3E (Energy-Exergy-Economic) comparative study of integrating wet and dry cooling systems in solar tower power plants. (1st June 2020)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Boukelia, T.E.; Bouraoui, A.; Laouafi, A.; Djimli, S.; Kabar, Y.
• Is Part Of: Energy. Volume 200(2020)
• Publication Date: 2020-06-01
• Subjects: Annual water consumption -- Cooling mode -- Energy-exergy-economic -- Performance -- Solar tower power plant; Power resources -- Periodicals; Power (Mechanics) -- Periodicals; Energy consumption -- Periodicals; 333.7905
• DOI: 10.1016/j.energy.2020.117567
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 0360-5442

Abstract

Abstract: Unlike conventional power plants based on fossil fuels, which are generally erected in the coastal regions, where water resource availability is not a critical limitation, concentrating solar power (CSP) plants are usually installed in desert zones where there is a lack of water resources. In this regard, the main aim of the present study is to investigate the effects of deploying dry cooling option on the techno-economic performances of a solar tower power plant (STPP), in terms of energetic and exergetic yields, as well as total investment cost, net present value, and levelized cost of electricity. The obtained results show considerable drops in energy and exergy yields of the simulated plant with integrated dry cooling system compared to the one with the classic wet cooling mode. Furthermore, there are clear increases in the investment cost, as well as the levelized cost of electricity in the first plant. However, the main advantage of integrating dry system to solar tower power plants is to reduce its annual water consumption by almost 94.40%. The importance of this study is to define the main additions and shortcomings of using dry cooling system in solar thermal power plants, and which stage of the process needs to be improved. Highlights: The effects of deploying two cooling modes in solar tower plants were investigated. The techno-economic competitiveness of dry and wet cooling has been presented. 3 E (Energy-Exergy-Economic) comparative study of the two options has nbeen performed.