paper. LinkedIn rewards the opposite. Pick one observation you would make at the coffee machine if a colleague asked you about your week. Write it in short lines. One idea per post. Ship it. Repeat. LinkedIn's own data says weekly posting can increase profile views by 4x and double the follower count. That is not marketing-speak; it is feed mechanics: consistency trains the algorithm to surface you. Move 3. Reply to the first 10 comments within the first hour. This is the move most academics genuinely hate. It feels like "feeding the algorithm". It is. And refusing to do it is why good academic content dies in the feed. A 30-minute window of engaged replies in the hour after posting is worth more to reach than the next post you write. Your reward: new readers who feel seen, who come back, who convert to newsletter, community, workshops. Those three moves, in that order. That is the whole walkthrough. __ Enjoy this? ♻️ Repost it to your network and follow Dawid Hanak for more. Want to publish and build an expert profile without sacrificing research time or feeling burned out? DM me and I'll give you access to my community. #research #science #scientist #phd #professor #communication #researcher
-
Dawid Hanak posted thisHere is what almost nobody tells non-native English academics about desk rejections. (It is almost never about your science. And the 4 edits that turn it around have nothing to do with grammar.) I remember one of my PhD students submitted their paper, and only a few days later, it was desk-rejected. Ten weeks later, same paper, same journal, accepted. Her English was careful. Her methods were clean. She was not a native speaker, and she was terrified of that showing. The desk-rejection letter came with one sentence: "Writing quality below threshold." Stanford's AI group confirmed last year what many of us already knew. Bias against non-native English authors has not gone away in the AI tools era. In some ways, it has worsened because reviewers read "native-like" English as a quality signal and flag everything else. AI detectors make it harder, not easier, because they flag non-native writing as AI-generated at higher rates than native writing. Here is what we did, in the order we did it. 1st edit: we shortened the abstract to 8-10 sentences. Every word a reviewer sees in the first 40 seconds is load-bearing. 2nd edit: we front-loaded the contribution sentence. "This study shows X. We did Y. We find Z." We avoided unnecessary "It has been noticed that..." scaffolding. 3rd edit: we removed every sentence that began with a participle phrase. ("Having considered the literature...") Those phrases read as translated, not ungrammatical, to native reviewers. 4th edit: we named the limitation of the study before the reviewer did so. Just one paragraph that explained what was not considered in our study and why. No science was changed. The paper was essentially the same paper. The bias is real. But the good thing is that the craft of working around it is learnable. If this sounds like your drafts, what did you do to improve your writing? P.S. On 29th April 2026, I’m hosting a Professional Development session on Responsible AI policies in the classroom and would love it if you could join me for a conversation about navigating the evolving AI landscape. We’ll briefly cover AI detection, what other educators are doing, and media literacy in the age of AI. Let me know if you want in. #science #scientist #publishing #ai #research #phd #professor #postgradaute #researcher
-
Dawid Hanak posted this5 steps that cut the time I spend on responses to reviewers for my academic journal submissions from 3 weeks to 4 days. (Steps 4 and 5 are the ones nobody teaches.) Most researchers treat "major revisions" as a near-rejection. It isn't. It is an invitation to publish, with conditions. Here are the rules I use, and now teach my PhDs and postdocs. 1) Triage before you feel Open the decision letter and make three columns: factual errors to fix, reframing the reviewer wants, and objections you will push back on. No emotion on this pass. 2) Write a one-line summary of each reviewer "R1: wants a broader intro, sceptical of the sample size. R2: accepts the contribution, wants tighter results. R3: silent on methods, has issues with our writing." Knowing who each reviewer is before you write the response saves you from arguing with the wrong one. 3) Answer in their order, not yours Reviewers reread their own comments. If your response letter jumps around, they scan for their point and get annoyed when they can't find it. Mirror the structure of the original report. 4) Quote, then respond Paste each reviewer comment verbatim in a different colour or italics. Respond underneath. As journals are short of good reviewers, such an approach will lower their cognitive load, and they can approve your work in a single pass. 5) Thank, then push back When you disagree, open with one sentence that names the merit of the reviewer's point, and then lay out your counter-evidence. Never use flat "no". Use a specific "I hear the concern, and here is why the data point the other way". One paper. Cleaner response letter. Faster turnaround. Save this for your next major revisions letter. #Publishing #PeerReview #Academic #Scientist #PhD #Professor #Postdoc #Postgraduate #MotivatedAcademic
-
Dawid Hanak shared thisAfter ten years of coaching working academics, here is what almost nobody tells you about "write every day". For most of us, it produces fewer papers, not more. I used to teach the daily-writing rule. I stopped about 4 years ago. Here is the pattern I kept seeing, across my own calendar and the PhDs I supervise. You sit down at 08:30 with good intentions. By 08:45, you are 3 tabs deep in a new citation rabbit hole. By 09:10, the email you meant to reply to in one minute has eaten the block. By 09:30, you close the laptop, annoyed, and promise yourself a longer session tomorrow. Seven days of that, and your word count is a rounding error. The mistake isn't discipline. It's the shape of the commitment. Daily writing asks a working academic to context-switch into a slow cognitive mode every single workday. With teaching, supervision, admin, committee work, the switching cost eats the block before it earns a page. That is not laziness. It is the physics of attention. What I now recommend, and what works for most of the researchers I coach: 1. 2 protected blocks per week, 90 minutes each, phone off, door shut, no other meetings, same days every week. 2. Single warm-up ritual, reread yesterday's last paragraph and write one sentence of scaffolding, so the writing process starts in 4 minutes, not 40. 3. A finishing line, not a clock, so momentum carries past the block ("when this section ends", not "when the hour ends"). Faculty burnout in 2026 is not a motivation problem. It is a calendar-design problem. Two good blocks a week will beat seven broken ones. What shape does your writing actually have in a normal week? Daily 20-minute starts that don't stick, or longer protected blocks? I reply to every comment in the mornings. #Academia #PhD #Researcher #Scientist #Professor #Burnout #Writing #Publishing
-
Dawid Hanak shared thisRecently, I ran a scientific writing and publication session for the faculty development programme at Woxsen University. It was one of those sessions where the energy in the room tells you the topic hits a real nerve. We covered three stages of building a strong publication: 1. Pre-frame: defining what you are actually contributing to the body of knowledge before you write a single word 2. Frame: structuring the paper content so the novelty is visible, not buried, as well as ensuring that you only include all necessary information and key messages 3. Verification: stress-testing whether the framing holds up against what reviewers will actually look for, including contirbution to knowledge & logical flow of information I also shared the outline method I use in all my papers. The one thing that has kept my output consistent over the past decade is while delivering other research development & delivery responsibilities. It is not a hack. It is a system built from 80+ papers and many rejected drafts. If your institution runs faculty development programmes and wants a session on academic writing and the publication process — get in touch. I am happy to talk about how I can support academics and researchers at all career stages. More sessions are coming soon through the Research Career Club. What is the single biggest bottleneck in your own publication process right now? #phd #postdoc #science #scientist #research #publishing #professor #academia #postgraduate #researcher #highereducation #writing
-
Dawid Hanak shared thisYesterday I was interviewed by the Korean Broadcasting System (the BBC equivalent) about Teesside's transition to net zero. [This wouldn't be possible if I only published papers!] If you want to accelerate your academic career, try doing these in addition to publishing your research. 1. Seek external engagement: Publishing academic papers is vital, but stepping outside the academic circles will amplify your impact. Collaborating with media outlets and professional bodies can help showcase your expertise and research to a broader audience. 2. Build an expert brand: Visibility is key. Share your insights on various platforms (i.e. conferences, podcasts, or documentaries). This not only enhances your reputation but also helps position you as a thought leader in your field. 3. Engage with the community: Connect with peers and practitioners outside your usual circles. Networking and sharing your research with those who can benefit from it fosters innovation and collaboration. I apply ALL of this to my life and there is not a single day I am not grateful for keeping my focus on the things that are most important. How do you plan to take your research beyond the academic circles? #publishing #science #phd #scientist #professor #postdoc #impact #dissemination #postgraduate #academia #education
-
Dawid Hanak liked thisDawid Hanak liked thisThis week, I made 10 founders go viral on LinkedIn. (500,000+ impressions in in >24hrs) All they had to do is follow my proven 5-step checklist I've been using over the last 2 years (it never fails). For context, most of these founders had <10k followers. Many of them struggled with engagement and lead gen. This is the checklist (Save and ♻️ repost for later) 1. Your first sentence should have a metric or a keyword 1. Go to events. Talk about them using rule 1. Post it. 2. Always use an image or infographic in your posts! 3. Stop writing "How to", try using "How I" Instead. 4. Format your content, use spacing, and listicles. 2 is my favorite, works 10/10 times I've done it. I applied all 5 lessons in this post. Did you notice? You can STILL grow on LinkedIn. And you WILL. You just need the right coach (like me). I challenge you to apply all 5 before April ends! PS: I'm running a 3-Day FREE LinkedIn growth challenge from May 1st to May 3rd! Covering all of this in depth! Join 1,000+ attendees, and RSVP here: https://lnkd.in/ex2EhXMM See you soon, winners 💪
-
Dawid Hanak liked thisDawid Hanak liked thisReally honored that Prof. Ali Cinar got a copy of my Stats for ChemEs book and that I got to sign it for him. I also just found out that Prof. Cinar was a visiting professor at UW-Madison Chemical and Biological Engineering back in 1982. #chemicalengineering
-
Dawid Hanak liked thisAre you interested in how we can decarbonise commercial fleets — and free on Friday 1 May? Why not join Matthew Cotton, Dawid Hanak and me for an interactive workshop to help shape Teesside’s low-carbon future. Teesside University Durham University #REHIPDawid Hanak liked thisHelp shape the future of low-carbon fuels in Teesside 🌱 We’re calling for businesses, industry leaders, policy makers, fleet operators, and NGOs from across Teesside to join us for a collaborative online workshop, bringing together industry, policy and innovation to co-create a roadmap to 2040–2050. Be part of the conversation driving a cleaner, more sustainable region. 📅 1 May ⏱️ 9.30-11am Register now👉 https://lnkd.in/eBhjZAkT
-
Dawid Hanak liked thisDawid Hanak liked thisDecarbonisation is not just a theoretical concept that I research at work. It is also something I have been trying to apply at home. Over the last few years, I have added an air-source heat pump, installed solar PV, and switched to a plug-in hybrid vehicle. On my own property, that now means a 9.4 kWp solar array, 16 kWh battery storage, a Daikin Altherma 3 4 kW heat pump, and a PHEV with a 25 kWh battery (75 mile electric range). Why does that matter? Because it is easy to talk about net zero in reports, models, and strategies. It is much harder, and much more interesting, to make low-carbon choices work in real life, with real costs, real trade-offs, and real operating constraints. That is one reason why I care so much about evidence-based decarbonisation. In my research and consultancy work, I help organisations develop practical pathways to net zero through technology assessment, techno-economic analysis, life cycle assessment, market research, and policy review. But living through some of these decisions personally has made me appreciate even more that decarbonisation is rarely about one perfect technology; it is about making the right combination of choices for a specific context. Before making the investments I had the following questions: - How does the technology perform in the real world? - What does it do to energy bills? - How should systems be integrated? - What are the trade-offs between capital cost, carbon savings, convenience, and resilience? These are the same kinds of questions that matter in homes, campuses, and industrial systems alike. If you'd like the cost breakdown, expected ROI, payback, and savings I've made over the past year, please send me a DM. #netzero #research #decarbonisation #solar #battery #consultancy P.S. More on why PHEV vs EV on another occasion!
Experience
-
Professor of Decarbonization of Industrial Clusters & Lead for TEA/LCA and Feasibility Studies
Net Zero Industry Innovation Centre
-
Founder & Community Lead | Supporting 1000 researchers to become academic thought leaders
Motivated Academic
-
-
-
-
Cranfield University
-
Education
-
-
Cranfield University
Postgraduate Certificate in Academic Practice
-
Activities and Societies: Fellow of Higher Education Academy
-
-
Cranfield University
Master of Science (M.Sc.) Carbon Capture and Transport 1st (84%)
-
MSc Thesis: Investigation of the Energy Savings Opportunities in Post-combustion Capture Process in Supercritical Pulverized Coal Power Plant
-
The Silesian University of Technology
Master of Engineering (M.Eng.) Power Engineering: Clean Coal Technologies A
-
Qualified for ERASMUS Programme at Cranfield University (Carbon Capture and Transport MSc Programme)
-
The Silesian University of Technology
Bachelor fo Engineering (B.Eng.) Sustainable Energy Engineering A with distinction
-
Activities and Societies: Vice-president of Clean Energy Technologies Student Scientific Group
Engineering project titled "Study of a biomass and pulverized coal feeding system for a laboratory pulverized fuel furnace (PFF) with a 40kW swirl burner"
Licenses & Certifications
Skills
Publications
-
Comparison of probabilistic performance of calcium looping and chemical solvent scrubbing retrofits for CO2 capture from coal-fired power plant
Applied Energy / Elsevier
Other authors -
-
Calcium looping with supercritical CO2 cycle for decarbonisation of coal-fired power plant
Energy / Elsevier
Other authors -
-
Calcium looping with inherent energy storage for decarbonisation of coal-fired power plant
Energy and Environmental Science / RSC
Other authors -
-
Modelling and comparison of calcium looping and chemical solvent scrubbing retrofits for CO2 capture from coal-fired power plant
International Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control/Elsevier
Other authors -
-
A review of developments in pilot plant testing and modelling of calcium looping process for CO2 capture from power generation systems
Energy and Environmental Science/Elsevier
Other authors -
-
Efficiency improvements for the coal-fired power plant retrofit with CO2 capture plant using chilled ammonia process
Applied Energy/Elsevier
Development of clean coal technologies for power generation is crucial in meeting the European Union 2050 target to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. CO2 capture technology using chemical solvents currently has the highest potential to decarbonise coal-based power generation. Substitution of amine solvent with NH3 has been proposed as a viable option to reduce the efficiency penalty. In this study, the scenario of a supercritical coal-fired power plant retrofitted with a chilled ammonia process…
Development of clean coal technologies for power generation is crucial in meeting the European Union 2050 target to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. CO2 capture technology using chemical solvents currently has the highest potential to decarbonise coal-based power generation. Substitution of amine solvent with NH3 has been proposed as a viable option to reduce the efficiency penalty. In this study, the scenario of a supercritical coal-fired power plant retrofitted with a chilled ammonia process capture plant and CO2 compression unit was modelled in a common simulation environment. To fully assess the integration impact on power plant performance, the pressure loss due to steam extraction has been taken into account by using the Stodola ellipse law. Analysis of a basic integration scenario revealed that the efficiency penalty fell between 10.4% and 10.9% points depending on the stripper pressure. The quality of extracted steam became insufficient to meet the reboiler heat requirement above a stripper pressure of 21.8 bar, and the lowest efficiency penalty was obtained when reboiler condensate was returned to the deaerator in the power plant. In evaluating measures to improve integration, the efficiency penalty was reduced to 8.7–8.8% points through the integration of a single-stage or two-stage auxiliary steam turbine, respectively, and a back-pressure turbine. Nevertheless, the analysis has indicated that the net impact on power plant performance is similar to that of an amine-based post-combustion CO2 capture plant.
Other authors -
-
Evaluation and modelling of part-load performance of coal-fired power plant with post-combustion CO2 capture
Energy and Fuels/ACS
The share of the fossil-fuel power systems in the European Union energy portfolio has recently increased, even with new environmental incentives aimed at the reduction of CO2 emissions from the power sector. Implementation of carbon capture technologies has been identified as a critical step toward reduction of CO2 emissions. As the power plants usually operate with changing loads to meet the electricity demand, it is important to evaluate the process performance under different operating…
The share of the fossil-fuel power systems in the European Union energy portfolio has recently increased, even with new environmental incentives aimed at the reduction of CO2 emissions from the power sector. Implementation of carbon capture technologies has been identified as a critical step toward reduction of CO2 emissions. As the power plants usually operate with changing loads to meet the electricity demand, it is important to evaluate the process performance under different operating loads. Therefore, this study provides a methodology for modeling of part-load operation of coal-fired power plants in a process simulator, such as Aspen Plus. The part-load power plant model is validated using data from the literature, and it was demonstrated that a maximum discrepancy of 5% was obtained for the live steam pressure prediction at 40% load, while the discrepancy for all other compared parameters at other loads did not exceed 3%. Furthermore, the part-load model is used to evaluate the performance of the retrofitted power plant with the CO2 capture plant at different loads, with monoethanolamine as a solvent, revealing that the net efficiency varied between 28.2%HHV and 21.1%HHV. Moreover, the analysis showed that neglecting the off-design conditions due to steam extraction would result in overestimating the net thermal efficiency by up to 1.3%HHV points at 100% load operation and steam extracted at 11.9 bar.
Other authors -
-
Rate-based model development, validation and analysis of chilled ammonia process as an alternative CO2 capture technology for coal-fired power plants
International Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control/Elsevier
Highlights:
• Alternative chemical solvents are necessary to reduce the efficiency penalty.
• Closed-loop rate-based model for chilled ammonia process was developed.
• Two absorbers and one stripper were needed to decarbonise 580 MWel coal-fired power plant.
• Lean loading and ammonia concentration had a major impact on process performance.
• The optimal equivalent work was found at moderate stripper pressures.Other authors -
-
Probabilistic performance assessment of a coal-fired power plant
Applied Energy/Elsevier
Highlights
- Power plant equipment is usually oversized to account for input uncertainties.
- Oversized equipment degrades its rated efficiency and increases capital cost.
- A stochastic methodology to assess probabilities of equipment failure was proposed.
- The methodology was proven applicable for design and analysis of the power plants.
- Estimated high reliability indices allow reducing power plant equipment oversizing.Other authors -
-
Heat integration and exergy analysis for a supercritical high-ash coal-fired power plant integrated with a post-combustion carbon capture process
Fuel/Elsevier
The International Energy Agency (IEA) has recommended eliminating at least 80% of the CO2 emission from the power sector by 2050 as a response to climate change. Meeting this target is expected to be challenging since a lion’s share of the power generation is based upon coal combustion. A cost effective strategy to decarbonise the power sector would require carbon capture and storage, largely through a post-combustion capture (PCC). In this study, a model of the supercritical coal-fired power…
The International Energy Agency (IEA) has recommended eliminating at least 80% of the CO2 emission from the power sector by 2050 as a response to climate change. Meeting this target is expected to be challenging since a lion’s share of the power generation is based upon coal combustion. A cost effective strategy to decarbonise the power sector would require carbon capture and storage, largely through a post-combustion capture (PCC). In this study, a model of the supercritical coal-fired power plant (CFPP) fed with a high-ash coal was developed and validated, a validated model of a PCC pilot plant using monoethanolamine (MEA) solvent is scaled-up to meet the CFPP capacity, a CO2 compression unit model was developed to fully assess the energy penalty, and the three models were integrated for a 90% capture level. This required determination of the PCC steam requirement and identification of the optimal condensate return location. The performance of the integrated models was compared with the reference CFPP model (with a net efficiency of 39.1%), and the energy penalty was estimated to cause a 25% fall in the CFPP power output. Then, energy saving opportunities were investigated through the heat exchanger network (HEN) analysis. Several HEN designs were analysed, revealing that heat can be recovered from the flue gas leaving the CFPP, and used to heat up boiler feedwater to enhance the plant efficiency. Such a configuration resulted in reduction of energy penalty by 4.15%, improving the performance of the integrated plant. Finally, it is inferred from the exergy analysis that further energy savings can be achieved by reducing the exergy destruction in the PCC.
Other authors -
Projects
-
Clean heat, power, and hydrogen from biomass and waste
-
The decarbonisation of the power, heat and industrial sectors is critical to meeting the Paris Agreement targets that suggested keeping the global mean temperature below 2oC and undertaking efforts to limit it to 1.5oC above pre-industrial. The power sector can be decarbonised via the deployment of carbon capture and storage (CCS) and renewable energy sources, fuel switching from fossil fuels to biomass and hydrogen, as well as implementation of high-efficiency power generation technologies…
The decarbonisation of the power, heat and industrial sectors is critical to meeting the Paris Agreement targets that suggested keeping the global mean temperature below 2oC and undertaking efforts to limit it to 1.5oC above pre-industrial. The power sector can be decarbonised via the deployment of carbon capture and storage (CCS) and renewable energy sources, fuel switching from fossil fuels to biomass and hydrogen, as well as implementation of high-efficiency power generation technologies, such as fuel cells. In addition, biomass and hydrogen have been identified as plausible replacements for fossil fuels to fire industrial processes, in which CO2 emissions stem from both fossil fuel combustion and the process itself, and district heating systems. Finally, application of CCS is expected to be the only route to decarbonise the waste incinerators that utilise the municipal solid wastes to produce heat and power. The processes based on the sorption enhanced hydrogen production from biomass and/or wastes linked with high-temperature fuel cells and advanced power cycles for combined production of heat and power are expected to have a significant potential to ensure high fuel conversions at low- to negative-emissions of CO2 and an affordable cost. As such concepts have not been developed yet, this project will propose novel configurations and systematically assess their techno-economic feasibility to enable a step-change in decarbonisation of power, heat, and industrial sectors.
Other creators -
-
A state of art techno-economical review of H2 production technologies
-
Other creators -
-
A techno-economic study of H2 fuelled ferry’s in the Orkney Islands
-
Other creators -
-
Assessment of solid oxide fuel cells on unconventional hydrogen carriers
-
Other creators -
-
Biomass energy with carbon capture
-
-
Carbon capture challenges and opportunities for space applications
-
Other creators -
-
CO2 storage potentials in Oman
-
-
Efficient production of hydrogen for net-zero economy
-
-
Integrated assessment modelling of the Nigerian energy industry
-
Other creators -
-
Integration of wind energy and fuel cells for reliable power supply
-
-
Modelling and evaluation of gas-liquid ejector design
-
-
Study on structural integrity inspection of the natural gas liquid (NGL) transportation pipelines
-
Other creators -
-
Aerogel insulation materials at scale from waste resources
-
Other creators -
-
Applying Artificial Intelligence (AI) as estimator in chemical process systems
-
Other creators -
-
CFD modelling of hydrogen-enriched methane combustion
-
Other creators -
-
Development of new control design methods for pressurised water reactors (PWR): application to temperature control
-
-
High-efficiency low-emission oxy-turbine power cycles
-
-
Modelling energy sector in Oman
-
-
Novel liquid air energy storage
-
-
Nuclear reactors for low-cost power production
-
Other creators -
-
Optimisation of combined heat and power (CHP) co-generation in student accommodation and private rental schemes.
-
-
Optimization of two-phase LNG gas supply: slugging management and flow assurance using Unisim
-
-
Techno-economic assessment of hydrogen/ammonia production using solid oxide electrolysers
-
Other creators -
-
Redefining power generation from carbonaceous fuels with carbonate looping combustion and gasification technologies
-
See projectFollowing the Paris Climate Change Agreement, 197 countries, including the UK, are now obligated to reduce their anthropogenic greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions to hold the global mean temperature increase from pre-industrial levels well below 2 deg. C and pursuing efforts to limit it to 1.5 deg. C. Meeting this ambitious goal requires near-complete decarbonisation of the power sector, as it generates a third of the anthropogenic GHG emissions. To maintain its sustainability and international…
Following the Paris Climate Change Agreement, 197 countries, including the UK, are now obligated to reduce their anthropogenic greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions to hold the global mean temperature increase from pre-industrial levels well below 2 deg. C and pursuing efforts to limit it to 1.5 deg. C. Meeting this ambitious goal requires near-complete decarbonisation of the power sector, as it generates a third of the anthropogenic GHG emissions. To maintain its sustainability and international competitiveness, as well as to meet the environmental targets, the UK economy requires a secure supply of low-carbon electricity at an affordable cost. This is especially important in light of the forecast 30-60% increase in the peak electricity demand in the UK by 2050. Although the unabated conventional fossil fuel power systems are well-suited to flexibly meet the market demand, and thus to balance the intermittency of the renewable energy sources, they are heavy CO2 emitters.
This project employed state-of-the-art engineering procedures to develop, and assess the feasibility of, novel power generation concepts based on the emerging carbonate looping process and high-efficiency power cycles, and/or fuel cells. These concepts were identified through a design matrix generated during screening of carbonate looping cycles, power cycles and fuel cells. Then, the process models of the sub-systems included in the design matrix was built using first principles and validated with data retrieved from the literature. Synthesis of novel power generation concepts was conducted by employing the process wide approach to process modelling. The initial configurations of the concepts were revised by employing the heat exchanger network and parametric analyses. Finally, the feasibility of the novel power generation concepts was assessed and benchmarked against the conventional fossil fuel power plants in the multi-criteria analysis. -
Assessment of fuel cell integration in absorption refrigeration systems
-
-
Biomass combustion power plant with supercritical CO2 cycle and calcium looping for negative CO2 emission power generation
-
-
Carbonate looping gasification for high-efficiency low-emission power generation
-
-
Enhanced sorbents for calcium looping CO2 capture
-
-
Identification of residual biogas potential (RBP) test results using artificial neural network
-
-
Investigating solar power absorption refrigeration system
-
-
Low-emission natural gas combined cycle with calcium looping plant and supercritical CO2 bottoming cycle
-
-
Balanced Energy Networks
-
See projectThe Balanced Energy Networks project will deliver both a physical and digital network to integrate systems that will enable the balancing of heating, cooling, electricity, and carbon, in a way that minimises costs.
Addressing the energy trilemma - delivering security of supply, at low cost, and with low carbon emissions - is a key requirement for achieving a sustainable and prosperous economy. The Balanced Energy Networks project will build a working demonstration of the integrated…The Balanced Energy Networks project will deliver both a physical and digital network to integrate systems that will enable the balancing of heating, cooling, electricity, and carbon, in a way that minimises costs.
Addressing the energy trilemma - delivering security of supply, at low cost, and with low carbon emissions - is a key requirement for achieving a sustainable and prosperous economy. The Balanced Energy Networks project will build a working demonstration of the integrated system at London South Bank University (LSBU). This will involve the construction of an inter-seasonal thermal storage system to balance the production of heating and cooling throughout the year. It will also create a bi-directional network to balance electricity supply and demand. Attached to these physical and information and control networks will be a range of innovative technologies including one which can both generate electricity and remove carbon dioxide from the air, allowing the overall system to be carbon neutral. -
Study to assess the suitability and modifications required to operate the CATS terminal in fractionation bypass mode.
-
A group project prepared for the BP Amoco aimed at determining whether the process plant can operate at provided conditions.
Main benefits and skills gained:
- In-depth understanding of the NGL terminal operation
- Experience in Aspen HYSYS modelling and simulation
- Teamwork and team communicationOther creators -
-
Life cycle analysis of hydrogen fuel cell aircraft
-
Other creators -
Honors & Awards
-
2020 Students' Choice Award
Cranfield Student Association
Awarded the 2020 Students' Choice Award for the best lecturer in School of Water, Energy and Environment at Cranfield University.
-
Collaborate to Innovate
The Engineer and EPSRC
The Balanced Energy Project that won the Engineer 'Collaborate to Innovate' Awards 2018 in the Energy and Environment section supported by the Engineer and EPSRC
-
The Lord Kings Norton Award
Cranfield University
Winner of the Lord Kings Norton medal for the best PhD thesis at Cranfield University in 2017.
-
Best overall performance on the MSc in Carbon Capture and Transport
Cranfield University
-
The Coal Research Forum Prize at the Early Career Energy Sector Chemists Symposium 2013
The Royal Society of Chemistry Energy Sector Interest Group
The prize received for a 2-minute flash presentation followed by a poster presentation on "Parasitic load reduction in a supercritical coal-fired power plant integrated with a post-combustion capture".
Languages
-
English
Full professional proficiency
-
Polish
Native or bilingual proficiency
Recommendations received
19 people have recommended Dawid
Join now to viewExplore more posts
Explore collaborative articles
We’re unlocking community knowledge in a new way. Experts add insights directly into each article, started with the help of AI.
Explore More