Concentrating Solar Thermal Systems
This material is an extract from “Solar
Thermal Power Systems” Keith Lovegrove and Andreas Luzzi,
Encyclopedia of Physical Science and Technology, 3rd Edition, Vol
15.
1 Introduction
Various devices for collecting solar radiation thermally have
been devised. At the simplest level, a flat metal plate painted
black and placed in the sun will heat up until it reaches a temperature
where the heat that it looses to the air around it and also by
radiating itself, exactly balances the amount of energy it receives
from the sun. This “stagnation temperature” occurs
at around 80oC for a simple flat plate. If water, for example,
is passed through passages in the plate, then it will stabilize
at a lower temperature and the water will extract some of the energy
in being usefully heated up. This is the essence of solar thermal
energy collection.
Greater levels of sophistication are aimed at reducing the amount
of “thermal loss” from the collector surface at a given
temperature. This allows energy to be collected more efficiently
and at higher temperatures.
Starting with the flat plate, a cover layer of glass helps by cutting
down the energy lost by the circulation of cold air. If metal tubes
and glass cylinders are used instead of plates, then the space
can be completely evacuated, so that air convection losses are
completely eliminated. Clever use of coating materials to produce
an optically selective surface that absorbs as much as possible
of visible solar wavelengths whilst emitting as little as possible
of thermal radiation from the plate helps to reduce radiation losses.
Various combinations of these measures are used in the production
of systems for the production of solar hot water that are used
around the world for domestic and industrial applications. In principle,
solar collectors of this nature could be used for electricity production.
However the low temperatures achievable limit the conversion efficiencies
possible to low levels. |
Further increasing the temperature at which energy can usefully be
recovered requires some method of optically concentrating the
radiation so that the size of the absorbing surface and hence
its thermal loss, is reduced. The conceptually simplest approach
is to employ a series of flat mirrors (called heliostats) that
are continuously adjusted to direct solar radiation onto the
absorbing surface. This is illustrated conceptually in Figure
1. Large plants called “Central
Receiver Systems” or “Power Towers” have been built based
on this principle and are discussed in detail in section 2. The concept can
also be adapted to linear absorbers and long strips of mirror to create a “Linear
Fresnel” concentrator.
Alternatively, the mathematical properties
of a parabola can be exploited. The equation for a parabola in
the x y plane is;
y=x2/4f |

Figure
1. The central receiver concept; a field of plane mirror heliostats
all move independently to each keep a beam of solar radiation focussed
on a single central receiver (Figure H. Kreetz). |
Rays of light parallel to the y axis of a mirrored parabola will
all be reflected and focused at the focal point at a distance f from
the vertex.
As illustrated in Figure 2, this effect can be used in a linear
arrangement, where a mirrored “trough” with a parabolic
cross section will focus solar radiation onto a line focus when
it is pointed directly at the sun. The largest Solar Thermal Power
plants constructed to date employ this principle, they are reviewed
in section 3. Alternatively a mirrored dish with a parabolic cross
section (a paraboloid) will focus solar radiation to a point focus
(see figure 3). Dish systems are reviewed in section 4. Both dishes
and troughs require continuous adjustment of position (or at least
frequent readjustment) to maintain the focus as the sun moves through
the sky. |

Figure 2. A parabolic trough concentrator focuses solar radiation onto a linear
receiver when faced directly at the sun (figure from H. Kreetz) |

Figure 3. A paraboloidal dish concentrator focuses solar radiation onto a point
focus receiver (figure from H. Kreetz). |
Similar focusing effects can obviously be achieved
with lenses of various kinds, but this has not been employed on
the scales needed for solar thermal power systems. |
Another alternative which potentially avoids the
need to track the sun is to employ “non imaging” concentration.
As illustrated in Figure 4, this involves the construction of a mirrored “light
funnel” of some kind. Such a device will be able to collect
rays into its aperture over a range of incidence angles and cause
them to exit via a smaller aperture via multiple reflections. Non
imaging concentrators have not found application as the “primary” means
of concentration for Solar Thermal Power systems but they are frequently
applied as “secondary concentrators” at the focus of
central receivers, dishes or troughs, where they serve to further
reduce the size of the focal region.
Figure 4. (right). A non-imaging concentrator concentrates solar
radiation without the need to track the sun. |
 |
The rays of light from the sun are not exactly parallel.
This means that even a perfect optical system will produce an image
of finite size, with an intensity distribution that is a maximum
in the center and tapers off to zero at the edges. Imperfections
in mirror shape and tracking accuracy have the effect of further
spreading out the sun image.
Each of these approaches to concentration has a typical ratio of
collected radiation intensity to incident solar radiation intensity,
termed the “concentration
ratio”. Table 1 summarizes the options discussed and lists
typical concentration ratios, the resultant operating temperatures
and the consequent thermodynamic limiting efficiency with which electricity
could be produced. The limiting conversion efficiency arises from
the second law of thermodynamics. The maximum efficiency for conversion
of heat from a constant high temperature source given by;
Maximum conversion efficiency = 1- Tcold/Thot
This is the “Carnot limit”. A simple understanding of
why there should be such a limit can be developed by realizing that
empirically heat will not spontaneously flow from cold objects to
hot ones. If all the heat flow from a hot object could be converted
to electricity then this could in turn all be used to heat an even
hotter object which we know to be impossible. In real Solar Thermal
Power systems, conversion efficiencies around one third or less of
the ideal maximum are typically achieved.
Clearly higher concentration ratios give higher efficiency, however
they also lead to potentially higher complexity and cost. The ultimate
challenge with Solar Thermal Power systems is to produce the desired
output as economically as possible. This invariably means a trade
off between system efficiency and capital investment drives the
design process. |
Table 1. Typical temperature and concentration range of the various solar
thermal collector technologies.
Technology
|
T [°C]
|
Concentration ratio
|
Tracking
|
Max Conv. Eff. (Carnot)
|
Flat
plate collector
|
30 – 100
|
1
|
-
|
21%
|
Evacuated
tube collector
|
90 – 200
|
1
|
-
|
38%
|
Solar
pond
|
70 – 90
|
1
|
-
|
19%
|
Solar
chimney
|
20 – 80
|
1
|
-
|
17%
|
Fresnel
reflector technology
|
260 – 400
|
8 – 80
|
One-axis
|
56%
|
Parabolic
trough
|
260 – 400
|
8 – 80
|
One-axis
|
56%
|
Heliostat
field + Central receiver
|
500 – 800
|
600 – 1000
|
Two-axis
|
73%
|
Dish
concentrators
|
500 - 1200
|
800 - 8000
|
Two-axis
|
80%
|
2 Central Receiver Systems
The central receiver concept was first proposed by scientists in
the USSR in the mid 1950s. The first experiment was established
in Sant' Ilario near Genova, Italy, in 1965 by Professor Giovanni
Francia. He installed 120 round mirrors each the size of a 'tea-table',
focusing on a small steam generator on top of a steel frame.
The product was superheated steam (500 oC, 10 Mpa).
Central receivers have the advantage that all the energy conversion
takes place at single fixed point. This avoids the need for energy
transport networks and allows investment to improve the efficiency
and sophistication of the energy conversion process to be made
more cost effectively. Associated disadvantages are that they must
be built as single large systems, without the modularity benefits
of distributed systems like troughs or dishes. The fixed position
of the receiver also means that heliostats do not point directly
at the sun, so that the amount of collected solar radiation per
unit area of mirror is less than with the other technologies.
Major investigations during the past twenty years have focused
on four heat transfer fluid systems; water/steam, sodium, molten
salt and air.An overview of the major demonstration grid connected
power plants built to date is given in Table2. |
Table 2. Summary of Central Receiver demonstration power plants.
|
Eurelios (
Italy
)
|
Sunshine (
Japan
)
|
IEA-CRS (
Spain
)
|
Solar One (
Usa
)
|
Solar Two (
USA
)
|
CESA 1 (
Spain
)
|
Themis (France)
|
MSEE (
USA
)
|
SES 5 (CIS-USSR)
|
Weizman (
Israel
)
|
Net electric power
|
1MWe
|
1MWe
|
0.5MWe
|
10MWe
|
10MWe
|
1.2MWe
|
2.5MWe
|
0.75MWe
|
5MWe
|
0.5MWe
|
Total reflector area
|
6260m2
|
12912m2
|
3655m2
|
71095m2
|
81344m2
|
11880m2
|
10740m2
|
7845m2
|
40584m2
|
3500m2
|
Heat transfer fuid
|
Water/ steam
|
Water/ steam
|
Sodium
|
Water/ steam
|
Molten salt
|
Water/ steam
|
Molten salt
|
Molten Salt
|
Water/ steam
|
Beam down
|
Storage capacity
|
0.06MWhe
|
3MWhe
|
1.0MWhe
|
28MWhe
|
107MWhth
|
3MWhe
|
15MWhe
|
2.5MWhe
|
1.5MWhe
|
|
Period of service
|
1980-1984
|
1981-1984
|
1981-1985
|
1982-1988
|
1996 -1999
|
1983-1984
|
1983-1986
|
1984-1985
|
1985-
|
2001-
|
To date power generation has been via conventional steam Rankine
cycles at the base of the tower. In early systems, receivers were
built to produce superheated steam directly, however thermal problems
associated with the unsteady boundary between liquid water and steam
in the tubes motivated a move to secondary heat transfer fluids.
Liquid sodium provides good heat transfer behaviour, but carries
the disadvantage that all the transport piping must be heated above
sodium’s melting point (slightly below 100oC). The possibility
of leaks also provides a significant fire risk. Use of molten salt
avoids the fire risk and is thus also well suited to storage in tanks
to allow power generation when there is no sun. The nitrate salts
used has a melting point of 260oC. They do however lead to corrosion
problems if leaks occur. Air is also suggested as a heat transfer
fluid, a 3MWth system has been demonstrated at the Plataforma Solar
test facility in southern Spain.
Heliostat fields can either surround the tower or be spread out on one side.
For a surround field externally radiated circular cross-section receivers are
employed, for one sided fields cavity receivers can be used. System designers
have developed optimization strategies which determine the best arrangement for
a given number of heliostats. These take into account the effects of shading
between heliostats, the spread of the field and the optical inefficiency that
increases as heliostats are further from the tower.
Two general approaches to heliostat design have been used. The most obvious is
a plane structure with rigid mirror facets mounted on it. The structure sits
on top of a pedestal with a gearbox arrangement that allows for two axis tracking
of the sun. |
| The other alternative is termed the “stretched
membrane” approach. As the name implies a membrane is stretched
across a circular frame in a similar manner to a drum skin. The membrane
is then covered with mirrors. Thin stainless steel membranes with
glass mirrors glued to the surface have been tried as have polymer
films which are mirrored themselves. The stretched membrane approach
allows the mirrored surface to be curved slightly by the application
of a small internal vacuum. In this way heliostats can actually focus
their own sun image on the tower receiver rather than just directing
a plane beam at it. Figure 6 illustrates an example of a stretched
membrane heliostat design. Development trends have suggested that
larger heliostats are more cost effective, heliostat modules up to
200m2 have been tested. |

Figure 6. Stetched membrane heliostat. |
| The largest central receiver solar thermal power plant demonstrated
to date is the “Solar Two” plant in Southern California.
This plant is actually an updated version of the previously operated “Solar
One” system. Extra heliostats were added and the receiver converted
from direct steam generation to molten salt. Figure 7 shows the Solar
Two plant in operation and figure 8 is a schematic illustrating the
operating principles. When the solar field is operating, the molten
nitrate salt moves from a cold (288oC) storage tank via the receiver
at the top of the tower, where it is heated, to the hot storage tank
(566oC). Independantly of the solar energy collection process, salt
from the hot tank is passed through a heat exchanger where heat is
transferred to produce superheated steam, with the salt passing back
to the cold storage tank. The steam is used in a conventional steam
turbine power plant for electricity generation. |
Figure 7. The Solar One (later Solar Two) central receiver power
plant in operation. |

Figure 8. Schematic of Solar Two operation (figure from Bechtel Group Intenational). |
The Solar Two plant has one thousand and eighteen
39.1m2 heliostats plus a further one hundred and eight 95m2 heliostats.
Under nominal conditions, 48MWth is concentrated onto the receiver
which sits at the top of a 91m high tower. Steam is produced in the
heat exchangers at 10MPa and 538oC and the net electrical output
is 10.4MWe.
One of the most recent developments in the Central Receiver area, is the “beam
down” concept proposed by the Weizmann Institute in Israel. Rather that
converting the energy at the top of the tower, a hyperbolically shaped secondary
directs it vertically downwards. At the bottom a further non imaging concentrator
concentrates it further before it is captured by a volumetric receiver capable
of heating air to very high temperatures needed for a Brayton cycle. |
3 Trough Systems
Solar thermal power in the form of mechanical energy for water
pumping was established for the first time near Cairo in 1914 (~
40 kW). It incorporated a water/steam operated parabolic trough
array (5 units, 4m x 62m) and a low pressure condensing steam engine.
Solar electric trough development was re-activated by the U.S.
Department of Energy in the mid 1970's. The first experimental
system started operation in 1979. At the same time a private Research
and Development company from Jerusalem, Israel, (LUZ) decided to
design and implement commercial scale parabolic trough 'Solar Electric
Generating Systems' (SEGS). This decision was strongly motivated
by favourable power purchase agreements and tax credits offered
in the state of California.
The nine SEGS plants built by LUZ between 1984 and 1989, have a
combined capacity of 354MWe. They are all continue to operate on
a commercial basis and together they represent by far the majority
of operating solar thermal power station capacity in the world.
During the early 1980s small demonstration trough based solar thermal
power systems were constructed in the USA, Japan, Spain and Australia.
Table 3 lists the details of these plants. Specifications for the
9 SEGS plants are given in Table 4. |
Table 3. Details of demonstration trough based solar thermal power plants.
|
Coolidge (
USA
)
|
Sunshine (
Japan
)
|
IEA-DCS (
Spain
)
|
STEP-100 (
Australia
)
|
Net electric power
|
0.15MWe
|
1MWe
|
0.5MWe
|
0.1MWe
|
Total aperture area
|
2,140m2
|
12,856m2
|
7,622m2
|
920m2
|
Heat transfer fluid
|
Synthetic oil
|
Water/steam
|
Synthetic oil
|
Synthetic oil
|
Effective Storage capacity
|
5MWth
|
3MWe
|
0.8MWe
|
117MWth
|
Duration of service
|
1980 -1982
|
1981 - 1984
|
1981 -1985
|
1982 -1985
|
Table 4. Details of the Californiam SEGS plants.
|
SEGS I
|
SEGS II
|
SEGS III
|
SEGS IV
|
SEGS V
|
SEGS VI
|
SEGS VII
|
SEGS VIII
|
SEGS IX
|
Net electric power
|
13.8 MWe
|
30 MWe
|
30 MWe
|
30 MWe
|
30 MWe
|
30 MWe
|
30 MWe
|
80 MWe
|
80 MWe
|
Total aperture area
|
83,000 m2
|
19,000m2
|
230,000 m2
|
230,000m2
|
251,000m2
|
188,000m2
|
194,00m2
|
464,000 m2
|
484,000m2
|
Duration of service
|
1984 - present
|
1985 - present
|
1986 - present
|
1986
- present
|
1987 - present
|
1988 - present
|
1988 - present
|
1989 - present
|
1989 - present
|
| Figure 9 shows one of the SEGS plants and figure
10 illustrates the operating principles schematically. A synthetic
heat transfer oil is pumped through the trough array and heated
to up to 400oC. This oil is then used to produce steam in heat
exchangers before being circulated back to the array. The steam
is used in a conventional steam turbine based electricity generating
plant. Although some hot oil based energy storage was provided
in the first plant, the SEGS systems overall rely on natural gas
firing to provide continuous operation when the sun is not available. |

Figure 9. View of SEGS trough based solar thermal power plant in southern California.
|

Figure 10. Schematic representation of SEGS plant operation (figure from ABB). |
The LUZ troughs are built using a galvanized
steel space frame. This frame supports 4mm thick glass mirror segments
which are shaped by heating and molding to match the parabolic
profile, before silvering. Each mirror facet is supported only
at 4 points of attachment. The most recently constructed systems
(termed LS-3) are 5.76m wide and 95m long giving a total aperture
of 545m2. 224 glass mirror segments are used and a concentration
ratio of up to 80:1 is achieved.
The trough units are lined up in north south rows and track the sun from East
to West during the day. During the winter when midday sun elevation is lower
some radiation is lost from the end of each trough, but because they are long,
this is only a small fraction of the total. Each trough has its own positioning
and local control system.
The receiver units of the LUZ troughs consist of a stainless steel tube 70mm
in diameter, covered by a Pyrex glass envelope which is sealed to the tube via
metal belows at the ends. The space between the steel and glass is evacuated
to minimize thermal losses. The surface of the stainless steel absorber tubes
is coated with a black chrome selective surface which absorbs 94 % of the solar
radiation incident whilst minimizing the amount that is radiated at thermal wavelengths.
The combination of trough and receiver is capable of operating at temperatures
in excess of 400oC. However the heat transfer oil becomes chemically unstable
and begins to degrade at temperatures above 300oC. Approximately 350m3 of oil
circulates in one of the 30MWe plants. Depending on the operating regime this
can need replacing at rates of up to 8% per year as a result of chemical breakdown.
The latest SEGS plants each employ an Asea Brown Boveri steam turbine with reheat
cycle and multiple extraction. With steam inlet conditions of 10MPa and 370oC,
thermal to electric conversion efficiencies of approximately 37% are achieved,
giving overall peak solar to electric efficiencies of 24%.
Regular maintenance is required for all solar thermal power systems. For the
SEGS plants, routine cleaning and replacement of broken mirror facets and receiver
modules forms a major part of the maintenance program.
Research and Development on trough systems has continued since the LUZ plants
were completed. A major area of investigation has targeted the replacement of
the heat transfer oil with direct generation of steam in the receivers. Direct
steam generation would allow collection of energy at higher temperatures and
so improve the efficiency of the steam turbine. It would also avoid the need
to replace the costly oil and eliminate the inherent fire risk. The challenge
is managing the rapidly changing thermal stresses induced in the receiver tube
by the unsteady movement of liquid and vapor water when boiling is taking place.
In a variation of linear focusing technology a group based at the university
of Sydney has developed a concept known as the “Compact Linear Fresnel
Reflector”. This operates rather like a linear version of a central receiver
system. Fixed linear receivers are illuminated by a series of long narrow mirrors
which track the sun individually. If several receiver rows are installed side
by side, then the individual mirror units can switch from one receiver to another
depending on the relative optical efficiencies at different times of the day.
A demonstration system based on this technology is under construction as an addition
to an existing coal fired power station in northern Queensland (Australia). |
4 Paraboloidal Dishes
The first | |