Environmental Engineering Reference
In-Depth Information
Table 14.3.2
Costs for main components of a solar field based on
parabolic trough technology (Manzolini et al., 2011a).
Support Structure
a
/m
2
64
Reflecting mirror
a
/m
2
54
HCE
a
/m
200
a
/m
2
Driver/controls
15.7
Foundations
a
/m
2
19.2
Assembling
a
/m
2
22.8
a
/m
2
Contingencies
8
Solar field BOP
%
30
14.3.11 Cost comparison of linear focus technologies
The last section, dedicated to the linear focus technology, tries to give an idea about
the costs of parabolic trough and linear Fresnel. Before going into details, it must be
admitted that the two technologies have a different level of development: 30 years have
passed since the first solar plant based on PT was built, while the older Fresnel plant
is less than five years old. Obviously, this level of development affects the cost of the
technology.
Besides this, the cost of a parabolic trough field is in the range of 220 to 300
/m
2
(Giostri et al., 2013; Graf and Nava, 2011; Morin et al., 2012). The cost of the solar
field can be split into the component parts shown in Table 14.3.2.
For every linear metre of trough, where the aperture width is about 6 m, the cost
of the support structure and reflecting mirrors accounts for more than 50% of the
overall cost of the solar field. The remainder is due to the HCE (15%) and to the civil
works and drivers.
Current research activity focuses on increasing the aperture area of the parabola
in order to reduce the ancillary costs of drive units, sensors, control systems and pylon
foundations (Graf and Nava, 2011). In addition, cost reductions can be made in solar
field assembly: fewer collectors and smaller labour costs. Finally, another topic is the
improvement of mirrors in terms of performance and weight; lighter mirrors can reduce
the cost of the structure and foundations.
Where LFR is concerned, it is much more difficult to find reliable cost informa-
tion in the literature. Few studies discuss the maximum costs that the technology can
support to be competitive with PT systems. Results show that Fresnel must be at least
50% cheaper than PT (Giostri et al., 2013; Morin et al., 2012). The target is feasible
since the support structure would be cheaper, along with the foundations, drivers and
controls. Moreover, the higher concentration ratio can reduce the HCE share of total
costs.
a
14.3.12 Point focus
The second type of solar field is based on point-focusing systems. This technology is
based on two-axis tracking systems which have a higher ratio of concentration than
single-axis tracking (hundreds of sun vs. tens to sun) with potentially higher working
Search WWH ::
Custom Search