Análisis termodinámico de un sistema para generar energía eléctrica a partir de la energía mecánica de un gas natural

The objective of this work is to design a system for generating electricity from the mechanical energy of a natural gas at high pressure. The main motivation for the development of the research is based on the need to detect by the natural gas distribution industry, where it is considered that the use of the mechanical energy of natural gas (flow energy and kinetic energy) can be used for the Electric power generation, through a turbo expander, and thus power the electromechanical components of a substation. In this way, energy consumption costs are reduced, which translates into unquestionable gains in energy efficiency. The methodology applied is based on the use of physical principles such as the conservation of mass and energy in a control volume. Likewise, the guidelines established in the guideline for the expression of measurement uncertainty allowed us to estimate an interval where the real value of the mechanical power generated at the output of the turboexpander is found. Based on experimental data in a natural gas distribution substation, the consolidated results allowed quantifying the average mechanical power at the inlet of a turboexpander (8155 W) and, in the typical situation where the turboexpander reduces its outlet pressure to 50% , an average mechanical power is generated at the output of the turboexpander equal to 4893 W, which translates into an efficiency of 40%. This research work allowed us to conclude that the design of a system for electric power generation is viable based on the thermodynamic and dimensional parameters associated with the natural gas distribution system, as well as the mechanical power that can be generated at the exit of a turboexpander.Este trabajo tiene por objetivo diseñar un sistema de generación de energía eléctrica a partir de la energía mecánica de un gas natural a alta presión. La motivación principal para el desarrollo de la investigación se fundamenta en la necesidad detectar por la industria de distribución de gas natural, donde se considera que el aprovechamiento de la energía mecánica del gas natural (energía de flujo y energía cinética) puede ser aprovechado para la generación de energía eléctrica, a través de un turbo expansor, y así alimentar los componentes electromecánicos de una subestación. De esta forma se disminuyen costos de consumo de energía lo que se traduce en incuestionables ganancias de eficiencia energética. La metodología aplicada se basa en la utilización de principios físicos como lo son la conservación de masa y energía en un volumen de control. De igual forma, lo lineamiento establecidos en la guía para la expresión de la incertidumbre de medición, permitió estimar un intervalo donde se encuentra el valor real de la potencia mecánica generada a la salida del turbo expansor. A partir de datos experimentales en una subestación de distribución de gas natural, los resultados consolidados permitieron cuantificar la potencia mecánica promedio en la entrada de un turbo expansor (8155 W) y, en la situación típica donde el turbo expansor reduce su presión de salida al 50%, se genera una potencia mecánica promedio a la salida del turbo expansor igual a 4893 W, lo que se traduce en una eficiencia de 40%. Este trabajo de investigación permitió concluir que el diseño de un sistema para generación de energía eléctrica es viable a partir de los parámetros termodinámicos y dimensionales asociadas al sistema de distribución de gas natural, así como la potencia mecánica que puede ser generada a la salida de un turbo expansor

Thermodynamic Analysis of aSystem to Generate Electrical Energy from the Mechanical Energy of aNatural Gas

The objective of this work is to design a system for generating electricity from the mechanical energy of anatural gas at high pressure. The main motivation for the development of the research is based on the need to detect by the natural gas distribution industry, where it is considered that the use of the mechanical energy of natural gas (flow energy and kinetic energy) can be used for the Electric power generation, through a turbo expander, and thus power the electromechanical components of a substation. In this way, energy consumption costs are reduced, which translates into unquestionable gains in energy efficiency. The methodology applied is based on the use of physical principles such as the conservation of mass and energy in a control volume. Likewise, the guidelines established in the guideline for the expression of measurement uncertainty allowed us toestimate an interval where the real value of the mechanical power generated at the output of the turboexpanderis found. Based on experimental data in a natural gas distribution substation, the consolidated results allowed quantifying the average mechanical power at the inlet of a turboexpander(8155 W) and, in the typical situation where the turboexpanderreducesits outlet pressure to 50% , an average mechanical power is generated at the output of the turboexpanderequal to 4893 W, which translates into an efficiency of 40%. This research work allowed us to conclude that the design of a system for electric power generation is viable based on the thermodynamic and dimensional parameters associated with the natural gas distribution system, as well as the mechanical power that can be generated at the exit of a turboexpanderEste trabajo tiene por objetivo diseñar un sistema de generación de energía eléctrica a partir de la energía mecánica de un gas natural a alta presión. La motivación principal para el desarrollo de la investigación se fundamenta en la necesidad detectar por la industria de distribución de gas natural, donde se considera que el aprovechamiento de la energía mecánica del gas natural (energía de flujo y energía cinética) puede ser aprovechado para la generación de energía eléctrica, a través de un turbo expansor, y así alimentar los componentes electromecánicos de una subestación. De esta forma se disminuyen costos de consumo de energía lo que se traduce en incuestionables ganancias de eficiencia energética. La metodología aplicada se basa en la utilización de principios físicos como lo son la conservación de masa y energía en un volumen de control. De igual forma, lo lineamiento establecidos en la guía para la expresión de la incertidumbre de medición, permitió estimar un intervalo donde se encuentra el valor real de la potencia mecánica generada a la salida del turbo expansor. A partir de datos experimentales en una subestación de distribución de gas natural, los resultados consolidados permitieron cuantificar la potencia mecánica promedio en la entrada de un turbo expansor (8155 W) y, en la situación típica donde el turbo expansor reduce su presión de salida al 50%, se genera una potencia mecánica promedio a la salida del turbo expansor igual a 4893 W, lo que se traduce en una eficiencia de 40%. Este trabajo de investigación permitió concluir que el diseño de un sistema para generación de energía eléctrica es viable a partir de los parámetros termodinámicos y dimensionales asociadas al sistema de distribución de gas natural, así como la potencia mecánica que puede ser generada a la salida de un turbo expansor

Sparsentan in patients with IgA nephropathy: a prespecified interim analysis from a randomised, double-blind, active-controlled clinical trial

Background: Sparsentan is a novel, non-immunosuppressive, single-molecule, dual endothelin and angiotensin receptor antagonist being examined in an ongoing phase 3 trial in adults with IgA nephropathy. We report the prespecified interim analysis of the primary proteinuria efficacy endpoint, and safety. Methods: PROTECT is an international, randomised, double-blind, active-controlled study, being conducted in 134 clinical practice sites in 18 countries. The study examines sparsentan versus irbesartan in adults (aged ≥18 years) with biopsy-proven IgA nephropathy and proteinuria of 1·0 g/day or higher despite maximised renin-angiotensin system inhibitor treatment for at least 12 weeks. Participants were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive sparsentan 400 mg once daily or irbesartan 300 mg once daily, stratified by estimated glomerular filtration rate at screening (30 to 1·75 g/day). The primary efficacy endpoint was change from baseline to week 36 in urine protein-creatinine ratio based on a 24-h urine sample, assessed using mixed model repeated measures. Treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) were safety endpoints. All endpoints were examined in all participants who received at least one dose of randomised treatment. The study is ongoing and is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03762850. Findings: Between Dec 20, 2018, and May 26, 2021, 404 participants were randomly assigned to sparsentan (n=202) or irbesartan (n=202) and received treatment. At week 36, the geometric least squares mean percent change from baseline in urine protein-creatinine ratio was statistically significantly greater in the sparsentan group (-49·8%) than the irbesartan group (-15·1%), resulting in a between-group relative reduction of 41% (least squares mean ratio=0·59; 95% CI 0·51-0·69; p<0·0001). TEAEs with sparsentan were similar to irbesartan. There were no cases of severe oedema, heart failure, hepatotoxicity, or oedema-related discontinuations. Bodyweight changes from baseline were not different between the sparsentan and irbesartan groups. Interpretation: Once-daily treatment with sparsentan produced meaningful reduction in proteinuria compared with irbesartan in adults with IgA nephropathy. Safety of sparsentan was similar to irbesartan. Future analyses after completion of the 2-year double-blind period will show whether these beneficial effects translate into a long-term nephroprotective potential of sparsentan. Funding: Travere Therapeutics

Efficacy and safety of sparsentan versus irbesartan in patients with IgA nephropathy (PROTECT): 2-year results from a randomised, active-controlled, phase 3 trial

BackgroundSparsentan, a novel, non-immunosuppressive, single-molecule, dual endothelin angiotensin receptor antagonist, significantly reduced proteinuria versus irbesartan, an angiotensin II receptor blocker, at 36 weeks (primary endpoint) in patients with immunoglobulin A nephropathy in the phase 3 PROTECT trial's previously reported interim analysis. Here, we report kidney function and outcomes over 110 weeks from the double-blind final analysis.MethodsPROTECT, a double-blind, randomised, active-controlled, phase 3 study, was done across 134 clinical practice sites in 18 countries throughout the Americas, Asia, and Europe. Patients aged 18 years or older with biopsy-proven primary IgA nephropathy and proteinuria of at least 1·0 g per day despite maximised renin–angiotensin system inhibition for at least 12 weeks were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive sparsentan (target dose 400 mg oral sparsentan once daily) or irbesartan (target dose 300 mg oral irbesartan once daily) based on a permuted-block randomisation method. The primary endpoint was proteinuria change between treatment groups at 36 weeks. Secondary endpoints included rate of change (slope) of the estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR), changes in proteinuria, a composite of kidney failure (confirmed 40% eGFR reduction, end-stage kidney disease, or all-cause mortality), and safety and tolerability up to 110 weeks from randomisation. Secondary efficacy outcomes were assessed in the full analysis set and safety was assessed in the safety set, both of which were defined as all patients who were randomly assigned and received at least one dose of randomly assigned study drug. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03762850.FindingsBetween Dec 20, 2018, and May 26, 2021, 203 patients were randomly assigned to the sparsentan group and 203 to the irbesartan group. One patient from each group did not receive the study drug and was excluded from the efficacy and safety analyses (282 [70%] of 404 included patients were male and 272 [67%] were White) . Patients in the sparsentan group had a slower rate of eGFR decline than those in the irbesartan group. eGFR chronic 2-year slope (weeks 6–110) was −2·7 mL/min per 1·73 m2 per year versus −3·8 mL/min per 1·73 m2 per year (difference 1·1 mL/min per 1·73 m2 per year, 95% CI 0·1 to 2·1; p=0·037); total 2-year slope (day 1–week 110) was −2·9 mL/min per 1·73 m2 per year versus −3·9 mL/min per 1·73 m2 per year (difference 1·0 mL/min per 1·73 m2 per year, 95% CI −0·03 to 1·94; p=0·058). The significant reduction in proteinuria at 36 weeks with sparsentan was maintained throughout the study period; at 110 weeks, proteinuria, as determined by the change from baseline in urine protein-to-creatinine ratio, was 40% lower in the sparsentan group than in the irbesartan group (−42·8%, 95% CI −49·8 to −35·0, with sparsentan versus −4·4%, −15·8 to 8·7, with irbesartan; geometric least-squares mean ratio 0·60, 95% CI 0·50 to 0·72). The composite kidney failure endpoint was reached by 18 (9%) of 202 patients in the sparsentan group versus 26 (13%) of 202 patients in the irbesartan group (relative risk 0·7, 95% CI 0·4 to 1·2). Treatment-emergent adverse events were well balanced between sparsentan and irbesartan, with no new safety signals.InterpretationOver 110 weeks, treatment with sparsentan versus maximally titrated irbesartan in patients with IgA nephropathy resulted in significant reductions in proteinuria and preservation of kidney function

Efficacy and safety of sparsentan versus irbesartan in patients with IgA nephropathy (PROTECT): 2-year results from a randomised, active-controlled, phase 3 trial

Background Sparsentan, a novel, non-immunosuppressive, single-molecule, dual endothelin angiotensin receptor antagonist, significantly reduced proteinuria versus irbesartan, an angiotensin II receptor blocker, at 36 weeks (primary endpoint) in patients with immunoglobulin A nephropathy in the phase 3 PROTECT trial's previously reported interim analysis. Here, we report kidney function and outcomes over 110 weeks from the double-blind final analysis. Methods PROTECT, a double-blind, randomised, active-controlled, phase 3 study, was done across 134 clinical practice sites in 18 countries throughout the Americas, Asia, and Europe. Patients aged 18 years or older with biopsy-proven primary IgA nephropathy and proteinuria of at least 1·0 g per day despite maximised renin–angiotensin system inhibition for at least 12 weeks were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive sparsentan (target dose 400 mg oral sparsentan once daily) or irbesartan (target dose 300 mg oral irbesartan once daily) based on a permuted-block randomisation method. The primary endpoint was proteinuria change between treatment groups at 36 weeks. Secondary endpoints included rate of change (slope) of the estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR), changes in proteinuria, a composite of kidney failure (confirmed 40% eGFR reduction, end-stage kidney disease, or all-cause mortality), and safety and tolerability up to 110 weeks from randomisation. Secondary efficacy outcomes were assessed in the full analysis set and safety was assessed in the safety set, both of which were defined as all patients who were randomly assigned and received at least one dose of randomly assigned study drug. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03762850. Findings Between Dec 20, 2018, and May 26, 2021, 203 patients were randomly assigned to the sparsentan group and 203 to the irbesartan group. One patient from each group did not receive the study drug and was excluded from the efficacy and safety analyses (282 [70%] of 404 included patients were male and 272 [67%] were White) . Patients in the sparsentan group had a slower rate of eGFR decline than those in the irbesartan group. eGFR chronic 2-year slope (weeks 6–110) was −2·7 mL/min per 1·73 m2 per year versus −3·8 mL/min per 1·73 m2 per year (difference 1·1 mL/min per 1·73 m2 per year, 95% CI 0·1 to 2·1; p=0·037); total 2-year slope (day 1–week 110) was −2·9 mL/min per 1·73 m2 per year versus −3·9 mL/min per 1·73 m2 per year (difference 1·0 mL/min per 1·73 m2 per year, 95% CI −0·03 to 1·94; p=0·058). The significant reduction in proteinuria at 36 weeks with sparsentan was maintained throughout the study period; at 110 weeks, proteinuria, as determined by the change from baseline in urine protein-to-creatinine ratio, was 40% lower in the sparsentan group than in the irbesartan group (−42·8%, 95% CI −49·8 to −35·0, with sparsentan versus −4·4%, −15·8 to 8·7, with irbesartan; geometric least-squares mean ratio 0·60, 95% CI 0·50 to 0·72). The composite kidney failure endpoint was reached by 18 (9%) of 202 patients in the sparsentan group versus 26 (13%) of 202 patients in the irbesartan group (relative risk 0·7, 95% CI 0·4 to 1·2). Treatment-emergent adverse events were well balanced between sparsentan and irbesartan, with no new safety signals. Interpretation Over 110 weeks, treatment with sparsentan versus maximally titrated irbesartan in patients with IgA nephropathy resulted in significant reductions in proteinuria and preservation of kidney function.</p