status and perspectives of csp technology · significant change in market share between power tower...
TRANSCRIPT
Status and Perspectives of CSP Technology
Robert Pitz-Paal
1. Characteristics of CSP
2. Market und Cost Development
3. Benefits for a mix of PV und CSP
4. Innovation to drive cost reduction
5. Conclusions
Outline
> AGCS Expert Days 2017 > Robert Pitz-Paal • CSP Technology > 02.11.2017 DLR.de • Chart 2
1. Characteristics of CSP
2. Market und Cost Development
3. Benefits for a mix of PV und CSP
4. Innovation to drive cost reduction
5. Conclusions
Outline
> AGCS Expert Days 2017 > Robert Pitz-Paal • CSP Technology > 02.11.2017 DLR.de • Chart 3
Conventional power plant
What is CSP?
4
www.DLR.de • Folie 4 > AGCS Expert Days 2017 > Robert Pitz-Paal • CSP Technology > 02.11.2017
What is CSP?
5
www.DLR.de • Folie 5
Concentrating solarpower plant
> AGCS Expert Days 2017 > Robert Pitz-Paal • CSP Technology > 02.11.2017
Trough vs. Tower
> AGCS Expert Days 2017 > Robert Pitz-Paal • CSP Technology > 02.11.2017 DLR.de • Chart 6
© DLR
Line Focus
Point Focus
Trough vs. Tower
• Solar energy collected by reflection
> AGCS Expert Days 2017 > Robert Pitz-Paal • CSP Technology > 02.11.2017 DLR.de • Chart 7
• Solar energy collected by piping
Solar Resource direct und diffuse radiation Block size mWatt to some 100 Installation: everywhere (roof top) etc.) Capacity : 700 – 2000 full load hours Back-up Capacity external (e.g. gas turbine) Inst. Power (2016) 305 GW LCOE 0,03 – 0,13 €/kWh
direct Radiation 10 MW to some 100 MW flat unused land 2000 – 7000 full load hours therm. Storage / fossil backup 5 GW 0,06 – 0,12 €/kWh
Characteristics PV CSP
> AGCS Expert Days 2017 > Robert Pitz-Paal • CSP Technology > 02.11.2017 DLR.de • Chart 8
Thermal Storage vs. Electric Storage
CSP with thermal storage and fossil back provides reliable dispatchble power at no additional cost
2000 h
+2000 h
η >95 %
η = 75%
200 h
Firm capacity
> AGCS Expert Days 2017 > Robert Pitz-Paal • CSP Technology > 02.11.2017 DLR.de • Chart 9
CSP only suitable in areas with high direct normal radiation > AGCS Expert Days 2017 > Robert Pitz-Paal • CSP Technology > 02.11.2017 DLR.de • Chart 10
High shares of cheap Wind and PV capacity lead to a strongly fluctuating residual load that need to covered by other technologies
> AGCS Expert Days 2017 > Robert Pitz-Paal • CSP Technology > 02.11.2017 DLR.de • Chart 11
PV and CSP
• Two technologies that complement each other perfectly in many regions of the world, in particular if large shares fossil fuel can not be used Scenario for Electricity Supply for North Africa for 2015 based on high shares of renewable energies *
*Results from the EU Better Study (www.better-project.net)
> AGCS Expert Days 2017 > Robert Pitz-Paal • CSP Technology > 02.11.2017 DLR.de • Chart 12
1. Characteristics of CSP
2. Market und Cost Development
3. Benefits for a mix of PV und CSP
4. Innovation to drive cost reduction
5. Conclusions
Outline
> AGCS Expert Days 2017 > Robert Pitz-Paal • CSP Technology > 02.11.2017 DLR.de • Chart 13
Global expansion of CSP in three phases
> AGCS Expert Days 2017 > Robert Pitz-Paal • CSP Technology > 02.11.2017 DLR.de • Chart 14
Lilliestam, J., Labordena, M., Patt, A. & Pfenninger, S. Nat. Energy 2, 17094 (2017).
Market Development CSP
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
2010 2015 2020 2025
Inst
alle
d po
wer
(cum
ulat
ed, G
We)
Year historisch Heliokon
40% 60%
2020 Tower
2020 Trough 60%
40% 2025 Tower
2025 Trough
Significant change in market share between Power Tower and Trough
5 GWe installed in 2015
8.5 GWe will be installed until 2020 Currently 2 GWe under construction
18.5 GWe planned until 2025 depend on cost development
Confirmed Planned
Tower
Trough
www.DLR.de • Chart 15 > AGCS Expert Days 2017 > Robert Pitz-Paal • CSP Technology > 02.11.2017
Cost reduction over last 5 years at a learning rate of > 25%
> AGCS Expert Days 2017 > Robert Pitz-Paal • CSP Technology > 02.11.2017 DLR.de • Chart 16
Lilliestam, J., Labordena, M., Patt, A. & Pfenninger, S. Nat. Energy 2, 17094 (2017).
Cost for CSP and PV have dropped dramatically
• Installed CSP capacity is more than an order of magnitude smaller than PV capacty
Energy sales price PV
Energy sales prices CSP
2014
2007
2014
Module price PV
Dubai 2017 Chile 2016
www.DLR.de • Chart 17
2016
Australia 2017
> AGCS Expert Days 2017 > Robert Pitz-Paal • CSP Technology > 02.11.2017
More than 5000 full load hours
Solar electricity competive with natural gas? 700 MW @ 5500 h CSP á 7,3 $cents/kWh + 800 MW @ 2300 h PV a 3 $Cents/kWh
= 5,95 $cents/kWh = 5,07 €cents/kWh for 24/7 electricity
> AGCS Expert Days 2017 > Robert Pitz-Paal • CSP Technology > 02.11.2017 DLR.de • Chart 18
What is behind these numbers?
Example Dubai: DEWA Project: What do we know? • PPA Price 7,3 $cents/kWh • PPA duration 35 years • Total investment 3‘900 Mio.$ = 5570 $/kW • Solar Resource: ~2200kWh/m²a • average of 12 hours of storage
What we don‘t know • Capacity factor of plant? • O&M cost? Result in financing conditions (WACC) 4,8%
Let‘ try to estimate 60% 2% of invest
www.DLR.de • Chart 19 > AGCS Expert Days 2017 > Robert Pitz-Paal • CSP Technology > 02.11.2017
What does a WACC of 4,8% mean?
• All these constellations leads to a WACC of 4,8%
Loan Period 35y 35 y 35y Equity share 20% 30% 20% Loan interest 2,5% 2,5% 3,5% IRR 6,1% 5,0 % 2,8% (during loan period) ⇒Very low financing conditions, compared to other markets ⇒Places with better solar resources may allow for higher financing cost at
the same electricity price
www.DLR.de • Chart 20 > AGCS Expert Days 2017 > Robert Pitz-Paal • CSP Technology > 02.11.2017
1. Characteristics of CSP
2. Market und Cost Development
3. Benefits for a mix of PV und CSP
4. Innovation to drive cost reduction
5. Conclusions
Outline
> AGCS Expert Days 2017 > Robert Pitz-Paal • CSP Technology > 02.11.2017 DLR.de • Chart 21
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
[MW
]
x 1
00
00
Installed Capacity
PumpBatteryCSP_SolarPV_SolarWindOtherHydro_NCREHydro_RORHydro_DamDieselLNGGeothermalBiomassCoal
2029
Social acceptance
Energy demand
Technological change in BESS
Externality costs
RE investment costs
Fossil fuel costs
CSP LCOE
Scenario B High High Low High Low High USD 50 /MWh by 2025
Chile Scenario Results – Expansion Model Scenario 1
0
5
10
15
20
25
[GW
h]
x 1
00
00
Generation
BatteryPumpDieselPV_SolarCSP_SolarWindHydro_RORHydro_NCREGeothermalOtherBiomassLNGHydro_DamCoal
Chile Scenario Results – Expansion Model Scenario 1
2029
Social acceptance
Energy demand
Technological change in BESS
Externality costs
RE investment costs
Fossil fuel costs
CSP LCOE
Scenario B High High Low High Low High USD 50 /MWh by 2025
0
5000
10000
15000
20000
Pow
er (M
W)
PV_SOLCSP_SOLLNG_CCGTLNG_GTWINDHYDRO_RORHYDRO_DAMGEODIECOGBIOCOAL
Chile Szenario results: Short Term Simulation
2035 summer week dispatch by technology
CSP
1. Characteristics of CSP
2. Market und Cost Development
3. Benefits for a mix of PV und CSP
4. Innovation to drive cost reduction
5. Conclusions
Outline
> AGCS Expert Days 2017 > Robert Pitz-Paal • CSP Technology > 02.11.2017 DLR.de • Chart 25
Advanced Silicon Oil in Parabolic Troughs Environmental Safety Capacity / Performance
• low pour point (-55°C) reduces auxiliary consumption for freeze protection
• slower degradation at 425°C in comparison to DPO/BP at only 400°C
• 425°C field outlet temperature increases conversion efficiency of Rankine cycle and allows for smaller heat storage systems
> AGCS Expert Days 2017 > Robert Pitz-Paal • CSP Technology > 02.11.2017 DLR.de • Chart 26
Advanced Silicon Oil in Parabolic Troughs
Enhanced thermal stability
• Comparison of DPO/BP at only 400°C with HELISOL® 5A at 425°C • Considerably slower formation of low boiling degradation products • Less hydrogen formation (enhanced receiver lifetimes expected)
> AGCS Expert Days 2017 > Robert Pitz-Paal • CSP Technology > 02.11.2017 DLR.de • Chart 27
A
A
A
Advanced Silicon Oil in Parabolic Troughs
Benefits over DPO/BP state-of-the-art thermal oil • Increased performance due to higher live steam temperatures • Lower storage costs due to increased temperature spread • LCOE by cost reduction potential of about 5% for different sites and plant sizes
> AGCS Expert Days 2017 > Robert Pitz-Paal • CSP Technology > 02.11.2017 DLR.de • Chart 28
A
Heat transfer fluid DPO/BP HELISOL® 5A Unit Nominal solar field temperature °C 393 430 Gross power block efficiency (wet cooling) % 39.0 40.5 Gross power block efficiency (ACC) % 37.7 39.2 Nominal specific solar field parasitics W/m² 8 6.4 Specific investment solar field €/m² 235 235 Specific investment storage €/kWh 40 33 Specific HTF cost (identical) €/kg 4 4 Annual HTF replacement rate (identical) % 2 2 Mean volumetric heat capacity kJ/(m³K) 1871 1397
SITEF Project 2016-2017
> AGCS Expert Days 2017 > Robert Pitz-Paal • CSP Technology > 02.11.2017 DLR.de • Chart 29
German-Spanish cooperation PROMETEO test facility at Plataforma Solar de Almería (Spain) • Durability and loop scale applicability of HELISOL® 5A at 425°C • Comprehensive laboratory analysis – degradation • Functionality parabolic trough collector components at up to 450°C
• Receiver Tubes • Rotation and expansion performing assemblies
• Economic benefit of HELISOL® 5A • technical investments / greater energy output • Safety concept and (permitting process for relevant target markets)
Outline
1. Characteristics of CSP
2. Market und Cost Development
3. Benefits for a Mix of PV und CSP
4. Innovation to drive Cost reduction Near term: Advanced silicon Oil in parabolic troughs Mid term: Parabolic Trough with Molten Salt Long term: Particle Receiver Technology 5. Conclusions
> AGCS Expert Days 2017 > Robert Pitz-Paal • CSP Technology > 02.11.2017 DLR.de • Chart 30
Molten Salt in Parabolic Trough Power Plants
Thermal oil (TO) based plant Molten salt (MS) based plant
Advantages of the Molten Salt System • Higher overall system efficiencies due to higher working parameters (up to
565°C/150 bar instead of 400°C/100 bar) • Solar Field and power block fully decoupled • Lower price for heat transfer fluid (HTF), no need of heat exchangers and
additional pumps • Environmentally friendly heat transfer fluid vs. thermal oil
DLR.de • Folie 31 > AGCS Expert Days 2017 > Robert Pitz-Paal • CSP Technology > 02.11.2017
DLR.de • Folie 32
Parabolic Trough Night operation /w molten salt
Salt Mixtures Decomp. Temperature
Freezing Temperature
MS-A NaK-NO3 (Solar Salt)
>550°C 238°C @ 60/40 Mixture
MS-B NaKCa-NO3 <500°C ~150°C MS-C NaKLi-NO3 ~530°C ~140°C
> AGCS Expert Days 2017 > Robert Pitz-Paal • CSP Technology > 02.11.2017
• Minimum temperature in solar field must not drop to solidification temperature of the salt
• Choice of salt defines hours of so called anti-freeze operation of a cooled down solar field, e.g. during night and overcast times
• Energy for anti-freeze operation during night and overcast situations is provided by the sun! Part of the thermal energy storage is reserved for anti-freeze and loaded during the day. Only in seldom cases of exception a fossil burner supports.
• Wirkungsgrad und Kostenpotenzial
DLR.de • Folie 33
Energy flow diagram of MS-A molten salt parabolic trough system
Optical loss PTCs1207.8 GWh
Heat loss PTRs293.9 GWh
Heat loss pipings25.6 GWh
Heat loss tanks8.3 GWh
Heat loss SG9.8 GWh
Heat loss auxiliary heater
4.5 GWh
Power block768.1 GWh
Power block heat up48.2 GWh
Solar field Power block
Heat loss switch steady-->transient
16.2 GWh
Auxiliary heater45.2 GWh
Pump solar field12.6 GWhe
Tanks and AH
Pump power block12.2 GWhe
Electricity 596 GWhe
numerical error0.7 GWh
Loss pump7.2 GWh
Dumping140.9 GWh
Sun3057.2 GWh
100%
gross 19,2%
Net 18,1%
3% of solar thermal power by fossil fuel
2,1% of electricity 2% of electricity
> AGCS Expert Days 2017 > Robert Pitz-Paal • CSP Technology > 02.11.2017
Rügamer, T., H. Kamp, et al. (2013). Molten Salt for Parabolic Trough Applications: System Simulation and Scale Effects. 19th SolarPACES Conference, Las Vegas.
DLR.de • Folie 34
Road map of Cost reductions for molten salt parabolic trough plants at (IRR of 8% over 25 years)
2013
> AGCS Expert Days 2017 > Robert Pitz-Paal • CSP Technology > 02.11.2017
1. Filling and draining of the plant 2. Anti-freeze parasitic load 3. Danger of freezing 4. Blackout scenarios 5. Corrosion at high temperature 6. System performance 7. Flexible connection technology: Proof of functionality and tightness 8. Steam Generating System leakage 9. Maintenance procedures 10. Stability of salt mixtures
DLR.de • Folie 35
Proof of concept needs to show:
> AGCS Expert Days 2017 > Robert Pitz-Paal • CSP Technology > 02.11.2017
> AGCS Expert Days 2017 > Robert Pitz-Paal • CSP Technology > 02.11.2017 DLR.de • Folie 36
DLR‘s objective in Évora, Portugal: to confute all concerns
Once-Through Steam Generating System
Thermal Energy Storage
Drainage Tank with permanent Melting Unit
Solar Field Site
Control Room
Wind Fence
Project: HPS2 – High Performance Solar 2 Commissioning of the plant: January 2018
W/S-Cycle
HelioTrough loop will be installed
See also: http://www.dlr.de/sf/en/desktopdefault.aspx/tabid-10436/20
Outline
1. Characteristics of CSP
2. Market und Cost Development
3. Benefits for a Mix of PV und CSP
4. Innovation to drive Cost reduction Near term: Advanced silicon Oil in parabolic troughs Mid term: Parabolic Trough with Molten Salt Long term: Particle Receiver Technology 5. Conclusions
> AGCS Expert Days 2017 > Robert Pitz-Paal • CSP Technology > 02.11.2017 DLR.de • Chart 37
Long Term Perspective: Path to High Temperatures
Target: higher system efficiency • Increased power cycle efficiency by increased process temperatures
• Steam cycles with up to 620°C: ηcycle up to 48% • Supercritical CO2 cycles with up to 700°C: ηcycle > 50%?
• Higher cycle efficiency ⇒ less heliostats required ⇒ lower cost • Higher receiver temperature: Trec > 600°C
• Suitable heat transfer media for higher receiver temperatures: • New molten salt mixtures: cost, corrosion, degradation? • Liquid metals: cost, corrosion, safety? • Solid particles?
> AGCS Expert Days 2017 > Robert Pitz-Paal • CSP Technology > 02.11.2017 DLR.de • Chart 38
Bauxite particles • Very high operation temperature possible (up to 1000°C) • Direct absorption of solar radiation: high efficiency
⇒ no solar flux density limit, less high temperature materials
• Direct storage of the heat transfer medium • High temperature spread in storage ⇒ low storage cost • Low parasitic power: no freezing ⇒ no trace-heating
Reference system: molten salt, steam cycle @540°C
Principle of a Solar Particle System
> AGCS Expert Days 2017 > Robert Pitz-Paal • CSP Technology > 02.11.2017 DLR.de • Chart 39
Particle Direct Absorption Receiver: Falling Film Receiver
• Solar tests at temperatures > 700°C • Particles: sintered bauxite (“proppants”) • High particle velocities might be problematic (abrasion, attrition)
Particle receiver tests at Sandia Natl. Labs, USA
> AGCS Expert Days 2017 > Robert Pitz-Paal • CSP Technology > 02.11.2017 DLR.de • Chart 40
DLR Approach: Direct Absorption Receiver: Centrifugal Receiver • Rotating receiver • Centrifugal force keeps particles at the wall • Residence time controlled by rotational speed
• Good temperature control in all load situations
> AGCS Expert Days 2017 > Robert Pitz-Paal • CSP Technology > 02.11.2017 DLR.de • Chart 41
Centrifugal Particle Receiver: 10kW Test Receiver
receiver
Successful lab testing up to 900°C
Electric Xe arc lamps High receiver efficiency due to high flux capability
> AGCS Expert Days 2017 > Robert Pitz-Paal • CSP Technology > 02.11.2017 DLR.de • Chart 42
• 500 kWth currently under testing • >800°C particle outlet temperature
already achieved
Centrifugal Particle Receiver: 500kW Prototype
DLR solar tower test facility in Jülich, Germany
> AGCS Expert Days 2017 > Robert Pitz-Paal • CSP Technology > 02.11.2017 DLR.de • Chart 43
Economics of Solar Particle Systems vs. State of the Art Molten Salt Tower ⇒ LCoE reduction potential: about 16%
> AGCS Expert Days 2017 > Robert Pitz-Paal • CSP Technology > 02.11.2017 DLR.de • Chart 44
1. Characteristics of CSP
2. Market und Cost Development
3. Benefits for a mix of PV und CSP
4. Innovation to drive cost reduction
5. Conclusions
Outline
> AGCS Expert Days 2017 > Robert Pitz-Paal • CSP Technology > 02.11.2017 DLR.de • Chart 45
• PV and CSP with storage and hybridization are complementary technologies: • PV provides energy • CSP Energy + secured power
• PV market is booming since today often the most cost-effective option,
• CSP is at the edge of being competitive to gas in combination with PV: further cost reduction is expected
• Cost reduction requires higher process temperature to reach to higher solar-electric efficiency
• New heat transfer fluids needs to be integrated to reach higher process temperature
• Advanced oil, molten salt or solid particles are currently under large-scale testing to proof their feasibility
Conclusion
> AGCS Expert Days 2017 > Robert Pitz-Paal • CSP Technology > 02.11.2017 DLR.de • Chart 46