Effect of Two Different Heat Transfer Fluids on the Performance of Solar Tower CSP by Comparing Recompression Supercritical CO 2 and Rankine Power Cycles, China

Ephraim Bonah Agyekum, Tomiwa Adebayo (), Festus Bekun, Nallapaneni Manoj Kumar and Manoj Kumar Panjwani
Additional contact information
Ephraim Bonah Agyekum: Department of Nuclear and Renewable Energy, Ural Federal University Named after the First President of Russia Boris Yeltsin, 19 Mira Street, 620002 Ekaterinburg, Russia
Nallapaneni Manoj Kumar: School of Energy and Environment, City University of Hong Kong, Kowloon, Hong Kong, China
Manoj Kumar Panjwani: Department of Energy Systems Engineering, Sukkur IBA University, Sukkur 65200, Pakistan

Energies, 2021, vol. 14, issue 12, 1-19

Abstract: China intends to develop its renewable energy sector in order to cut down on its pollution levels. Concentrated solar power (CSP) technologies are expected to play a key role in this agenda. This study evaluated the technical and economic performance of a 100 MW solar tower CSP in Tibet, China, under different heat transfer fluids (HTF), i.e., Salt (60% NaNO 3 40% KNO 3 ) or HTF A, and Salt (46.5% LiF 11.5% NaF 42% KF) or HTF B under two different power cycles, namely supercritical CO 2 and Rankine. Results from the study suggest that the Rankine power cycle with HTF A and B recorded capacity factors (CF) of 39% and 40.3%, respectively. The sCO 2 power cycle also recorded CFs of 41% and 39.4% for HTF A and HTF B, respectively. A total of 359 GWh of energy was generated by the sCO 2 system with HTF B, whereas the sCO 2 system with HTF A generated a total of 345 GWh in the first year. The Rankine system with HTF A generated a total of 341 GWh, while the system with B as its HTF produced a total of 353 GWh of electricity in year one. Electricity to grid mainly occurred between 10:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. throughout the year. According to the results, the highest levelized cost of energy (LCOE) (real) of 0.1668 USD/kWh was recorded under the Rankine cycle with HTF A. The lowest LCOE (real) of 0.1586 USD/kWh was obtained under the sCO 2 cycle with HTF B. In general, all scenarios were economically viable at the study area; however, the sCO 2 proved to be more economically feasible according to the simulated results.

Keywords: Rankine power cycle; supercritical carbon-dioxide power cycle; concentrated solar power; China; techno-economics (search for similar items in EconPapers)
JEL-codes: Q Q0 Q4 Q40 Q41 Q42 Q43 Q47 Q48 Q49 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2021
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (5)

Downloads: (external link)
https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/14/12/3426/pdf (application/pdf)
https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/14/12/3426/ (text/html)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:gam:jeners:v:14:y:2021:i:12:p:3426-:d:572363

Access Statistics for this article

Energies is currently edited by Ms. Agatha Cao

More articles in Energies from MDPI
Bibliographic data for series maintained by MDPI Indexing Manager ().