Design and modeling of a 50 MW solar tower power plant (STPP) in Gaziantep

Öz

This study presents the design, modeling, validation, and techno-economic assessment of a 50 MW molten-salt solar tower power plant proposed for Gaziantep, Türkiye. An integrated analytical–numerical workflow was adopted in which the preliminary plant configuration was first derived analytically and then simulated in SolarPILOT and SAM. The numerical framework was verified against reported data for the Gemasolar solar tower plant before being applied to the Gaziantep case. The optimized Gaziantep design indicates that plant performance is governed by the coupled effects of tower height, heliostat-field size, and thermal-energy-storage duration. For the preferred configuration, a tower height of 178 m and a storage duration of about 8 h lead to an annual net electricity generation of 212.79 GWh, a capacity factor of 48.6%, an overall plant efficiency of 18.01%, and an LCOE of 13.35 ¢USD/kWh-e. Two design scenarios were further compared in order to evaluate whether reducing heliostat count could lower cost without materially degrading performance. The comparison shows that a moderate reduction in heliostat number slightly decreases total CAPEX, but the accompanying loss in thermal input increases LCOE and reduces overall efficiency. A sensitivity analysis also shows that CAPEX is the dominant economic driver, followed by the discount rate. Overall, the study offers a validated and decision-oriented framework for site-specific solar tower design in high-DNI regions. Beyond the Gaziantep case itself, the results provide transferable guidance on how storage sizing, tower height, and heliostat-field design should be optimized together rather than independently when both technical performance and economic feasibility are targeted.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Solar power tower
• System Advisor Model software
• Tower height
• Thermal energy storage
• Heliostat field
• Levelized cost of electricity

Kaynakça

1. [1] Karakas Y. 50 MV kurulu güçteki güneş kulesi santralinin tasarımı ve modellenmesi. Master’s Thesis, Istanbul Technical University, 2022. [Online] Available from: https://tez.yok.gov.tr/UlusalTezMerkezi/tezSorguSonucYeni.jsp (Accessed: 27/02/2024).
2. [2] United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. The Paris Agreement. 2020. [Online] Available from: https://unfccc.int/process-and-meetings/the-paris-agreement/the-paris-agreement (Accessed: 27/02/2024).
3. [3] Srilakshmi G, Suresh NS, Thirumalai NC, Ramaswamy MA. A novel approach to determine the non-dimensional heliostat field boundary for solar tower plants. Sustainable Energy Technologies and Assessments 2016; 7: 26-37.
4. [4] Praveen RP. Performance analysis and optimization of central receiver solar thermal power plants for utility scale power generation. Sustainability 2020; 12(1): 127.
5. [5] Schöttl P, Bern G, van Rooyen DW, Fernández Pretel JA, Fluri T, Nitz P. Optimization of Solar Tower molten salt cavity receivers for maximum yield based on annual performance assessment. Solar Energy 2020; 199: 278-294.
6. [6] Benammar S, Khellaf A, Mohammedi K. Contribution to the modeling and simulation of solar power tower plants using energy analysis. Energy Conversion and Management 2014; 78: 923-930.
7. [7] Ramos A, Ramos F. Strategies in tower solar power plant optimization. Solar Energy 2012; 86(9): 2536-2548.
8. [8] Ashley T, Carrizosa E, Fernández-Cara E. Optimisation of aiming strategies in Solar Power Tower plants. Energy 2017; 137: 285-291.

9. [9] Carrizosa E, Domínguez-Bravo CA, Fernández-Cara E, Quero M. An optimization tool to design the field of a solar power tower plant allowing heliostats of different sizes. International Journal of Energy Research 2017; 12(4): 1096-1107.
10. [10] Xiao G, Zeng J, Nie J. A practical method to evaluate the thermal efficiency of solar molten salt receivers. Applied Thermal Engineering 2021; 190: 116787.
11. [11] Saghafifar M, Mohammadi K, Powell K. Design and analysis of a dual-receiver direct steam generator solar power tower plant with a flexible heliostat field. Sustainable Energy Technologies and Assessments 2020; 39: 100698.
12. [12] Hussaini ZA, King P, Sansom C. Numerical simulation and design of multi-tower concentrated solar power fields. Sustainability 2020; 12(6): 2402.
13. [13] Ashour AI, Almitani KH, Abu-Hamdeh NH. Developing and improving a prototype scale concentrating solar power tower-system. Sustainable Energy Technologies and Assessments 2021; 45: 101105.
14. [14] Boretti A, Nayfeh J, Al-Kouz W. Validation of SAM modeling of concentrated solar power plants. Energies 2020; 13(8): 1949.
15. [15] Belaid A, Filali A, Gama A, Bezza B, Arrif T, Bouakba M. Design optimization of a solar tower power plant heliostat field by considering different heliostat shapes. International Journal of Energy Research 2020; 44(14): 11524-11541.
16. [16] Marzo A, Salmon A, Polo J, Ballestrín J, Soto G, Quiñones G, et al. Solar extinction map in Chile for applications in solar power tower plants, comparison with other places from sunbelt and impact on LCOE. Renewable Energy 2021; 170: 197-211.
17. [17] Luo Y, Wang Z, Zhu J, Lu T, Xiao G, Chu F, et al. Multi-objective robust optimization of a solar power tower plant under uncertainty. Energy 2022; 238: 121716.
18. [18] Buck R, Giuliano S. Solar tower system temperature range optimization for reduced LCOE. AIP Conference Proceedings 2019; 2126(1).
19. [19] Awan AB, Zubair M, Mouli KVC. Design, optimization and performance comparison of solar tower and photovoltaic power plants. Energy 2020; 199: 117450.
20. [20] Blanc P, Espinar B, Geuder N, Gueymard C, Meyer R, Pitz-Paal R, et al. Direct normal irradiance related definitions and applications: The circumsolar issue. Solar Energy 2014; 110: 561-577.
21. [21] Raboaca MS, Badea G, Enache A, Filote C, Rasoi G, Rata M, et al. Concentrating solar power technologies. Energies 2019; 12(6): 1048.
22. [22] Solargis. Solar resource maps of Turkey. 2019. [Online] Available from: https://solargis.com/maps-and-gis-data/download/turkey (Accessed: 29/02/2024).
23. [23] European Commission. JRC Photovoltaic Geographical Information System (PVGIS). [Online] Available from: https://re.jrc.ec.europa.eu/pvg_tools/en/#TMY
24. [24] Burgaleta JI, Arias S, Ramirez D. GEMASOLAR, the first tower thermosolar commercial plant with molten salt storage. Proceedings of SolarPACES 2011, Concentrating Solar Power and Chemical Energy Systems Conference, Granada, Spain, 20-23 September 2011.
25. [25] Sener. Energy: HE54 heliostat. [Online] Available from: https://www.energy.sener/project/he54-heliostat (Accessed: 02/03/2024).
26. [26] Goswami Y. Principles of Solar Engineering. 3rd ed. CRC Press-Taylor & Francis Group, 2015, pp. 480-483.
27. [27] Yıldırım B, Düzkaya H. Comparative Analysis with PVGIS and PVsyst for Solar Energy Production in Bahşılı Region of Kırıkkale. Gazi Üniversitesi Fen Bilimleri Dergisi Part C: Tasarım ve Teknoloji 2025; 13(3): 877-891.
28. [28] Güleş ZF, Bozkurt İ, Kürker F, Pala M. Investigation of production performance of a solar power plant according to the optimum panel tilt angle. International Journal of Energy Studies 2026; 11(1): 371-381.
29. [29] Duman AC, Güler Ö. Economic analysis of grid-connected residential rooftop PV systems in Turkey. Renewable Energy 2020; 148: 697-711.
30. [30] Ferraro V, Marinelli V, Settino J, Nicoletti F. Techno-Economic Analysis of a Solar Tower Power Plant with an Open Air Brayton Cycle and a Combined Cycle - A Simplified Calculation Method. International Journal of Heat and Technology 2020; 38: 590-600.
31. [31] Khan IM, et al. The economics of concentrating solar power (CSP): Assessing cost competitiveness and deployment potential. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 2024; 200: 114551.
32. [32] Wang L, Chen H, et al. Techno-economic performance of the solar tower power plants integrating with 650°C high-temperature molten salt thermal energy storage. Energy 2025; 324: 136073.