Skip to main content

Abstract

This chapter describes a steady-state sensitivity analysis based on a design point, considering each of the four configurations proposed in Chap. 5. This approach deals with a simulation-based analysis that allows estimation of overall efficiency over a wide range of boundary conditions to determine which cogeneration system is the most optimal in terms of capital cost (overall efficiency is directly related to the solar field size required). The analysis was performed for the three existing cooling technologies: once-through, evaporative water cooling and dry air cooling (except for the case in which a low-temperature (LT) multi-effect distillation (MED) unit replaces the condenser in the parabolic-trough concentrating solar power [PT-CSP] plant). The specific electric consumption (SEC) and the exhaust steam temperature were taken as inputs to be varied for a wide range of conditions that cover all the locations between the Mediterranean basin and the Arabian Gulf and match the three cooling systems considered. The simulations were carried out using the models described in Chaps. 3, 4 and 5. The study evaluated in which cases the PT-CSP + MED configurations are more efficient than the PT-CSP + RO configuration. Note that the results given in this chapter are valid only for parabolic-trough solar technology; thus, they could change for a different solar technology. Finally, a detailed techno-economic analysis is described for two representative locations in the Mediterranean basin and the Arabian Gulf, with the aim of determining the most suitable configuration and refrigeration system in each location. Specific operating conditions were established for each location, based on similar studies and information from real plants.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 119.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Abbreviations

Cr:

Compression ratio

CSP + D:

Concentrating solar power and desalination

DNI:

Direct normal irradiation (kWh/m2 year)

EES:

Engineering equation solver

GOR:

Gain output ratio

LEC:

Levelised electricity cost (c€/kWh)

LT-MED:

Low temperature multi-effect distillation

LT-MED + TVC:

Low temperature multi-effect distillation powered by a thermal vapour compressor

LWC:

Levelised water cost (€/m3)

MENA:

Middle East and North Africa

PT:

Parabolic trough

Ra:

Entrainment ratio

RO:

Reverse osmosis

MED-TVC:

Multi-effect distillation with thermal vapour compression

P net :

Net power production (MWe)

:

Mass flow rate (kg/s)

F FW :

Fresh water flow rate (m3/day)

P cond :

Power consumed by the condenser (MWe)

h :

Specific enthalpy (kJ/kg)

P th :

Net output thermal capacity (MWth)

M d :

Distillate mass flow rate (kg/s)

M mv :

Motive steam mass flow rate (kg/s)

M ent :

Entrained vapour mass flow rate (kg/s)

η th :

Global efficiency

F sw :

Seawater flow rate (m3/day)

M d,net :

Net fresh water production (m3/day)

M d,gross :

Gross fresh water production (m3/day)

P turb :

Gross power production (MWe)

A a :

Aperture area (m2)

F s :

Solar fraction

crf:

Capital recovery factor

K invest :

Total investment of the plant (€)

K O & M :

Annual operation and maintenance costs (€)

K fuel :

Annual fuel cost (€)

E net :

Net electricity delivered to the grid (GWh)

k d :

Real debt interest rate (%)

n :

Depreciation period (years)

K insurance :

Annual insurance rate (%)

References

  • Blanco-Marigorta, A. M., Sánchez-Henríquez, M. V., & Peña-Quintana, J. A. (2011). Exergetic comparison of two different cooling technologies for the power cycle of a thermal power plant. Energy, 36, 1966–1972.

    Google Scholar 

  • El-Dessouky, H., & Ettouney, H. (2002). Fundamentals of salt water desalination (1st ed.). Amsterdam, The Netherlands: Elsevier Science.

    Google Scholar 

  • Geyer, M., Herrmann, U., Sevilla, A., Nebrera, J. A., & Zamora, A. G. (2006, June 20–23). Dispatchable solar electricity for summerly peak loads from the solar thermal projects Andasol-1 & Andasol-2. In: Proceedings of 13th SolarPACES Symposium, Seville, Spain.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goebel, O. (2010, September 21–24). Shams One 100 MW CSP plant in Abu Dhabi. Update on projects status. In: Proceedings of 16th SolarPACES symposium, Perpignan, France.

    Google Scholar 

  • IDA. (2013). IDA desalination yearbook 2012–2013: Water desalination report. Topsfield, MA: Global Water Intelligence/International Desalination Association.

    Google Scholar 

  • Klein, S. A., Alvarado, F. L., & Beckman, W. A. (1997). Engineering Equation Solver (EES), Mc Version 4.447. F-Chart Software. Middleton, WI.

    Google Scholar 

  • NREL. (2010). System advisor model (SAM). National Renewable Energy Laboratory. Retrieved from https://sam.nrel.gov/cost

  • Palenzuela, P., Zaragoza, G., Alarcón-Padilla, D. C., Guillén-Burrieza, E., Ibarra, M., & Blanco, J. (2011a). Assessment of different configurations for combined parabolic-trough (PT) solar power and desalination plants in arid regions. Energy, 36, 4950–8.

    Google Scholar 

  • Palenzuela, P., Zaragoza, G., Alarcón-Padilla, D. C., & Blanco, J. (2011b). Simulation and evaluation of the coupling of desalination units to parabolic-trough solar power plants in the Mediterranean region. Desalination, 281, 379–87.

    Google Scholar 

  • Palenzuela, P., Hassan, A. S., Zaragoza, G., & Alarcón-Padilla, D. C. (2014). Steady state model for multi-effect distillation case study: Plataforma Solar de Almería MED pilot plant. Desalination, 337, 31–42.

    Google Scholar 

  • Richter, C., Dersch, J. et al. (2009, September 15–18). Methods for reducing cooling water consumption in solar thermal power plants. In: Proceedings of the 15th SolarPACES Conference, Berlin, Germany.

    Google Scholar 

  • Richter, C., & Dersch, J. (2010, June 29). Wasserverbrauch und Wassereinsparung bei solarthermischen Kraftwerken. Presentation at the DLR 13th solar conference, Cologne, Germany. DLR, Cologne

    Google Scholar 

  • Short, W., Packey, D.J., & Holt, T. (1995). A manual for the economic evaluation of energy efficiency and renewable energy technologies (NREL/TP-462-5173). Golden, Co: National Renewable Energy Laboratory. Retrieved June 29, 2015, from http://www.nrel.gov/docs/legosti/old/5173.pdf

  • Taylor, B. N., & Kuyatt, C. E. (1994). Guidelines for evaluating and expressing the uncertainty of NIST measurement results (Technical Note 1297). Gaithersburg, MD: National Institute of Standards and Technology.

    Google Scholar 

  • Trieb, F., Kronshage, S., Quaschning, V., Dersch, J., Lerchenmüller, H., Morin, G., et al. (2004). SOKRATES-Projekt: Solarthermische Kraftwerkstechnologie für den Schutz des Erdklimas. Stuttgart, Germany: DLR.

    Google Scholar 

  • Trieb, F. (2007). Concentrating solar power for seawater desalination (Aqua-CSP study report). Stuttgart, Germany: DLR (German Aerospace Center).

    Google Scholar 

  • US DoE. (2009). Concentrating solar power commercial application study: Reducing water consumption of concentrating solar power electricity generation. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Energy.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zarza, E. (1991). Solar thermal desalination project, first phase results and second phase description (1st ed.). Madrid, Spain: CIEMAT.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Appendix

Appendix

Table 6.2 Overall efficiencies of the systems PT-CSP + LT-MED and PT-CSP + RO at an exhaust steam temperature of 37 °C, considering dry cooling as the cooling method
Table 6.3 Overall efficiencies of the systems PT-CSP + LT-MED and PT-CSP + RO at an exhaust steam temperature of 57 °C, considering dry cooling as the cooling method
Table 6.4 Overall efficiencies of the systems PT-CSP + LT-MED and PT-CSP + RO at an exhaust steam temperature of 37 °C, considering evaporative water cooling as the cooling method
Table 6.5 Overall efficiencies of the systems PT-CSP + LT-MED and PT-CSP + RO at an exhaust steam temperature of 57 °C, considering evaporative water cooling as the cooling method
Table 6.6 Overall efficiencies of the systems PT-CSP + LT-MED and PT-CSP + RO at an exhaust steam temperature of 37 °C, considering once-through as the cooling method
Table 6.7 Overall efficiencies of the systems PT-CSP + LT-MED and PT-CSP + RO at an exhaust steam temperature of 57 °C, considering once-through as the cooling method
Table 6.8 Overall efficiencies of the systems PT-CSP + LT-MED + TVC and PT-CSP + RO at an exhaust steam temperature of 37 °C, considering dry cooling as the cooling method
Table 6.9 Overall efficiencies of the systems PT-CSP + LT-MED + TVC and PT-CSP + RO at an exhaust steam temperature of 57 °C, considering dry cooling as the cooling method
Table 6.10 Overall efficiencies of the systems PT-CSP + LT-MED + TVC and PT-CSP + RO at an exhaust steam temperature of 37 °C, considering evaporative water cooling as the cooling method
Table 6.11 Overall efficiencies of the systems PT-CSP + LT-MED + TVC and PT-CSP + RO at an exhaust steam temperature of 57 °C, considering evaporative water cooling as the cooling method
Table 6.12 Overall efficiencies of the systems PT-CSP + LT-MED + TVC and PT-CSP + RO at an exhaust steam temperature of 37 °C, considering once-through as the cooling method
Table 6.13 Overall efficiencies of the systems PT-CSP + LT-MED + TVC and PT-CSP + RO at an exhaust steam temperature of 57 °C, considering once-through as the cooling method
Table 6.14 Overall efficiencies of the systems PT-CSP + MED-TVC and PT-CSP + RO at an exhaust steam temperature of 37 °C, considering dry cooling as the cooling method
Table 6.15 Overall efficiencies of the systems PT-CSP + MED-TVC and PT-CSP + RO at an exhaust steam temperature of 57 °C, with dry cooling as cooling method
Table 6.16 Fresh water flow rate (F FW) needed in the condenser of the power cycle with evaporative water cooling
Table 6.17 Power consumed by the condenser (P cond) of the power cycle and of the MED plants in the case of using once-through as cooling method

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2015 Springer International Publishing Switzerland

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Palenzuela, P., Alarcón-Padilla, DC., Zaragoza, G. (2015). Techno-economic Analysis. In: Concentrating Solar Power and Desalination Plants. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-20535-9_6

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-20535-9_6

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-20534-2

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-20535-9

  • eBook Packages: EnergyEnergy (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics