RE: Let's be positive16 Feb 2026 21:50
Inv86
Face the facts, MAST couldn’t afford the new more efficient Has Turbines which is why they’ve gone for second hand stuff.
Gas turbines are generally more efficient than reciprocating gas engines (generators) at high, constant loads and in large-scale power plants, often achieving 50-63% efficiency in combined cycle mode. However, gas engines offer higher simple cycle efficiency (39-49%) and better part-load efficiency for smaller or variable power needs.
Gas Turbines (Large-Scale / Constant Load)
Best for: High, consistent, large-scale power output.
Efficiency: 30–42% (simple cycle), but 50–63% (combined cycle).
Pros: Lower maintenance costs, higher capacity.
Cons: Poor part-load efficiency.
Gas Engines/Generators (Small-Scale / Variable Load)
Best for: Smaller power needs, rapid start-up, and better efficiency when operating at partial loads.
Efficiency: 39–49% (simple cycle).
Pros: Fast load acceptance, better performance at varied speeds.
Key Takeaway: For large, base-load power (100+ MW), turbines are more efficient (especially in combined cycle). For smaller, intermittent, or peaking power, gas engines are often more efficient and flexible.
If MAST was serious about producing large amounts of electricity they would have gone for the gas turbines, however this is just further proof that MAST are doing things on a small scale.