| 000 | 03116naaaa2200349uu 4500 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 001 | https://directory.doabooks.org/handle/20.500.12854/70423 | ||
| 020 | _aintechopen.90410 | ||
| 024 | 7 |
_a10.5772/intechopen.90410 _cdoi |
|
| 041 | 0 | _aEnglish | |
| 042 | _adc | ||
| 072 | 7 |
_aTBC _2bicssc |
|
| 100 | 1 |
_aValentin, Benoît _4auth |
|
| 700 | 1 |
_aZaversky, Fritz _4auth |
|
| 700 | 1 |
_aLes, Iñigo _4auth |
|
| 700 | 1 |
_aBerard, Flavien _4auth |
|
| 700 | 1 |
_aBrau, Jean-Florian _4auth |
|
| 700 | 1 |
_aSánchez, Marcelino _4auth |
|
| 700 | 1 |
_aMcGuire, Jonathon _4auth |
|
| 700 | 1 |
_aSiros, Frédéric _4auth |
|
| 245 | 1 | 0 | _aChapter Techno-Economic Optimization and Benchmarking of a Solar-Only Powered Combined Cycle with High-Temperature TES Upstream the Gas Turbine |
| 260 |
_bInTechOpen _c2019 |
||
| 506 | 0 |
_aOpen Access _2star _fUnrestricted online access |
|
| 520 | _aThis work presents a techno-economic parametric study of an innovative central receiver solar thermal power plant layout that applies the combined cycle (CC) as thermodynamic power cycle and a multi-tower solar field configuration together with open volumetric air receivers (OVARs). The topping gas turbine (GT) is powered by an air–air heat exchanger (two heat exchanger trains in the case of reheat). In order to provide dispatchability, a high-temperature thermocline TES system is placed upstream the gas turbine. The aim is threefold, (i) investigating whether the multi-tower concept has a techno-economic advantage with respect to conventional single-tower central receiver plants, (ii) indicating the techno-economic optimum power plant configuration, and (iii) benchmarking the techno-economic optimum of the CC plant against that of a conventional single-cycle Rankine steam plant with the same receiver and TES technology. It is concluded that the multi-tower configuration has a techno-economic advantage with respect to the conventional single-tower arrangement above a total nominal solar power level of about 150 MW. However, the benchmarking of the CC against a Rankine single-cycle power plant layout shows that the CC configuration has despite its higher solar-to-electric conversion efficiency a higher LCOE. The gain in electricity yield is not enough to outweigh the higher investment costs of the more complex CC plant layout. | ||
| 540 |
_aCreative Commons _fhttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/ _2cc _4https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/ |
||
| 546 | _aEnglish | ||
| 650 | 7 |
_aEngineering: general _2bicssc |
|
| 653 | _aconcentrated solar power, solar combined cycle, multi-tower central receiver, open volumetric air receiver (OVAR) | ||
| 773 | 1 | 0 |
_0OAPEN Library ID: ONIX_20210602_10.5772/intechopen.90410_416 _7nnaa |
| 856 | 4 | 0 |
_awww.oapen.org _uhttps://library.oapen.org/bitstream/20.500.12657/49302/1/70392.pdf _70 _zDOAB: download the publication |
| 856 | 4 | 0 |
_awww.oapen.org _uhttps://library.oapen.org/bitstream/20.500.12657/49302/1/70392.pdf _70 _zDOAB: download the publication |
| 856 | 4 | 0 |
_awww.oapen.org _uhttps://directory.doabooks.org/handle/20.500.12854/70423 _70 _zDOAB: description of the publication |
| 999 |
_c38169 _d38169 |
||