0
Research Papers

Viability Assessment of a Concentrated Solar Power Tower With a Supercritical CO2 Brayton Cycle Power Plant

[+] Author and Article Information
Ali Sulaiman Alsagri

Department of Mechanical Engineering,
Unayzah College of Engineering,
Qassim University,
Unayzah 51911, Saudi Arabia
e-mail: a.alsagri@qu.edu.sa

Andrew Chiasson

Department of Mechanical Engineering,
College of Engineering,
University of Dayton,
Dayton 45469, OH
e-mail: achiasson1@udayton.edu

Mohamed Gadalla

Department of Mechanical Engineering,
College of Engineering,
American University of Sharjah,
Sharjah 26666, UAE
e-mail: mgadalla@aus.edu

1Corresponding author.

Manuscript received April 2, 2018; final manuscript received April 11, 2019; published online April 24, 2019. Assoc. Editor: Marc Röger.

J. Sol. Energy Eng 141(5), 051006 (Apr 24, 2019) (15 pages) Paper No: SOL-18-1153; doi: 10.1115/1.4043515 History: Received April 02, 2018; Accepted April 15, 2019

The aim of this study was to conduct thermodynamic and economic analyses of a concentrated solar power (CSP) plant to drive a supercritical CO2 recompression Brayton cycle. The objectives were to assess the system viability in a location of moderate-to-high-temperature solar availability to sCO2 power block during the day and to investigate the role of thermal energy storage with 4, 8, 12, and 16 h of storage to increase the solar share and the yearly energy generating capacity. A case study of system optimization and evaluation is presented in a city in Saudi Arabia (Riyadh). To achieve the highest energy production per unit cost, the heliostat geometry field design integrated with a sCO2 Brayton cycle with a molten-salt thermal energy storage (TES) dispatch system and the corresponding operating parameters are optimized. A solar power tower (SPT) is a type of CSP system that is of particular interest in this research because it can operate at relatively high temperatures. The present SPT-TES field comprises of heliostat field mirrors, a solar tower, a receiver, heat exchangers, and two molten-salt TES tanks. The main thermoeconomic indicators are the capacity factor and the levelized cost of electricity (LCOE). The research findings indicate that SPT-TES with a supercritical CO2 power cycle is economically viable with 12 h thermal storage using molten salt. The results also show that integrating 12 h-TES with an SPT has a high positive impact on the capacity factor of 60% at the optimum LCOE of $0.1078/kW h.

Copyright © 2019 by ASME
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

Coelho, B., Varga, S., Oliveira, A., and Mendes, A., 2014, “Optimization of an Atmospheric Air Volumetric Central Receiver System: Impact of Solar Multiple, Storage Capacity and Control Strategy,” Renew. Energy, 63, pp. 392–401. [CrossRef]
Hernández-Moro, J., and Martínez-Duart, J. M., 2013, “Analytical Model for Solar PV and CSP Electricity Costs: Present LCOE Values and Their Future Evolution,” Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev., 20, pp. 119–132. [CrossRef]
Parrado, C., Girard, A., Simon, F., and Fuentealba, E., 2016, “2050 LCOE (Levelized Cost of Energy) Projection for a Hybrid PV (Photovoltaic)-CSP (Concentrated Solar Power) Plant in the Atacama Desert, Chile,” Energy, 94, pp. 422–430. [CrossRef]
Ju, X., Xu, C., Hu, Y., Han, X., Wei, G., and Du, X., 2017, “A Review on the Development of Photovoltaic/Concentrated Solar Power (PV-CSP) Hybrid Systems,” Sol. Energy Mater. Sol. Cells, 161, pp. 305–327. [CrossRef]
Rea, J. E., Oshman, C. J., Olsen, M. L., Hardin, C. L., Glatzmaier, G. C., Siegel, N. P., Parilla, P. A., Ginley, D. S., and Toberer, E. S., 2018, “Performance Modeling and Techno-Economic Analysis of a Modular Concentrated Solar Power Tower With Latent Heat Storage,” Appl. Energy, 217, pp. 143–152. [CrossRef]
Fisher, K., Yu, Z., Striling, R., and Holman, Z., 2017, “PVMirrors: Hybrid PV/CSP Collectors That Enable Lower LCOEs,” AIP Conf. Proc., 1850, p. 020004.
Schmitt, J., Wilkes, J., Allison, T., Bennett, J., Wygant, K., and Pelton, R., “Lowering the Levelized Cost of Electricity of a Concentrating Solar Power Tower With a Supercritical Carbon Dioxide Power Cycle,” Proceedings of ASME Turbo Expo 2017: Turbomachinery Technical Conference and Exposition GT2017, Charlotte, NC, June 26–30, 2017.
Hinkley, J. T., Hayward, J. A., Curtin, B., Wonhas, A., Boyd, R., Grima, C., Tadros, A., Hall, R., and Naicker, K., 2013, “An Analysis of the Costs and Opportunities for Concentrating Solar Power in Australia,” Renew. Energy, 57, pp. 653–661. [CrossRef]
Turchi, C., Mehos, M., Ho, C. K., and Kolb, G. J., 2010, Current and Future Costs for Parabolic Trough and Power Tower Systems in the US Market. No. NREL/CP-5500-49303. National Renewable Energy Lab (NREL), Golden, CO.
Avila-Marin, A. L., Fernandez-Reche, J., and Tellez, F. M., 2013, “Evaluation of the Potential of Central Receiver Solar Power Plants: Configuration, Optimization and Trends,” Appl. Energy, 112, pp. 274–288. [CrossRef]
Eddhibi, F., Ben Amara, M., Balghouthi, M., and Guizani, A., 2015, “Optical Study of Solar Tower Power Plants,” J. Phys. Conf. Ser., 596(1), p. 012018. [CrossRef]
Iverson, B. D., Conboy, T. M., Pasch, J. J., and Kruizenga, A. M., 2013, “Supercritical CO2 Brayton Cycles for Solar-Thermal Energy,” Appl. Energy, 111, pp. 957–970. [CrossRef]
Atif, M., and Al-Sulaiman, F. A., 2017, “Energy and Exergy Analyses of Solar Tower Power Plant Driven Supercritical Carbon Dioxide Recompression Cycles for Six Different Locations,” Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev., 68, pp. 153–167. [CrossRef]
Al-Sulaiman, F. A., and Atif, M., 2015, “Performance Comparison of Different Supercritical Carbon Dioxide Brayton Cycles Integrated With a Solar Power Tower,” Energy, 82, pp. 61–71. [CrossRef]
Wang, K., and He, Y. L., 2017, “Thermodynamic Analysis and Optimization of a Molten Salt Solar Power Tower Integrated With a Recompression Supercritical CO2 Brayton Cycle Based on Integrated Modeling,” Energy Convers. Manag., 135, pp. 336–350. [CrossRef]
Wang, K., He, Y. L., and Zhu, H. H., 2017, “Integration Between Supercritical CO2 Brayton Cycles and Molten Salt Solar Power Towers: A Review and a Comprehensive Comparison of Different Cycle Layouts,” Appl. Energy, 195, pp. 819–836. [CrossRef]
Flesch, R., Frantz, C., Maldonado Quinto, D., and Schwarzbözl, P., 2017, “Towards an Optimal Aiming for Molten Salt Power Towers,” Sol. Energy, 155, pp. 1273–1281. [CrossRef]
Turchi, C. S., Vidal, J., and Bauer, M., 2018, “Molten Salt Power Towers Operating at 600–650°C: Salt Selection and Cost Benefits,” Sol. Energy, 164, pp. 38–46. [CrossRef]
Cocco, D., and Serra, F., 2015, “Performance Comparison of Two-Tank Direct and Thermocline Thermal Energy Storage Systems for 1 MWe Class Concentrating Solar Power Plants,” Energy, 81, pp. 526–536. [CrossRef]
“System Advisor Model,” Version 2017.11.11, National Renewable Energy Laboratory, Golden, CO.
Collado, F. J., and Guallar, J., 2013, “A Review of Optimized Design Layouts for Solar Power Tower Plants with Campo Code,” Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev., 20, pp. 142–154. [CrossRef]
Besarati, S. M., 2014, “Analysis of Advanced Supercritical Carbon Dioxide Power Cycles for Concentrated Solar Power Applications,” University of South Florida.
Hottel, H. C., 1976, “A Simple Model for Estimating the Transmittance of Direct Solar Radiation Through Clear Atmospheres,” Sol. Energy, 18(2), pp. 129–134. [CrossRef]
Wagner, M. J., 2008, “Simulation and Predictive Performance Modeling of Utility-Scale Central Receiver System Power Plants,” M.S. thesis, University of Wisconsin, Madison.
Schmitz, M., Schwarzbözl, P., Buck, R., and Pitz-Paal, R., 2006, “Assessment of the Potential Improvement due to Multiple Apertures in Central Receiver Systems With Secondary Concentrators,” Sol. Energy, 80(1), pp. 111–120. [CrossRef]
Atif, M., and Al-Sulaiman, F. A., 2015, “Optimization of Heliostat Field Layout in Solar Central Receiver Systems on Annual Basis Using Differential Evolution Algorithm,” Energy Convers. Manag., 95, pp. 1–9. [CrossRef]
Wagner, M. J., and Wendelin, T., 2018, “SolarPILOT™: A Power Tower Solar Field Layout and Characterization Tool,” Sol. Energy, 171, pp. 185–196. [CrossRef]
Chacartegui, R., Muñoz De Escalona, J. M., Sánchez, D., Monje, B., and Sánchez, T., 2011, “Alternative Cycles Based on Carbon Dioxide for Central Receiver Solar Power Plants,” Appl. Therm. Eng., 31(5), pp. 872–879. [CrossRef]
Zare, V., and Hasanzadeh, M., 2016, “Energy and Exergy Analysis of a Closed Brayton Cycle-Based Combined Cycle for Solar Power Tower Plants,” Energy Convers. Manag., 128, pp. 227–237. [CrossRef]
Oh, C. H., Kim, E. S., and Patterson, M., 2010, “Design Option of Heat Exchanger for the Next Generation Nuclear Plant,” ASME J. Eng. Gas Turbines Power, 132(3), p. 032903. [CrossRef]
Dostal, V., 2004, “A Supercritical Carbon Dioxide Cycle”.
Alsagri, A. S., Chiasson, A., and Aljabr, A., 2018, “Performance Comparison and Parametric Analysis of sCO2 Power Cycles Configurations,” ASME 2018 International Mechanical Engineering Congress and Exposition, Pittsburgh, PA, Nov. 9–15, 2018, p. V06BT08A007. American Society of Mechanical Engineers. Volume 6B: Energy.
Seidel, W., 2011, “Model Development and Annual Simulation of the Supercritical Carbon Dioxide Brayton Cycle for Concentrating Solar Power Applications,” M.S. thesis, University of Wisconsin, Madison.
Dyreby, J. J., 2014, “Modeling the Supercritical Carbon Dioxide Brayton Cycle With Recompression,” Ph.D. thesis, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, WI.
Dostal, V., and Kulhanek, M., “Research on the Supercritical Carbon Dioxide Cycles in the Czech Republic,” Proceedings of SCCO2 Power Cycle Symposium 2009 RPI, Troy, NY, April 29–30, 2009.
Bryant, J. C., Saari, H., and Zanganeh, K., “An Analysis and Comparison of the Simple and Recompression Supercritical CO2 Cycles,” Supercritical CO2 Power Cycle Symposium, Boulder, CO, May 24–25, 2011.
Turchi, C. S., and Heath, G. A.,2013, Molten Salt Power Tower Cost Model for the System Advisor Model (SAM). No. NREL/TP-5500-57625. National Renewable Energy Lab (NREL), Golden, CO.
Mehos, M., Turchi, C., Vidal, J., Wagner, M., Ma, Z., Ho, C., Kolb, W., Andraka, C., and Kruizenga, A., 2017, “Concentrating Solar Power Gen3 Demonstration Roadmap,” National Renewable Energy Laboratory, Report No. NREL/Tp-5500-67464.
Mancini, T. R., Gary, J. A., Kolb, G. J., and Ho, C. K., 2011, “Power Tower Technology Roadmap and Cost Reduction Plan,” Albuquerque, NM.
Kelly, B. D., 2010, “Advanced Thermal Storage for Central Receivers with Supercritical Coolants”.
Comello, S. D., Glenk, G., and Reichelstein, S., 2017, “Levelized Cost of Electricity Calculator”.
Jones, S. A., Lumia, R., Davenport, R., Thomas, R., Gorman, D., Kolb, G. J., and Donnelly, M. W., 2007, “Heliostat Cost Reduction Study,” Sandia National Laboratory, Report No. Sand2007-3293.
Alsagri, A. S., Chiasson, A., and Aljabr, A., “Thermodynamic Analysis and Multi-Objective Optimizations of a Combined Recompression sCO2 Brayton Cycle: tCO2 Rankine Cycles for Waste Heat Recovery,” ASME 2018 International Mechanical Engineering Congress and Exposition, Pittsburgh, PA, Nov. 9–15, 2018, p. V06BT08A007. American Society of Mechanical Engineers. Volume 8A: Heat Transfer and Thermal Engineering.
Kolb, G. J., 2011, “An Evaluation of Possible Next-Generation High-Temperature Molten-Salt Power Towers,” Sandia National Laboratories, Report No. SAND2011-9320.

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 1

Concentrated solar power tower system coupled with thermal energy storage

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 2

Distance between heliostats

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 3

Loss parameters in the heliostat field [22]

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 4

Method for selecting direct normal irradiance

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 5

(a) Recompression Brayton configuration and (b) temperature–entropy diagram of sCO2 recompression cycle

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 6

Sub-heat exchanger

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 7

An explanation of heat exchanger nodalization

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 8

Efficiency at different number of sub-heat exchangers

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 9

Recuperated Brayton cycle efficiency at different maximum pressure and pressure ratio: (a) Dostal’s et al. model and (b) current model

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 10

Recuperated Brayton cycle efficiency at different maximum pressure and pressure ratio: (a) Bryant’s et al. model and (b) current model

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 11

Monthly solar irradiance in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 12

Levelized cost as a function of solar multiple and size of thermal energy storage

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 13

Capacity factor as a function of solar multiple and size of thermal energy storage

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 14

Heliostat field layout with optical efficiency

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 15

Atmospheric attenuation efficiency of each heliostat

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 16

Cosine efficiency of each heliostat

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 17

Interception efficiency of each heliostat

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 18

Breakdowns of capital cost

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 19

Breakdown of the solar power tower system cost fraction for different thermal energy storage capacity

Tables

Errata

Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging and repositioning the boxes below.

Related Journal Articles
Related eBook Content
Topic Collections

Sorry! You do not have access to this content. For assistance or to subscribe, please contact us:

  • TELEPHONE: 1-800-843-2763 (Toll-free in the USA)
  • EMAIL: asmedigitalcollection@asme.org
Sign In