concentrating solar power (csp) - mtp.ma eduardo guedez mata... · concentrating solar power (csp)...

Concentrating Solar Power (CSP)From Solar Fundamentals to CSP Plant Modeling

Dr. Rafael Guédez September 5, 2018

KTH Industrial Engineering and Management

Researcher – Energy Department MASEN Talent Campus, Agadir, [email protected]

Agadir, September 5, 2018R. Guédez – Concentrating Solar Power 2

Agenda© SolarReserve

9:00 – 9:45 Introduction• Solar Fundamentals

• CSP Technology Basis

10:00 – 10:45 CSP Technology, Market & Prospects• Overview of technologies (cont.): projects

• Market outlook, Drivers and Prices

11:15 – 12:30 Thermal Energy Storage (TES)• On the value of TES in CSP

• Review of TES technologies for CSP

2:00 – 3:30 Modeling of CSP Plants with TES• Review on Project Development and Actors

• Power Plant Techno-economic Modeling approach

3:40 – 5:00 Case study: Simulation in SAM


Introduction: about meAt Academia: • Research Leader in Solar Power (CSP and PV) and thermal power cycles at KTH• Research Leader in Power Plant Techno-economic Modeling at KTH• Lecturer, course responsible and supervisor at MSc and PHD level at KTH.

At Industry:• Director at Europe Power Solutions (Consulting)• Advisor in Strategy and Technology to Azelio AB• Senior Performance Analyst at SolarReserve LLC

Education / Background:• PhD in CSP Plant Techno-Economic Performance Modeling – KTH • Executive programs in Business Administration, Marketing and Negotiation (ESADE, GEM, MIT)• Mechanical Engineering – Universidad Simon Bolivar (Venezuela)


Introduction: KTH• Sweden’s oldest

Technical University

• Founded in 1827

• +12000 students

• 10 Schools

• World Rankings:• 36 (Times - Engineering 2017)• 25 (QS Top Universities – Energy Engineering 2016)


Introduction: KTH CSP R&D Group

• + PostDoc, 3 PhD students+ 20 MSc Students and affiliates

• In close collaboration with industryand other R&D institutes


Solar EnergyIEA Energy Outlook: + 6°C by 2050

Solar Energy is the mostabundant renewable resource on Earth


Solar Basics: Radiant Flux1. The Sun’s energy radiates outwards into space from the photosphere..2. The intensity of the radiation decreases in accordance with the inverse-square law.3. At Earth’s mean orbital then it is internationally accepted the value of 1367 [W/m2]4. At atmosphere limits, incident radiation approaches a black-body distribution.


Solar Basics: Radiant Flux

Indeed, the Earth is closest to the Sun in January (perihelion) and furthest away in July (aphelion)

Incident flux on Earth varies due to its elliptical trajectory around the Sun

−

+⋅=365

22cos034.01 nII sco π

For a given day


Solar Basics: Atmospheric EffectsDuring passage through Earth’s atmosphere, partial flux is scattered or absorbed

Even on a clear day, up to 30% of the incoming radiation is absorbed

The peak flux at the Earth’s surface is approx. 1kW/m2

Largest losses result from absorption and reflection


Solar Basics: Atmospheric EffectsThe amount of scattering and absorbing is expressed by means of the air mass,the ratio of the actual path length to the path length when the Sun is directly overhead

( ) 636.1cos08.965057.0cos1

−−+=

zz

AMθθ

Standard design assumption:AM = 1.5 (850 W/m2)


Solar Basics: Radiation Components

Beneath Earth’s atmosphere, Solar flux is divided into two components: Beam and Diffuse radiation, which sum is known as the Global Irradiation

diffusebeamglobal III +=


Solar Basics: Radiation Components

The incident solar radiation at a site can be measured using a pyranometer, which measures the global solar irradiation.

Placed flat, thus measuring thehorizontal global irradiance:

diffusezbeamhglobal III +⋅= )cos(, θ


Solar Basics: Solar Time

1. Solar time: defines 12:00 as the moment when the Sun is exactly due South at the local position of the observer.

2. Clock time: defines 12:00 as the moment when the Sun is due South for an observer on the local standard time zone meridian

Two key concepts:

DSTEOTlocstd

clks tttt ∆+∆

+°−

+=6015

ψψts: solar time [hrs]tclk: clock time [hrs]Ψstd: time zone meridian [°W]Ψloc: local longitude [°W]ΔtEOT: equation of time [min]ΔtDST: daylight saving time [hrs]


Solar Basics: Earth-Sun GeometryThe direction of the incident beam radiation depends on the position of the Sun, which varies throughout the day. Moreover, the Sun’s path for a location depends on its latitude and the day of the year (through the declination angle)

−

=365

1732cos39795.0arcsin nπδDeclination angle:


Solar Basics: Earth-Sun GeometryThe design of solar energy systems requires knowledge of the position of the Sun throughout the day, which can be defined using a number of angles:

First step: convert local solar time into the Hour Angle.The angle through which the Earth has rotated since noon

Hour Angle ( )1212

−= stπω

Noon: ω = 0Midnight: ω = ±180


Solar Basics: Earth-Sun GeometryThe design of solar energy systems requires knowledge of the position of the Sun throughout the day, which can be defined using a number of angles:

( )δϕωδϕθ sinsincoscoscosarccos +=z

−=

ϕθδϕθ

ωγcossin

sinsincosarccos)sgn(z

zs

zs θθ −= 90

Zenith Angle

Azimuth Angle

Elevation Angle


Solar Basics: Radiation on a SurfaceThe intensity of radiation that is incident on a given surface is dependenton the relative orientation of the surface and the position of the Sun.The position of the surface (or aperture) can be defined by two angles:

The slope angle βc defined between the normal to the aperture and the zenith

The surface azimuth γc defined by the surface normal clockwise from due-South

( )( )cszczc γγθβθβθ −+= cossinsincoscosarccos

For determining radiant flux on a given surface, the Incidence Angle is needed:


Solar Basics: Radiation on a SurfaceWhen the incident radiation does not arrive normal to a collector, the surface intensity (Ic) of the radiation is reduced. This is known as cosine effect

θcosocccob AIAIAI ==

Cosine Effectiveness:

θε coscos ==b

c

II


Solar Basics: TrackingSingle-axis tracking system can be defined by certain quantities:

Tracking Angle (ρ): fixed by the tracking system and adjusted throughout the daySolar Tracking Incidence Angle (θt)Tracking Axis (n): vector about which the tracking system rotates to position the collector

DUAL-AXIS TRACKING

εcos = 100%

SINGLE-AXISTRACKING


Electricity from Solar Energy

Solar energy is harnessed mainly by two key technologies to produced electricity. Both of them commercial and in continuous development

Concentrating Solar Power (CSP) Solar Photovoltaic (PV)

© SENER


CSP Technology Basics

SOLAR ENERGY HIGH TEMPERATURE HEAT ELECTRICITY

THERMAL ENERGY STORAGE (TES)

HYBRIDIZATION

© Torresol Energy © Torresol Energy

TES

Solar Field(Heliostats)

ReceiverTower

Power Block

3 Main Blocks: Solar Field, TES, Power Block



SOLAR ENERGY HIGH TEMPERATURE HEAT ELECTRICITY

THERMAL ENERGY STORAGE (TES)

HYBRIDIZATION

© DLR



Fresnel Tower Dish Trough

Maturity Early commercial projects going online

Proven(First large projects)

DemonstrationProjects

Proven(most mature)

Tracking No tracking 2 axes tracking 2 axes tracking 1 axis tracking

Receiver Linear – Fixed Point - Fixed Point - Movable Linear - Movable

Storage Available, not proven Commercially Available Probable – not yet available

Commercially Available


CSP Basics: Concentration RatioConcentration increases density of the radiant energy flux, allowing more power to be absorbed for agiven surface area and thus a more effective receiver operation at higher temperatures

The CR varies depending on the technology and is an indicator of the system efficiency.The CR is connected to reachable temperatures and thus to identifying suitable power cycles.





10:00 – 10:45 CSP Technology, Market & Prospects• Overview of technologies (cont.) & projects








Parabolic Trough PlantsSolana 280 MWeArizona, USA – 2013Abengoa

Solar Field: Therminol VP1Storage: 6h 2 Tanks indirect (molten salts)

Power Block: Rankine Reheat


Parabolic Trough Plants

Andasol: 3 x 50 MWeGranada, Spain– 2008ACS Cobra - SENER

Solar Field: Therminol VP1Storage: 7h 2 Tank indirect (molten salts)



Parabolic Trough PlantsAmal West Field: 8 MWthAmal, Oman – 2014GlassPoint Solar – PDO, Shell, Total

Solar Field: Enclosed Parabolic Troughs for DSG


Parabolic TroughsSolar Collector Assembly (SCA)

Absorber Tube / Heat Collection Element (HCE)

Support Structure

Drive Pillar

Flexible Joint

Intermediate Pillar

Parabolic Mirror / Trough Collector


Parabolic Troughs

The net energy supplied by a given SCA is a function of a number of factors, and can be defined by:

( )( )endshdsurfoSCASCA ffIAQ −−⋅⋅⋅=+ 11IAMcosεε

QSCA: thermal power [W] εcos: cosine effectiveness [-]ASCA: SCA aperture area [m2] fshd: shadowing factor [-]Io: incident beam radiation [W/m2] IAM: incidence angle modifier [-]εsurf: surface effectiveness [-] fend: end-loss factor [-]


Parabolic Trough Plants: Schematics

STORAGE SYSTEM

SOLAR FIELD - HTF CYCLE POWER CYCLE


CSP Technologies


Solar Towers

Gemasolar: 20 MWeSeville, Spain – 2011Torresol (SENER)

Solar Field: Molten Salt towerStorage: 2 Tank Direct, 15h



Solar Towers

Ivanpah SEGS: 3 x 120 MWeCalifornia, USA – 2013Brigthsource

Solar Field: DSGStorage: no TESPower Block: Rankine Reheat with ACC


Solar Towers

Crescent Dunes: 110 MWeNevada, USA – 2015Solar Reserve

Solar Field: Molten Salt towerStorage: 2 Tank Direct, 10h

Rankine Reheat


Solar Towers

© B

rightsource

© Chevron Coalinga Oil Field: 30 MWthCalifornia, USA – 2013Brigthsource

Solar Field: DSGStorage: No TESPower Block: Process heat for EOR


Solar Towers


Solar TowersCentral Receiver

Heliostats

Tower


Solar TowersHeliostats: Sun-tracking mirrors mounted on dual-axis tracking structures

Designing addresses different aspects:

High reflectivityHigh optical precisionHigh tracking accuracyResistant structure

The aim is then to simultaneously address:• Collector efficiency• Temperature


Solar Towers: Heliostats

( )( )( )( )spillattblockshadsurfohh ffffIAQ −−−−⋅⋅=+ 1111cosεε

Qh: thermal power [W] εcos: cosine effectiveness [-]

Ah: heliostat surface area [m2] fshad: shadowing factor [-]

ρh: mirror reflectivity [-] fblock: blocking factor [-]

Io: incident beam radiation [W/m2] fatt: attenuation factor [-]

εsurf: surface effectiveness [-] fspill: spillage factor [-]


Solar Towers: Heliostats


Solar Towers: Receivers


Solar Tower Plants: SchematicsHTF CYCLE POWER CYCLE

STORAGE SYSTEMSOLARFIELD


CSP Market Today

6 GWe Installed Capacity

75%Parabolic Trough

25%Tower

Spain 2.4 GW - USA 1.9 GW

2GWeTendered - Under

Construction

50%Parabolic Trough Tower

China 1 GW - Morocco 0.7 GW

50%

70% w/ STORAGE 100% w/ STORAGE


CSP: Troughs vs Towers

• Maturity:

• Standardization of component development. More players.

• Proven, easier for bankability (finance).

• Achieved significant cost reduction due to technology improvements.

• O&M best practices known (e.g. Spain is increasing generation share).

• Solar field size is not limited as in towers larger power blocks.

• More ‘Modularity’ than for towers (specially for industrial process heat)

Parabolic Troughs:Despite being less efficient more projects will be built. Why?


CSP: Troughs vs TowersSolar Towers:The share of ST is only increasing. Why?• Higher CR, higher temperatures and system efficiency:

• Double axis tracking.

• Allowing for superheated steam and also gas turbine power blocks.

• More secure: HTF is ‘safe’ (non-flammable) & restricted to ‘smaller’ areas.

• Molten Salts are easier to control and to store directly (no additional HEx).

• Although being a less mature tech, there is room for innovation, thus a great potential for driving down costs

• Bankability: Technology proven to be reliable (Gemasolar)


Upcoming Solar Tower Plants

• 2020: 110 MW Redstone, South Africa (10h TES – molten salts)

• 2019: 110 MW Cerro Dominador, Chile (17.5h TES – molten salts)

• 2018: 150 MW Noor III, Morocco (7.5h TES – molten salts)

• 2018: 121 MW Ashalim, Israel (DSG – no TES)

• 2018: 50 MW Khi Solar One, South Africa (DSG – 2h TES)

• 2020: 2x100 MW DEWA, Dubai (10h TES – molten salts)

• 2021: 150 MW Aurora Project, Australia (7.5h TES –molten salts)


CSP Deployment Drivers• Technical: Renewable and dispatchable (cost-efficient and reliable storage)• Macroeconomic: Local content of CSP plants is one of largest for renewable projects• Technical Developments – Higher efficiencies• Cost Developments:


CSP 2030 Market Outlook and Scenarios

9h STORAGE

* For a 200$/kWh combined battery and batteryBOS costs and increased lifetime

* For PV systems (module + BOS) of 1$/W

27GWe

130GWe

SOLARPACES - ESTELA

87GWe

155GWe

IRENA IEA 2D

Current policy Moderate policy

(2016)

(2015)(2014)


CSP Market Outlook: Prices

63$/MWh

Chile 2016DNI: 3400

73$/MWh

UAE 2017DNI: 2200

• CSP is generally seen as less competitive on the basis of $/MWh

• We are seeing aggresive PPA bids,yet higher than other renewables e.g. PV

• It is now being understood that its value relies on its dispatchable attribute.

This has led to tech-specific tenders with time-of-use tariffs (hourly)

This means that the optimum design and operation of each plant is unique to each tender and location

220 MW Tower14h TES

200MW Tower8-10h TES

© SolarPACES-ESTELA 2016


CSP Deployment Drivers• Technical: Renewable and dispatchable (cost-efficient and reliable storage)• Macroeconomic: Local content of CSP plants is one of largest for renewable projects• Technical Developments – Higher efficiencies• Cost Developments:


Thermal Energy Storage (TES) IntegrationPower plants have different roles in the electricity market


Thermal Energy Storage (TES) IntegrationWhen designing a system, not only the nominal power and demand

should be considered, but also how is the system expected to operate

Power plants have different roles in the electricity market

This is often decided by the System Operator and Utilities

The role and share of a technology in the market is policy-related

CSP Plants with storage are dispatchable and thus able to fulfillany specific role, for which then the system can be designed for

Decision making involves multiple stakeholders and is based on policy, incentives, regulations and demand that define the market


Thermal Energy Storage (TES) Integration

CSP Plants withstorage are

dispatchable and flexible


Thermal Energy Storage (TES) IntegrationDepending on the role of the CSP plant, and specifically of

the TES system, the solar field might be oversized



The size of our TES system will be defined based on market needs or desired plant operating strategy

…we measure it through the storage capacity in hours,related to the thermal capacity through the following equation:

][ thhCAPPBthCAP MWhTESQTES −− ⋅=

…where QPB is the thermal power required from the PB at nominal design



The size of the SF then needs to be related to the desired operation and TES size:

)/(SM

min recnomPB

nomSF

SF

nomSF

QQ

QQ

η

==


Thermal Energy Storage (TES) IntegrationDesign considerations:It is desired for the plant to be able to operate under nominal conditions when running from TES, so systems are dimensioned based on discharging

• NaNO3-KNO3• Freezing point 270 °C• Stable up to 580 °C.

TES media: Solar Salt

2 Tanks in Parabolic Trough Plants

≈ 290 °C



Tanks

Salt Pumps

HTF-Salt Heatexchangers


Thermal Energy Storage (TES) IntegrationDesign considerations:Different high temperature TES concepts and technologies exist:

Active TES Passive TESForced convection heat transfer

into TES mediumTES medium passes through

heat exchanger *Direct: HTF = TES medium

E.g.: 2-Tank Direct (Gemasolar)Indirect: HTF ≠ TES mediumE.g.: 2-Tank Indirect (Andasol)

Dual medium TES systemsHTF charges/discharges

a solid materialAlso called regenerators

E.g.: Concrete TESPCM TES


TES: Sensible Heat

In sensible heat storage systems, variations of the stored energy are dependent on the variation of the mean temperature

∆𝑄𝑄𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠 = 𝑚𝑚 �ℎ(𝑇𝑇1)

ℎ(𝑇𝑇2)

𝑑𝑑𝑑 = 𝑚𝑚 �𝑇𝑇1

𝑇𝑇2

𝑐𝑐𝑝𝑝 𝑇𝑇 𝑑𝑑𝑇𝑇

∆𝑄𝑄𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠 ≈ 𝑚𝑚 � �̅𝑐𝑐𝑝𝑝 𝑇𝑇1

𝑇𝑇2� 𝑇𝑇2 − 𝑇𝑇1

𝑞𝑞 = 𝑑 = 𝑇𝑇𝑑𝑑𝑇𝑇


TES: Sensible Heat Example: Concrete

Concrete TES

Start

Discharging

Charging

End

Charged



Start

Discharging

Charging

End

Charged

𝑄𝑄1 = 𝑚𝑚 � 𝑑(𝑇𝑇1)



∆𝑄𝑄𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠 = 𝑚𝑚 � 𝑑 𝑇𝑇2 − 𝑑(𝑇𝑇1)

∆𝑄𝑄𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑟𝑟 = 𝑚𝑚 � 𝑑 𝑇𝑇2 − 𝑑(𝑇𝑇3)



Start

Discharging

Charging

End

Charged

Simplification

In order to simplify the calculation the heat exchanger charging/discharging efficiency εis introduced

𝑄𝑄𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑟𝑟𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠 = 𝑄𝑄𝑓𝑓𝑟𝑟𝑓𝑓𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠 � 𝜀𝜀𝑐𝑐ℎ

𝑄𝑄𝑓𝑓𝑟𝑟𝑓𝑓𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠 = 𝑄𝑄𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑟𝑟𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠 � 𝜀𝜀𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠

Charging:

Discharging:


CSP-TES: Real Operation


CSP Project Development: Bid TendersThere are multiple stakeholders involved in the value-chain

of the development of a CSP plant under a competitive bid tender

Each one with different interest so PPA price is not the only design objective

This makes the optimum design and operation more challengingand also dependent on the actual stakeholder


CSP Project Timeline


CSP actors/steps/contracts


CSP Techno-economic Modeling

a number of design objectives shall be considered in the evaluation of CSP plants

and also dependent on the stakeholder

These are all relevant decision criteria and often conflicting

Optimization Trade-offs


CSP Performance Indicators

TECHNICAL ENVIRONMENTAL

Annual Yield (Enet ) [GWh]

Capacity Factor (CF) [%]

𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴 𝑌𝑌𝑌𝑌𝑌𝑌𝐴𝐴𝑑𝑑8760 × 𝑁𝑁𝑁𝑁𝑚𝑚𝑌𝑌𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴 𝐶𝐶𝐴𝐴𝐶𝐶𝐴𝐴𝑐𝑐𝑌𝑌𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶

Annual Specific CO2 Emissions [kg CO2/MWh]

FINANCIAL (Costs)

Investment Costs (CAPEX) [$] Annual Operational Costs (OPEX) [$/y]

𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴 𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶2 𝐸𝐸𝑚𝑚𝑌𝑌𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑌𝑌𝑁𝑁𝐴𝐴𝑇𝑇𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴 𝑌𝑌𝑌𝑌𝑌𝑌𝐴𝐴𝑑𝑑



FINANCIAL (Performance)

Levelized Cost of Electricity [$/MWh] Internal Rate of Return (IRR) [%]

𝐷𝐷𝑌𝑌𝑇𝑇𝑐𝑐.𝐶𝐶𝐴𝐴𝑇𝑇𝑑 𝐶𝐶𝐴𝐴𝐶𝐶𝑂𝑂𝐴𝐴𝑁𝑁𝑂𝑂𝑇𝑇𝐷𝐷𝑌𝑌𝑇𝑇𝑐𝑐.𝐸𝐸𝐴𝐴𝑌𝑌𝑐𝑐𝐶𝐶𝐸𝐸𝑌𝑌𝑐𝑐𝑌𝑌𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶 𝐺𝐺𝑌𝑌𝐴𝐴𝑌𝑌𝐸𝐸𝐴𝐴𝐶𝐶𝑌𝑌𝑁𝑁𝐴𝐴

𝐿𝐿𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐸𝐸 = 𝑂𝑂 𝐶𝐶𝐴𝐴𝐶𝐶𝐸𝐸𝐶𝐶,𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐸𝐸𝐶𝐶,𝑌𝑌𝑌𝑌𝑌𝑌𝐴𝐴𝑑𝑑,𝐷𝐷𝐷𝐷

𝐷𝐷𝐷𝐷 = 𝑊𝑊𝐴𝐴𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶 = 𝑂𝑂𝐸𝐸𝑞𝑞𝐷𝐷𝑌𝑌𝐷𝐷𝐶𝐶 , 𝐼𝐼𝐷𝐷𝐷𝐷𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸, 𝑌𝑌𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑑𝑑𝑠𝑠

𝐼𝐼𝐷𝐷𝐷𝐷 = 𝐷𝐷𝐷𝐷 → 𝑁𝑁𝐶𝐶𝑁𝑁 = 0

𝑁𝑁𝐶𝐶𝑁𝑁 = 𝐷𝐷𝑌𝑌𝑇𝑇𝑐𝑐.𝐶𝐶𝐴𝐴𝑇𝑇𝑑 𝑌𝑌𝐴𝐴𝑂𝑂𝐴𝐴𝑁𝑁𝑂𝑂𝑇𝑇− 𝐷𝐷𝑌𝑌𝑇𝑇𝑐𝑐.𝐶𝐶𝐴𝐴𝑇𝑇𝑑 𝑁𝑁𝐴𝐴𝐶𝐶𝑂𝑂𝐴𝐴𝑁𝑁𝑂𝑂𝑇𝑇

Project acceptable if IRR Project > IRR min (owners)

Higher IRR project betterConstant price for breakeven



FINANCIAL (Performance)

Levelized Cost of Electricity [$/MWh]

𝐷𝐷𝑌𝑌𝑇𝑇𝑐𝑐.𝐶𝐶𝐴𝐴𝑇𝑇𝑑 𝐶𝐶𝐴𝐴𝐶𝐶𝑂𝑂𝐴𝐴𝑁𝑁𝑂𝑂𝑇𝑇𝐷𝐷𝑌𝑌𝑇𝑇𝑐𝑐.𝐸𝐸𝐴𝐴𝑌𝑌𝑐𝑐𝐶𝐶𝐸𝐸𝑌𝑌𝑐𝑐𝑌𝑌𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶 𝐺𝐺𝑌𝑌𝐴𝐴𝑌𝑌𝐸𝐸𝐴𝐴𝐶𝐶𝑌𝑌𝑁𝑁𝐴𝐴

𝐿𝐿𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐸𝐸 = 𝑂𝑂 𝐶𝐶𝐴𝐴𝐶𝐶𝐸𝐸𝐶𝐶,𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐸𝐸𝐶𝐶,𝑌𝑌𝑌𝑌𝑌𝑌𝐴𝐴𝑑𝑑,𝐷𝐷𝐷𝐷

𝐷𝐷𝐷𝐷 = 𝑊𝑊𝐴𝐴𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶 = 𝑂𝑂𝐸𝐸𝑞𝑞𝐷𝐷𝑌𝑌𝐷𝐷𝐶𝐶 , 𝐼𝐼𝐷𝐷𝐷𝐷𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸, 𝑌𝑌𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑑𝑑𝑠𝑠

Constant price for breakeven

Minimum PPA Price [$/MWh]

min Price at which IRR project ≥ WACCDifferent from LCOE

depends on hourly tariff schemes and usually public numbers relate to average or base PPA price


CSP Techno-economic Modeling

a number of design objectives shall be considered in the evaluation of CSP plants

and also dependent on the stakeholder

These are all relevant decision criteria and often conflicting

Optimization Trade-offs


Power Plant Modeling in DYESOPT


Process 1: Power Plant Nominal Design

SOLAR FIELD SIZE (SM)Mirror area / reflectivity

Receiver Rating / geometryTower height

TES CAPACITYTank specs

Loss CoefficientsMinimum tank levels

POWER BLOCK CAPACITYCycle Layout Design

Live steam and reheat conditions

MULTI-PARAMETER

VALIDATED SUB-COMPONENT THERMODYNAMIC MODELS

Nominal design for specific conditionse.g. Solar positioning and Irradiance (Location)


Process 2: Annual Dynamic Simulation

Example: Simplified model of a 100 MWe molten salt CSP tower plant with 6h storage (TES) for spot market in Seville, Spain

INPUTS: plant size, weather, TES dispatch-strategy, start-up limitations

OUTPUTS: hourly generation, yield, capacity factor, ...


Ref. Data: Literature / Quotations / Industry Reports / Industry coop

BOTTOM-UP COST MODEL – LOCATION AND TECH DEPENDENT

Process 3: Techno-Economic Calculations

CAPEX [$]

CPB CSF CTES

Csite CBOP Ctow Ccont

Crec

Cland CtaxCDEV-EPC

CDIRECT

CINDIRECT

OPEX [$/y]Clab Cser Cuti Cmisc

LCOE [$/MWh]IRR [%]

Local Economics(e.g. discount rate)

Market Conditions(e.g. electricity price)

𝐶𝐶𝑛𝑛 = 𝐶𝐶𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑓𝑓,𝑛𝑛 ⁄𝐶𝐶𝑛𝑛 𝐶𝐶𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑓𝑓,𝑛𝑛𝑦𝑦𝑛𝑛


Process 4: Multi-Objective OptimizationTo identify Trade-Off Curves between conflicting objectives

A, B and C are optimal configurations

D is sub-optimal (’naive design’)

Genetic Algorithims used to address:

• Discontinuities / non-linearity

• Local optima

To provide decision-makers with universe set of solutions


Location Data (i.e. Meteo & economics) - Technical Reports - Industry

OBJ 1: Minimize Investment (CAPEX)OBJ 2: Maximize Profits (IRRPROJECT)

Case study


Sizing and operation of sub-blocks has a clear impact

PB size, SF size, TES size and dispatch are decisive

Case study


Case Study: Influence of Price Tariffs


IC [MWe]

TES[h]

SM[-]

Tower height

[m]

OperatingStrategy

CAPEX[USD×106]

LCoE[USD/MWe]

Fcap [%]IRR [%]

S1 S2 S3A 110 4 1.35 176 Peaking 371.8 106.5 38.6 24.4 -1.2 11.4B 110 14 2.60 235 Peaking 635.0 89.4 74.6 18.7 2.6 10.9C 110 1 1.38 186 Continuous 353.1 99.6 39.5 20.9 0.5 13.3

Optimums are different for different market conditions

One should not compare projects built under different conditions / locations

B CA

Case Study: Influence of Price Tariffs


Relevant Effects to consider in CSPThermal Stress

”Internal distribution of force per unit area within a body reacting to applied forces”

Restricted expansionTemperature changesMaterial propertiesThermal gradientsConstraints dependant

Thermal Expansion”Tendency of matter to change in shape,

area, and volume in response to a changein temperature”

Free expansionMaterial propertiesInitial lengthTemperature changes

OUTSIDE

INSIDE

Concentrating Solar Power (CSP)From Solar Fundamentals to CSP Plant Modeling

Dr. Rafael Guédez September 5, 2018

KTH Industrial Engineering and Management

Researcher – Energy Department MASEN Talent Campus, Agadir, [email protected]

concentrating solar power (csp) - mtp.ma eduardo guedez mata... · concentrating solar power (csp)...

Documents