Comparative Techno-Economic Study of Solar Thermal Power Plants with Various Capacities: A Case for the Northern Part of Cameroon

Abstract

The purpose of this article is to evaluate the commercial use of different solar thermal power technologies in the northern part of Cameroon. For this, a techno-economic study highlighting the design of each technology using various capacities of the studied plant. The main objective was to carry out, technical, economic and financial parameters able to attract investors for the use of such kinds of technology to generate electricity in these provinces [G1] having a good direct normal irradiation estimated at 2145kWh/m²/year and meet at the energy demand of population living with less than 10% electrification rate in rural area. During this study, we considered some technical paramet[G2] ers as total annual DNI received by solar field, Field thermal output, thermal system transfer rated, overall energy efficiency and yearly electricity production. The last parameter was a key parameter for techno-economic analysis of the studied system.[G3]  Some parameters as the payback period (PBP), internal rated return (IRR), net present value (NPV) and levelized cost of electricity (LCOE) have been found out during the economic analysis. The bonus carbon can be allowed to a company because of the good electricity generation has been applied during the calculation of these parameters. Other parameters as the initial investment and incentives from the government or financial named in this study have been considered also. The [G4] environmental and social impact assessment (ESIA) related to this purpose give a priority to criteria as grid, land and water access and use for electricity generating. Then, the ESIA study has been considered as a key parameter for Multi-Criteria Decision Maker. The studied systems  had various range capacity  starting from 5 MW to 100 MW  and their analysis in the sub-Saharan region[G5]  shown that, the cost of installed kW for concentrating solar technologies (CST) varies between 4550 – 6745 US Dollar   ,  5240 – 9365 US Dollar   and 5100 - 6290 US Dollar   and the levelized cost of electricity per kWh varies between 10.22-13.22 USD cents, 11.07-19.81 USD cents and 14.63-15.6 USD cents for Parabolic trough collector(PTC), Solar Tower (ST) and Linear Fresnel (LF) respectively. The solar tower technology can't be efficient compared to other techniques for the thermal power plant (TPP) under 10 MW[G6] [G7] [G8] _e due to the initial investment. It important to add this, the cost of installed kW in the sub-Saharan region is higher[G9]  than order region because of transportation fees, the lake of solar thermal manufactures for insulation and piping system, metal structure and expertise related to total indirect cost such as engineering procurement construction and advanced ESIA services in this area.  The support of financial institution through CER/TAX and a similar approach in addition to existing subvention[G10] [G11] s for such technology can decrease considerably both payback period and feed-in-tariff (FİT) price of the studied system and contribute to developing the sector [G12] by creating an attractive market for investors. 

Keywords

• CST,LCOE,Carbon bonus,ESIA,FİT

References

1. International Renewable Energy Agency (IRENA) (2012). Renewable Energy Technologies: Cost Analysis Series, Concentrating Solar Power. Bonn, Germany.
2. International Renewable Energy Agency (IRENA) (2013). Renewable Power Generation Costs in 2012: An Overview. Bonn, Germany.
3. International Renewable Energy Agency (IRENA) (2015). Renewable Power Generation Costs in 2014. Bonn, Germany.
4. International Renewable Energy Agency (IRENA) (2018). Renewable Power Generation Costs in 2017. Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates.
5. International Renewable Energy Agency (IRENA) (2018). Renewable Capacity Statistics 2018. Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates.
6. Shanghai Electric and CSP Focus (2019). Introduction of Dubai 950MW CSP+PV Project by Shanghai Electric. Dubai, UAE.
7. Yeşilata, B. (2018). National Survey Report of PV Power Applications in Turkey 2018. IEA PVPS, http://iea-pvps.org/index.php?id=93.
8. Moore, J. and Apt, J. (2013). Can hybrid solar-fossil power plants mitigate CO2 at a lower cost than PV or CSP? Environmental Science & Technology, 47 (6): 2487-2493, DOI: 10.1021/es3021099.

9. Calise, F., Accadia, M. D., Macaluso, A. A., Piacentino, A. and Vanoli, L. (2016). Exergetic and exergoeconomic analysis of a novel hybrid solar-geothermal polygeneration system producing energy and water. Energy Conversion and Management, 115: 200–220, DOI:10.1016/j.enconman.2016.02.029.
10. Bonyadi, N., Johnson, E. and Baker, D. (2018). Techno-economic and energy analysis of a solar-geothermal hybrid electric power plant using a novel combined cycle. Energy Conversion and Management, 156: 542–554, DOI: 10.1016/j.enconman.2017.11.052.
11. Beerbaum, S., and Weinrebe, G.,(2000). Solar thermal power generation in India a techno-economic analysis. Renewable Energy, 21 (2): 153-174. DOI:10.1016/S0960-1481(00)00006-9.
12. Silva, R., Berenguel, M., Pérez, M. and Fernández-Garcia, A. (2014). Thermo-economic design optimization of parabolic trough solar plants for industrial process heat applications with memetic algorithms. Applied Energy, 113: 603–614. DOI: 10.1016/j.apenergy.2013.08.017.
13. Boukelia, T.E., Mecibah, M.S., Kumar, B.N. and Reddy, K.S. (2015). Optimization, selection and feasibility study of solar parabolic trough power plants for Algerian conditions. Energy Conversion Management, 101: 450-459. DOI: 10.1016/j.enconman.2015.05.067.
14. Morin, G., Dersch, J., Platzer, W., Eck, M. and Häberle, A. (2012). Comparison of linear Fresnel and parabolic trough collector power plants. Solar Energy, 86 (1): 1-12. DOI: 10.1016/j.solener.2011.06.020.
15. Nezammahalleh, H., Farhadi, F. and Tanhaemami, M. (2010). Conceptual design and techno-economic assessment of integrated solar combined cycle system with DSG technology. Solar Energy, 84 (9): 1696-1705. DOI: 10.1016/J.SOLENER.2010.05.007.
16. Musi, R., Grange, B., Sgouridis, S., Guedez, R., Armstrong, P., Slocum, A. and Calvet, N. (2017). Techno-economic analysis of concentrated solar power plant in terms of levelized cost of electricity. AIP Conference Proceedings, 1850 (160018): 1-12. DOI: 10.1063/1.4984538.
17. Kost, C., Shammugam, S., Jülch, V., Nguyen, H.T. and Schlegl, T. (Fraunhofer ISE, 2018). Levelized Cost of Electricity Renewable Energy Technologies. Freiburg, Germany. Del Río, P. and Kiefer, C.P. (2018). Analysis of the Drivers and Barriers to the Market Uptake of CSP in the EU. Madrid, Spain.
18. Lipu, M.S.H. and Jamal, T. (2013). Techno-economic analysis of solar Concentrating power (CSP) in Bangladesh. International Journal of Advanced of Renewable Energy Research, 2 (5): 750-762.
19. International Energy Agency (IEA) (2017). Energy Technology Perspectives 2017: Catalysing Energy Technology Transformations. OECD/IEA, DOI: 10.1787/energy_tech-2017-en.
20. Philibert, C., Frankl, P. and Dobrotkova, Z. (2010). Technology Roadmaps: Concentrating Solar Power. OECD/IEA, Paris, France.
21. Philibert, C. (2014). Technology Roadmaps: Solar Thermal Electricity. OECD/IEA, Paris, France.
22. Purohit, I. and Prohit, P. (2010). Techno-economic evaluation of concentrating solar power generation in India. Energy Policy, 38 (6): 3015-3029. DOI:10.1016/j.enpol.2010.01.041.
23. Viebahn, P., Kronshage, S., Trieb, F. and Lechon, Y. (2008). Final report on technical data, costs, and life cycle inventories of solar thermal power plants, Project no. 502687. Paris, France.
24. Biboum, A. and Yilanci, A. (2019). Feasibility study of biomass power plants fired with maize and sorghum stalk in the Sub-Saharan region: a case for the northern part of Cameroon. European Mechanical Science, 3 (3): 102-111. DOI: 10.26701/ems.493188.
25. Saaty, T.L. (1980). The Analytic Hierarchy Process: Planning, Priority Setting, Resource Allocation. New York, USA.
26. Esmail, M.A., Mokheimer, E.M.A., Dabwan, Y.D., Habib, M.A., Said, S.A.M. and Al-Sulaiman, F.A. (2014). Techno-economic performance analysis of parabolic trough collector in Dhahran, Saudi Arabia. Energy Conversion and Management, 86: 622–633. DOI: 10.1016/j.enconman.2014.06.023
27. SAM, (2017). System Advisor Model 17.9.5, National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) software.