Viability analysis of solar parabolic dish stand-alone power plant for Indian conditions

Applied Energy 102 (2013) 908–922

Contents lists available at SciVerse ScienceDirect

Applied Energy

journal homepage: www.elsevier .com/ locate/apenergy

Viability analysis of solar parabolic dish stand-alone power plantfor Indian conditions

K.S. Reddy ⇑, G. VeershettyHeat Transfer and Thermal Power Laboratory, Department of Mechanical Engineering, Indian Institute of Technology Madras, Chennai 600 036, India

h i g h l i g h t s

" Viability analysis of solar parabolic dish based power plant." Field analysis of solar parabolic dish power plant." Techno-economic feasibility studies of 5 MW solar parabolic dish power plant.

a r t i c l e i n f o

Article history:Received 17 April 2012Received in revised form 3 August 2012Accepted 21 September 2012Available online 10 November 2012

Keywords:Solar parabolic dish collectorLand use factorEconomic analysisLevelised electricity costClean development mechanismAnnual energy output

0306-2619/$ - see front matter � 2012 Elsevier Ltd. Ahttp://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2012.09.034

⇑ Corresponding author. Tel.: +91 44 22574702; faxE-mail address: [email protected] (K.S. Reddy).

a b s t r a c t

The solar parabolic dish collector is one of the most efficient energy conversion technologies among theconcentrating solar power (CSP) systems. The design and implementation of solar parabolic dish powerplants will result in sustainable energy generation. In this article, techno-economic feasibility analysis ofa 5 MWe solar parabolic dish collector field is carried out for entire India covering 58 locations. The solarparabolic dish power plant configuration is investigated based on various parameters such as the spacingbetween dish collectors, land area required, percentage of the shadow and energy yield. The shadow pro-file around the dish throughout the year at various latitudes (8–35�N) for various plant-operating hours isdetermined. In-line arrangement of the solar dish collector arrays is found to be a better choice in termsof the minimum land area required for setting up the power plant. The generalized correlations are devel-oped for both east–west and north–south spacing distances as the function of latitude and plant operat-ing hours. It is found that the configuration corresponding to the plant operating from 1 h after sunrise to1 h before sunset with spacing distance in east–west direction equal to the shadow length after 2 h sun-rise and in north–south direction equal to shadow length at noon for winter solstice gives the highestenergy output with optimum land use. The minimum and maximum average annual power generationat Panaji and Tiruchirapalli are 7.25 GW h, and 12.68 GW h respectively. The minimum levelised electric-ity cost (LEC) for a stand-alone solar parabolic dish power plant with the clean development mechanism(CDM) is found to be INR 9.83 ($ 0.197, 1$ = INR 50) at Indore with payback period of 10.63 years withcost benefit ratio of 1.48. Based on the financial performance, most of the northern region locationsand some of the western and southern region locations are found attractive for power generation bythe solar parabolic dish power collector based on the direct steam generation, where direct normal irra-diation (DNI) is more than 5 kW h/m2 day.

� 2012 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction

India is located in the equatorial sun belt of the earth, therebyreceiving abundant radiant energy from the sun. In most parts ofIndia, clear sunny weather is experienced for about 250–300 daysin a year. The annual global radiation varies from 1600 to2200 kW h/m2, which is comparable with radiation received inthe tropical and sub-tropical regions. The annual global radiation

ll rights reserved.

: +91 44 22574652.

received in most parts of India is fairly large amount as comparedto other parts of the world. Concentrating Solar Power (CSP) sys-tems can be used effectively to convert solar energy into electricalenergy. The CSP systems namely parabolic trough, linear fresnelreflector, power tower and parabolic dish are capable of producingpower. Among the CSP technologies, parabolic dish collector is rec-ognized as the most efficient system for energy conversion. Thesuccessful implementation of any new technology depends onthe cost effective conversion of the energy. The cost of solar collec-tor field is determined primarily by its size, while the cost of theenergy production depends on both collector field cost and the

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2012.09.034

mailto:[email protected]

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2012.09.034

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/journal/03062619

http://www.elsevier.com/locate/apenergy

Nomenclature

Acoll total collector area (m2)Ap aperture area of the parabolic dish collector (m2)Aland land area around the dish (m2)Ash shadow covered area (m2)Atot total solar field area (m2)C cost (INR)D aperture diameter of the dish concentrator (m)d distance between the center of the dishes as viewed

parallel to sunrays (m)DPP discounted payback period (year)e escalation rate (%)INR Indian rupeesie equivalent discount rate (%)L length (m)LEC levelised electricity cost (INR)LF levelising factorLUF land use factorlt life time of the plantN number of dishesn days of the yearNPV net present value (INR)P plant capacity (MW)pe price of electricity (INR)PCaux auxiliary power consumption (kW h)PGnet net power generation (kW h)PGtot total power generation (kW h)tplant plant operating time (h)tsr sunrise time (h)

Greek Symbolsa altitude angle (deg)c azimuth angle (deg)d declination angle (deg)g efficiency/ latitude angle (deg)xsr sunrise hour angle (deg)x hour angle (deg)

Suffixact actualCap capitalEW east–westFC fixed capitalFOM fixed operation and maintenanceLOM levelised operation and maintenanceOM operation and maintenancemax maximumNS north–southp plantsh shadingsp spacingsr sunrisess sunsetVOM variable operation and maintenance

K.S. Reddy, G. Veershetty / Applied Energy 102 (2013) 908–922 909

amount of the energy collected by dish system. One way to in-crease solar energy conversion is by decreasing the amount of sha-dow falling on the adjacent dish. The economic viability of thesystem depends on the design and configuration. The configurationof the dish field has to be based on minimum interference/shadingof one dish on the another so that the land utilization is maximum.

Grossman et al. [1] presented a detailed design report on a sin-gle element stretched membrane 10.4 m dish concentrator solarcollector suitable for the 25 kWe stirling motor generator. The de-sign includes the collectors optical element, the drive and supportsystems. Kaushika and Reddy [2] presented the design, develop-ment and performance characteristics of a low cost solar steamgenerating system which incorporates design and materials inno-vations of parabolic dish technology. The concentrator was a deepdish of rather imperfect optics, made of silvered polymer reflectorsfitted in the aluminum frame of a satellite communication dish.Lovegrove et al. [3] constructed a new 500 m2 parabolic dish pro-totype of a design optimized for manufacture. The constructionof the prototype has successfully proven a range of novel designfeatures including the use of the mirror panels to form part ofthe structure itself. Initial optical analysis shows that operationof receivers with geometric concentration ratios of at least 2000times should be possible.

Robert [4] analyzed the effect of tracking errors and optical er-ror on the performance of the point focusing solar collectors. Arbabet al. [5] investigated the sun tracking system of a solar dish basedon computer image processing of a bar shadow. The system isindependent with respect to geographical location of the solar dishand periodical alignments such as daily or monthly regulations.Barra et al. [6] presented an analytical – numerical method forevaluating the shading effect in a typical solar power plant of con-centrating cylindrical parabolic collectors tracking the sun. Appel-baum and Bany [7] analyzed the shading of effect onthe performance of solar collector. This information was used for

optimal development of collectors in a given area which includesthe tilt angle, collector size, spacing between the collectors andnumber of rows. Groumps and Khouzam [8] presented a genericmathematical framework for the analysis of the shadow effect oflarge solar collector power system. Aronova et al. [9] developed anumerical model for determining the energy generated by trackingphotoelectric power modules with partial shadowing. They havestudied how shadowing influences the relative annual losses ofthe power generated by the modules, and arrived at optimumarrangement of the module at any chosen place with minimumlosses.

Beerbaum and Weinrebe [10] analyzed the potential of solar en-ergy and cost effectiveness of centralized and decentralized solarthermal electricity generation technologies in India. Poullikkas[11] carried out the economic analysis of solar parabolic troughpower plant for Mediterranean regions such as Cyprus. Purohitand Purohit [12] evaluated the preliminary techno-economic anal-ysis for concentrating solar power generation in India and the unitpower generation cost by considering CDM. In this paper, techno-economical feasibility of parabolic dish thermal power generationand its potential in India have been investigated. The solar para-bolic dish field configuration has been proposed for optimum en-ergy at various locations in India.

2. Solar parabolic dish collector system

Solar parabolic dish collector system consists of mirrors ar-ranged in the shape of parabola and concentrates the incidentbeam irradiation onto a small region called focal point where thereceiver needs to be located. The concentrated solar irradiation isabsorbed by the receiver and transferred to the working fluid thatflows through the cavity receiver. The parabolic dish continuouslytracks the sun in the two axes namely azimuth and elevation. A20 m2 prototype solar parabolic dish collector has been developed

Fig. 1. Solar parabolic dish collector system developed at IIT Madras (India).

910 K.S. Reddy, G. Veershetty / Applied Energy 102 (2013) 908–922

at IIT Madras, Chennai (India) to investigate the performance of themodified cavity receiver (Fig. 1). The dish system essentially con-sists of a concentrator, cavity receiver, tracking mechanism andmeasurement systems. The solar parabolic dish concentrator ismade of high reflective, light weight mirrors. The mirrors areplaced on rigid structure and mounted on a single truss support.The hemispherical cavity receiver is placed at the focal point withtwo supporting rods. The receiver is made up of Copper/Inconeltubes, wounded in hemispherical shape. The outer surface of thereceiver is covered with ceramic wool insulation and steel outercover in order to reduce the heat loss to ambient.

2.1. Solar dish thermal power plant configuration

A typical layout of the solar parabolic dish power plant is shownin Fig. 2. The collector field consists of an array of solar parabolicdish collectors placed in east–west as well as north–south direc-tion. The working fluid, water is converted to high temperaturesteam as it circulates through the receiver. The superheated steam

Fig. 2. Layout of a typical par

is allowed to enter into the power block. The power block is a stan-dard steam turbine-generator to produce the electricity and fedinto the local grid. The steam which comes from the turbine is con-densed before pumping back to the collector field. The solar toelectrical energy conversion depends on the availability of the solarinsolation, optimum placing of the dish arrays and operating hours.The optimum spacing between the dishes must be chosen in such away that the shadow of the dishes does not fall on the adjacentdishes at any point of time during a year.

2.2. Shadow analysis of parabolic dish collector

The shadow size of the parabolic dish collector depends on thelatitude of the place, declination and sun altitude angle. The sha-dow length of the parabolic dish concentrator at a given altitudeangle, assuming aperture plane is perpendicular to sun rays maybe expressed as:

Lsh ¼D

sin að1Þ

The sun altitude angle (a) is given as [13]:

sina ¼ sin / � sin dþ cos / � cos d � cos x ð2Þ

The declination angle is given as [13]:

d ¼ 23:45 sin360365ð284þ nÞ

� �ð3Þ

The sunrise or sunset hour angles are obtained by setting the a = 0in Eq. (2) and expressed as:

cos xsr ¼ ð� tan / � tan dÞ ð4Þ

At any given sun altitude angle, the shadow cast by the dish onplain ground is in the form of ellipse except for the altitude angle90�, where the shadow is circular equal to diameter and at beneathof the dish. The major axis length of the ellipse is equal to the sha-dow length and minor axis length is equal to the diameter of thedish, if the dish is perfectly tracked to the sun.

The orientation of the shadow around the dish depends on solarazimuth angle is expressed as:

cos cs ¼sin a � sin /� sin d

cos a � cos /

� �ð5Þ

abolic dish power plant.


Solar azimuth angle is the angle on a horizontal plane, between theline due south and the projection of the beam radiation on the hor-izontal plane. By convention, the angle is taken to be positive if theprojection is east of south and negative if the projection is west ofsouth for Northern hemisphere and vice versa for Southern hemi-sphere. A MATLAB code has been developed to determine shadowprofile around the dish for any operating time throughout the year.To illustrate how shadow profile occurs around the dish throughoutthe year, two extreme latitudes of India say 8�N and 35�N are con-sidered, operating from 2 h after sunrise to 2 h before sunset(Fig. 3). Each ellipse on west side represents the shadow profilefor dish system operating at 2 h after sunrise. When the dish isset to operate at 2 h after sunrise, the shadow length will be maxi-mum and as time progresses the shadow length decreases recedingtowards the dish. The top most ellipses correspond to the shadow ofthe dish for the declination �23.45�(winter solstice), whereas bot-tom most ellipses is for the declination +23.45�(summer solstice)and in-between ellipses correspond to other declinations. The sim-ilar shadow profile will occur on east side at 2 h before sunset. Theshadow length will be longer at noon time for the winter solstice.This shadow profile is useful in selecting optimum spacing of thedish arrays without shadow falling on any of the adjacent dishesin any day throughout the year.

To represent the shadow profile around the dish throughout theyear, operating duration is considered from 2 h after sunrise to 2 hbefore sunset, instead of the fixing the operating hours at localtime say 8 AM–4 PM or any other timing, because sunrise and sun-

Fig. 3. Shadow profile around the dish operating from after 2 h sunrise to 2 h beforesunset at latitude (a) 8�N, and (b) 35�N.

set will not be occurring at the same time all days throughout theyear. The shadow profile around the dish throughout the year de-pends on the latitude, operating hour, declination and azimuth an-gle. The shadow length shown in Fig. 3 is in non-dimensional formand expressed as the ratio of length of the shadow length to thediameter of the dish (Lsh/D). The position of the dish is shown asthe filled circle at the center (only horizontal position) whose sizeis equal to its diameter. At high latitude locations (<35�N), it is ob-served that, the shadow profile is larger as compared to that oflower latitude places for the same operating hours. The variationof the shadow length for various operating hours for latitude13�N (Chennai) is shown in Fig. 4. If the system is operated inthe early hours of the sunrise, the shadow casted by the dish willbe very large for low solar altitude angles compared to later hours.

2.3. Positioning of the parabolic dish collector field and land use factor

The arrangement of the solar dish arrays are made in such a waythat the land area required to arrange the dishes must be as min-imum as possible without the shadow falling on the any of the sur-rounding dishes at any time of the day throughout the year. Solardish collector field analysis is carried out for in-line and staggeredarrangements for latitudes ranging from 8�N to 35�N. The shadowlength in east–west for in-line arrangement ranges between 1.95Dand 2.51D whereas for staggered arrangement it ranges between1.99D and 2.55D for 2 h of operation after sunrise and before sun-set. From the analysis, it is found that staggered arrangement re-quires 5% more land area when compared to in-linearrangement. The spacing between the dishes in east–west direc-tion must be equal to the extreme shadow length at that operatinghour to avoid the shadow falling on the adjacent dish. The mini-mum shadow length will occur in east–west direction when thesolar azimuth angle is 90� for given operating hours on a particularday. Therefore, it is required to determine the declination (day ofthe year) on which the azimuth angle is 90� for given operatinghours to determine the minimum shadow length in east–westdirection. Eqs. (2), (4), and (5) are used to evaluate the declinationat which the azimuth angle is 90� for the given operating hours andwe get,

tan d ¼ � cot / � cosftan�1½�cot2/ � cosecxx � cotxx�g ð6Þ

The solar altitude angle at which the azimuth angle is 90� for givenoperating hours can be expressed as:

sinajcs¼90� ¼ sin / � sinðtan�1 YÞ þ cos / � cosðtan�1 YÞ

� cosðtan�1 X �xxÞ ð7Þ

where X = (�cot2/�cosecxx – cotxx) and Y = �cot/�cos(tan�1X)Shadow length in east–west direction at azimuth angle 90� is

expressed as:

Lsh EW ¼D

sinajcs¼90�

ð8Þ

The spacing in north–south direction is chosen in such a waythat the shadow does not fall on the adjacent dish at noon in anyof the day throughout the year. In order to avoid the shadow fallingon the adjacent dish at noon, the spacing between the dishes is ta-ken as maximum shadow length which occurs on the declinationof �23.45�(winter solstice).

From Eq. (2), the solar altitude angle for maximum shadow atnoon (x = 0� and d = �23.45�), is expressed as:

sinajd¼�23:45� ¼ sin / � sin dþ cos / � cos d ð9Þ

The shadow length in north–south direction at noon is expressedas:

Fig. 4. Variation of shadow length at various operating hours after sunrise at latitude 13�N (Chennai) (a) 1 h, (b) 1.5 h, (c) 2 h, and (d) 2.5 h.


Lsh NS ¼D

sin ajd¼�23:45�ð10Þ

The land area required around the dish is the product of the spacingdistances in east–west direction and north–south direction for thegiven operating hours and it is expressed as:

Aland ¼D2

sinajcs¼90� � sin ajd¼�23:45�ð11Þ

Land use factor (LUF) is the ratio of the aperture area of the dish tothe land area around the dish is given by:

LUF ¼ Ap

Aland¼

pðsin ajc¼90� � sinajd¼�23:45� Þ4

ð12Þ

The arrangement of the dish arrays for latitudes 8�N and 35�N oper-ating from 2 h after sunrise to 2 h sunset is shown in Fig. 5. The dish(DR) is taken as a reference to locate other dishes around it. Thedishes DE, DR and DW are arranged in-line with spacing distanceequal to the shadow length at 2 h after sunrise in east–west direc-tion. The dishes DN, DR and DS are arranged in-line with spacing dis-tance equal to the shadow length at noon on winter solstice(d = �23.45�) in north–south direction. The corner dishes (DNE,DSE, DNW and DSW) are arranged such a way that they are in-linewith respect to the adjacent dishes in east–west or north–southdirection spacing distance equal to shadow length in respectivedirection.

The variation of the spacing in east–west direction for the lati-tudes ranging from 8�N to 35�N and operating hours ranging from0.5 to 2.5 h is shown in Fig. 6. The spacing between the dishes ineast–west direction (LSP_EW) for latitudes 8�N and 35�N, operating

0.5 h after sunrise are found as 7.74 and 9.41 times diameter ofthe dish collector aperture respectively, whereas for operating2.5 h after sunrise, it is found to be 1.66 and 1.97 times diameterof the dish collector aperture respectively. The generalized correla-tion has been developed to calculate the spacing between thedishes in east–west direction as the function of operating hoursand latitude using regression analysis for a range of latitudes from8�N to 35�N and operating hours from half an hour to 2.5 h aftersunrise and is given as:

Lsp EW

D¼ 2:846/0:133t�0:976 ð13Þ

The parity plot presented in Fig. 7 depicts the deviation of correla-tion predictions from the analytical solution. The deviation is foundto be within ±10%.

The variation of the spacing in north–south direction is shownin Fig. 8. The spacing distances in north–south direction (Lsp_NS)for latitudes 8�N and 35�N are found to be 1.17 and 1.91 timesdiameter of the dish collector aperture respectively. The general-ized relationship has been developed for spacing distance betweenthe dishes in north–south direction as function of latitudes rangingfrom 8�N to 35�N by regression analysis and is given by:

Lsp NS

D¼ 0:0007/2 � 0:0038/þ 1:1637 ð14Þ

and the coefficient of correlation for the above relationship is about0.99.

For a dish of 10 m diameter, spacing between the dishes in east–west and north–south direction are 20 m and 12 m respectively(for / = 13�N, t = 2 h).

Fig. 5. Spacing distance between the dishes after 2 h of sunrise and 2 h beforeSunset at latitudes (a) 8�N, and (b) 35�N.

Fig. 6. Spacing distance required between the dishs in east–west direction afterdifferent hours of the sunrise.

Fig. 7. Parity plot for the spacing of solar dish collectors in east–west direction.

Fig. 8. Variation of extreme shadow length at noon with latitude at winter solstice.

Fig. 9. Variation of land use factor with latitude for different operating hours.


The variation of the land use factor (LUF) with latitude forvarious operating hours is shown in Fig. 9. The LUF is found tobe 0.087 for 8�N, and 0.044 for 35�N, operating 0.5 hafter sunrise to 0.5 h before sunset whereas, for dish operatingfrom 2.5 h after the sunrise to 2.5 h before sunset, theLUF is found to be 0.43 for 8�N and 0.21 for 35�Nrespectively.

2.4. Shadow effect on the adjacent dishes

The shadow of the dish on the adjacent dishes has been esti-mated. If the dish operating hour is same as that of the spacingdistance between the dishes in the east–west direction selectionhour, shadow will touch bottom tip of the adjacent dish. If thedish operates earlier than this hour, the shadow will fall on theadjacent dishes as shown in Fig. 10. When the dishes are viewed(from backside) in the direction of the sunrays, they appears liketwo circles just touching each other on the perpendicular plane(X–X0 plane) of the sunrays for same operating and spacing dis-tance time, whereas they appears like two circles overlappingon each other if operating time is earlier than the spacing dis-tance time.

Fig. 10. Effect of solar dish shadow on adjacent dish (a) without shadow, and (b) with shadow.


The shadow covered on the adjacent dish (area intersection ofthe two circles) can be expressed as:

Ash ¼D2

2cos�1 d

D

� �� d

2

ffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiD2 � d2

qð15Þ

The value of ‘d’ depends on the solar elevation angle, solar azimuthangle and positioning of the dish with respect to the other dish onwhich shadow falls on it.

The shadow of reference dish on the adjacent dishes is illus-trated in Fig. 11 for latitudes 8�N and 35�N spacing equal to sha-dow length at 2.5 h after sunrise and operating 1 h after sunriseto 1 h before sunset. The reference dish (DR) may cast the shadowon the two or three adjacent dishes on different days in a year. Thedish (DR) may cast the shadow on one dish or two dishes simulta-neously or sometimes there will not be any shadow on any of thedishes depending upon the operating hours, spacing distance, lati-tudes and declination. At the same time, dish (DR) will experienceequal amount of the shadow by opposite dish/dishes. The shadowof the dish (DR) falls on any of the three dishes (DNW, DW and DSW)during morning hours and on other three dishes (DNE, DE and DSE)during evening hours at different declination angles for latitude8�N (Fig. 11a). At latitude 35�N the shadow cast by the dish (DR)falls only on two dishes (DNW and DW) during morning hours andon other two dishes (DNE and DE) during evening hours at differentdeclination angles (Fig. 11b). There will not be any shadow by ref-erence dish on dishes (DSW and DSE) during any declination angle

during morning hours as well as evening hours. The percentageof the shadow on the adjacent dish/dishes or shadow experiencedby adjacent dish/dishes varies as shadow occurs at different posi-tion during different days of the year (declination). The variationof the shadow falling on the adjacent dishes at latitudes 8�N and35�N by reference dish is represented in Fig. 12. The variation ofshadow size for the latitude 8�N found to be 37–47% throughoutthe year, whereas for the latitude 35�N, the variation of the shadowon the dish is found to be 2–48%. The variation of percentage of theshadow falling on the dish with declination, at various operatinghours after sunrise to before sunset, when spacing equal to shadowlength at 2 h and 2.5 h after sunrise for latitudes 8�N and 35�N areshown in Figs. 13 and 14 respectively. At higher latitude, the rangeof percentage variation of the shadow for the different declinationsis more as compared to lower latitude places. The average value ofthe percentage of the shadow is high at lower latitude as comparedto higher latitude places.

3. Simulation of solar parabolic dish concentrating collectorpower plant

The solar parabolic dish concentrating collector power plant hasbeen simulated using flow-sheet computer program based soft-ware Cycle–Tempo [14]. The thermodynamic analysis of Rankinecycle for DSG based 5 MWe solar parabolic dish power plant isshown in Fig. 2. The steam parameters of 60 bar/400 �C withfeed water heater/de-aerator temperature of 153 �C have been

Fig. 11. Solar dish shadow analysis for 1 h after sunrise to 1 h before sunset keepingspacing at 2.5 h after sunrise for latitude (a) 8�N, and (b) 35�N. Fig. 12. Variation of the shadow with the declination at different operating hours

after 1 h with spacing of 2.5 h after sunrise for latitude (a) 8�N, and (b) 35�N.


considered [15]. The solar power plant consists of solar collectorfield and power block (turbo-generator, pump, condenser and bal-ance of plant and power block). In the thermodynamic analysis ofsolar parabolic dish power plant, the following parameters areassumed.

(i) Ambient pressure (Pa) and temperature (Ta) of the referenceenvironment are considered as 1.013 bar and 33 �C, respec-tively (Indian climatic conditions).

(ii) The relative humidity of the ambient air is taken as 60%.(iii) Condenser pressure is 10.3 kPa and temperature gain of the

condenser cooling water is 10 �C.

Based on the above thermodynamic analysis of solar parabolicdish power plant cycle, the amount of thermal energy requiredto generate 5 MWe is found as 17790.4 kWth. The solar parabolicdish collector field has been designed to generate the above ther-mal energy with including solar multiple (SM) as 1.16 [16]. TheSM is defined as the ratio of the thermal power produced by the so-lar field at the design point to the thermal power required by thepower block at nominal conditions. The solar multiple has beenconsidered to design the solar collector field to avoid part loadworking conditions of the power block during long cloudy ornon-insolation periods.

3.1. Plant operating hours and energy generation

The analysis is carried out to determine the energy yield from aparabolic dish plant for various locations in India. The solar radia-tion data are retrieved from ‘‘Indian Society of Heating, Refrigerat-ing and Air-Conditioning Engineers’’ [17].

The power generation by the parabolic dish solar plant has beenanalyzed for different plant operating hours and spacing distanceof the solar dish arrays such as

(a) tsr + 1 at Lsp ¼ Lshjtsrþ1to Lsp ¼ Lshjtsrþ2:5 with 1/2 h intervals,(b) tsr + 1.5 at Lsp ¼ Lshjtsrþ1:5 to Lsp ¼ Lshjtsrþ2:5 with 1/2 h

intervals,(c) tsr + 2 at Lsp ¼ Lshjtsrþ2 and Lsp ¼ Lshjtsrþ2:5 with 1/2 h intervals,

and(d) tsr + 2.5 at Lsp ¼ Lshjtsrþ2:5

tsr + 1 represents the duration of the power plant operation from1 h after sunrise to 1 h before sunset and so on. Lsp ¼ Lshjtsrþ1 repre-sents spacing between the dishes in east–west direction equal toshadow length at 1 h after sunrise and so on.

The monthly average daily energy yield from 5 MWe solar par-abolic dish power plant has been estimated for different operating

Fig. 13. Variation of the shadow with the declination at different operating hourswith spacing of 2 h after sunrise for latitude (a) 8�N, and (b) 35�N.

Fig. 14. Variation of the shadow with the declination at different operating hourswith spacing of 2.5 h after sunrise for latitude (a) 8�N, and (b) 35�N.


hours and spacing distances. The design point for solar field takenas the average of direct normal irradiation (DNI) based on the max-imum DNI which occurred in a given place and the average of theDNI after 2 h of sunrise to before 2 h of sunset. DNI is the amount ofsolar radiation received per unit area by a surface that is alwaysheld perpendicular (or normal) to the rays that come in straightline from the direction of the sun at its current position in the

Fig. 15. Monthly average daily power output of 5MWe solar parabolic dish p

sky. Taking dish optical efficiency 88%, receiver thermal efficiency90%, piping loss efficiency 96% [18] and turbine efficiency 28.45%(Cycle–Tempo analysis), net solar to electrical conversion effi-ciency (gnet) is about 21.63%. The monthly average daily energygeneration from the collector is given by

PGtot ¼DNI� Ap � gnet � tplant

1000ð16Þ

ower plant for different operating hours in Jodhpur (26�170 N, 73�10 E).

Table 1Variation of energy production and land requirement of 5 MWe standalone solar parabolic dish power plant with operating hours and spacing of the parabolic dish collectorarrays.

S.no

Operatinghours

Spacingdistance

Reduction in annual energy generation(%)

Land requirement per unit area of dish(m2)

Average shadow of DR on adjacent dishes(%)

Chennai (11.00GW h/a)

Jodhpur (12.08GW h/a)

Chennai (13�N,80�100 E)

Jodhpur (26�170 N,73�10 E)

Chennai (13�N,80�100 E)

Jodhpur (26�170 N,73�10 E)

1 tsr + 1 h Lsp ¼ Lshjtsrþ 1 2.02 4.99 6.28 9.28 0.00 0.00

2 tsr + 1 h Lsp ¼ Lshjtsrþ1:52.24 5.18 4.24 6.27 14.55 10.47

3 tsr + 1 h Lsp ¼ Lshjtsrþ22.67 5.53 3.25 4.79 27.55 21.39


5 tsr + 1.5 h Lsp ¼ Lshjtsrþ1:55.02 8.18 4.24 2.67 0.00 0.00

6 tsr + 1.5 h Lsp ¼ Lshjtsrþ25.13 8.25 3.25 4.79 6.71 6.00



9 tsr + 2 h Lsp ¼ Lshjtsrþ2:58.33 10.88 2.67 3.93 4.23 4.02



The DNI available for different plant operating hours has beencalculated by considering the sunrise and sunset hours. The totalavailable energy can be calculated by adding DNI from sunrisehours to sunset hours. The available energy at tsr + 1 is calculatedby adding the DNI after 1 h from the sunrise to 1 h before the sun-set considering shadow effect on reflecting surface and the samemethodology is used to calculate the available solar energy of theother plant operating hours.

The monthly average daily actual energy generation (Pact) basedon available DNI and maximum energy generation (Pmax) that canbe produced at design point of DNI for same operating durationfrom 5 MWe solar dish power plant at Jodhpur is shown inFig. 15. If the difference between Pmax and Pact is less, then the sys-tem can operate with close to its full capacity. It is observed thatoperating from 1 h after sunrise to 1 h before sunset, any timethroughout the year; Pact is always less than Pmax. The variationin the total energy generation, land use factor and average percent-age of the shadow on the dish at various operating hours and spac-ing for Chennai and Jodhpur are given in Table 1. At earlieroperating hours (just after the sunrise and before the sunset), thepercentage reduction in power that could have been extracted isless as compared to later operating hours, because in the earlierhours available DNI is less. The optimum spacing of the solar disharrays can be arrived by considering the maximum possible landutilization with minimum percentage of reduction in the energyextracted. Though the land cost is less as compared to the totalcapital cost, the larger spacing requires longer pipeline and addingto the extra cost and with penalty of the energy extracted. It is ob-served from Table 1, the yearly average percentage of reduction inenergy available is about 4.36% and 6.70% of the total energy avail-able throughout year at Chennai and Jodhpur respectively for tsr + 1and Lsp ¼ Lshjtsrþ2. From Fig. 15 and Table 1, the better configuration

Fig. 16. Sensitivity analysis for the levelised electricity cost of the parabolic dishpower plant at Jodhpur (26�170 N, 73�10 E) location.

is to operate the plant from 1 h after the sunrise to 1 h before sun-set with spacing distance equal to the shadow length at 2 h aftersunrise.

3.2. Feasibility of solar parabolic dish power plant in Indian conditions

The feasibility analysis in terms of annual energy production ofthe dish has been carried out for 58 locations in India for the bestconfiguration (the plant operates at tsr + 1 and spacingLsp ¼ Lshjtsrþ2). The various locations in India are grouped into East-ern region (Bhagalpur, Bhubaneswar, Dibrugarh, Guwahati, Im-phal, Jagdelpur, Jorhat, Kolkata, Patna, Raipur, Ranchi, Raxaul,Shillong and Tezpur), Western region (Ahmedabad, Akola,Aurangabad, Belgaum, Bhopal, Gwalior, Indore, Jabalpur, Jamnagar,Mumbai, Nagpur, Panaji, Pune, Rajkot, Ratnagiri, Sholapur, Suratand Veraval), Northern region (Allahabad, Amritsar, Barmer, Bika-ner, Dehradun, Gorakhpur, Hissar, Jaipur, Jaisalmer, Jodhpur, Kota,Lucknow, New Delhi, Saharanpur and Sundernagar) and Southernregion (Bangalore, Chennai, Chitradurga, Hyderabad, Kurnool,Mangalore, Nellore, Ramagundam, Tiruchirapalli, Trivandrum andVisakhapatnam). Monthly average daily DNI for different regionsof India is given in Table A1 (ISHRAE, 2005). It can be seen thatmost of the northern and western region locations receive DNImore than 5 kW h/(m2 day) during most of the months in a year.Most of the southern region receive DNI about 3–5 kW h/(m2 day) during most of the months in a year. In most of the east-ern region locations receive considerably less direct solar radiation.But during July–September, a significant drop in available DNI isobserved throughout country due to monsoon. The area of the col-lector field for different locations has been calculated based on thedesign point DNI with solar multiple of 1.16 to estimate the annualpower for different locations. The annual power generation from5 MW parabolic dish power plant for different regions in Indiawhen the plant operates from 1 h after sunrise to 1 h before sunsetwith Lsp ¼ Lshjtsrþ2 is shown in Table 3 of column 3. The plant oper-ating duration is 10 months in a year. The two months in consecu-tive of the low DNI due to raining have been allotted formaintenance. From Table 3, the annual power output ranging from7251 MW h to 12,678 MW h for solar radiation ranging from2.48 kW h/m2 day to 5.15 kW h/m2 day respectively.

4. Economic analysis of parabolic dish power plant

Economic analysis of the parabolic dish power plant has beencarried out at various locations in India. The economic parameterssuch as levelised electricity cost, discounted payback period,

Table 2Input parameters used for the economic analysis of the parabolic dish solar powerplant.

S. no Parameter Value (INR)

1 Solar field cost (m2) 175002 Power block (5 MWe) 156,458,8343 Construction and contingencies (5 MWe) 203,561,0174 O & M cost (kW year) 27465 Land cost (ac) 300,0006 Life of the power plant (year) 307 Discount rate 0.18 Auxiliary consumption 0.089 Variable operating and maintenance cost 0.110 Escalation rate 0.0511 Price of electricity generated by dish power plant (INR/

kW h)13.45


benefit to cost ratio and net present value have been calculated toinvestigate viability of the solar power plant.

4.1. Levelised electricity cost

The levelised electricity cost (LEC) has been estimated based onthe actual site related data and the capital, operation and mainte-nance (O & M) costs of plant from reference plant [19]. The fixedcapital cost includes infrastructure, solar field, power block, landand other indirect costs. The land cost for the different locationvaries based on the land area required to generate given powergeneration. The O & M cost includes the administration, solar fieldspare parts, equipments, service contracts, water treatment and la-bors for operation of the plant and maintenance. The cost of thepower plant varies time to time. The present cost of the plant is cal-culated based on the chemical engineering plant cost index (CEPCI)as follows:

Present cost ¼ Reference cost� CEPCIpresent

CEPCIreferenceð17Þ

The capital cost of solar power plant is expected to decrease withincrease in plant capacity. This is accounted by expressing the cap-ital cost in terms of the reference capital cost and a scaling factor isgiven as [20]:

Cost2 ¼ ðP2=P1Þ0:7 � Cost1 ð18Þ

Enough information is not available on solar parabolic dish collectorbased on the direct steam generation (DSG). The replacement oftrough collector field by dish collector field in DSG solar thermalpower plant for steam generation is assumed. The solar dish receiv-ers can provide steam high temperature and pressure so that thesteam can directly expanded in steam turbines [18]. The approxi-mate cost of the solar dish steam generator [21] is about INR14,000–16,000 per m2 of collector area and that of ratio of collectorfield cost of parabolic dish to parabolic trough is about 1.2 [22]. Inthe present analysis, the solar collector field cost for parabolic dishcollector is taken as 1.2 times the parabolic trough collector fieldwith the reference plant [19]. The reference parabolic trough fieldcost is INR 14540 per m2 of collector (with scaling factor) and 1.2time this cost is INR 17448 per m2 collector area. In the presentanalysis the collector field cost taken as around value of INR17500 per m2 of collector area. The capital and O & M cost for the5 MWe plant at Jodhpur is INR 86,31,91,908 ($17266388) and INR1,37,31,750 ($274635) per annum respectively ($1 = INR 50).

The levelised electricity cost (LEC) is given as

LEC ¼ CFCap þ CLOM ð19Þ

Fixed capital cost is given as

CFCap ¼CCap

PGnetð20Þ

Net energy generation (PGnet) is given as

PGnet ¼ PGtot � PCaux ð21Þ

The auxiliary power consumption for parabolic dish collector track-ing, feed water pump is considered as 8% of the total power gener-ation [23]. The levelised O & M cost (CLOM) is given as

CLOM ¼ LFðCFOM þ CVOMÞ ð22Þ

The levelising factor (LF) is given as [24]

LF ¼ ð1þ ieÞlt � 1

ieð1þ ieÞlt

" #ið1þ iÞlt

ð1þ iÞlt � 1

" #ð23Þ

where

ie ¼ði� eÞð1þ eÞ ð24Þ

The fixed O & M cost is given as

CFOM ¼COM

PGnetð25Þ

The variable O & M cost includes the additional O & M cost otherthan the fixed O & M and it is given as:

CVOM ¼ 0:1CFOM ð26Þ

The discounted payback period (DPP) for the solar collector is givenas [24]:

DPP ¼lnðBj � CjÞ � ln ðBj � CjÞ � iCCap

� �lnð1þ iÞ ð27Þ

The annual benefits (Bj) to the investor by selling electricity to thegovernment is given as

Bj ¼ PGnetCCappe ð28Þ

The benefit to cost of the parabolic dish plant is given as [24]:

BC¼ 1

CCap

Xlt

j

Bj � Cj

ð1þ iÞj

" #ð29Þ

The net benefit accrued to the investor (Bj � Cj) is assumed uniformthroughout the life of the plant. The net present value of the systemis given as [24]:

NPV ¼Xlt

j

Bj � Cj

ð1þ iÞj

" #� CCap ð30Þ

The input parameters used in the economic analysis of parabolicdish plant is given in Table 2. The minimum LEC is observed tobe INR 9.83 ($ 0.197) at Indore, with payback period of10.63 years and cost benefit ratio of 1.48. The variation of LEC isdue to the variation in availability of direct normal irradiation(DNI).

A solar power plant may be considered viable, when it is capa-ble of working continuously and generating power without anyloss till end of its life time. Viability of the solar power plant maybe defined in terms of NPV or LEC for any given location. In thisstudy, the viability of solar power plant is defined in terms ofLEC. The solar power generation is viable when the LEC of powergeneration is less than that of levelised tariff. The levelised tarifffor solar thermal and photovoltaic power generation is INR 13.45and INR 18.44 respectively [25]. The solar thermal power genera-tion is conditionally viable when the LEC lies between INR13.45and INR 18.44. The solar thermal power generation is not viable

Table 3Economic analysis of 5 MWe parabolic dish power system for different locations in India.

Locations DNI(kW h/m2 day)

Power generation(MW h/a)

Land area(ac)

Land usefactor

LEC(INR/kW h)

DPP(year)

NPV (INR) B/C ratio Viability

(a) Eastern IndiaBhagalpur 3.28 8217 39.2 0.23 16.76 NAa �35890 0.82 CVb

Bhubaneswar 3.53 9624 38.6 0.27 15.10 NA �18140 0.92 CVDibrugarh 2.36 8594 65.5 0.22 21.00 NA �101778 0.63 NVGuwahati 2.37 10290 69.3 0.23 18.58 NA �83008 0.72 NVc

Imphal 3.09 8882 47.3 0.24 17.34 NA �49569 0.79 CVJagdelpur 3.81 9588 33.6 0.27 14.22 33.24 �3196 0.98 CVJorhat 2.61 9302 62.6 0.22 19.05 NA �80396 0.70 NVKolkata 2.54 8675 52.2 0.25 19.56 NA �81280 0.68 NVPatna 3.52 8932 40.6 0.23 15.64 NA �23529 0.89 CVRaipur 4.21 10882 36.5 0.26 12.68 19.91 22412 1.11 Vd

Ranchi 4.43 11579 38.1 0.25 11.82 16.33 39768 1.19 VRaxaul 3.32 9447 47.3 0.22 15.79 NA �28562 0.87 CVShillong 2.52 7710 56.0 0.23 22.00 NA �102467 0.60 NVTezpur 2.33 9355 68.8 0.22 20.21 NA �99814 0.66 NV(b) Western IndiaAhmadabad 5.16 11718 35.4 0.25 11.24 14.38 51632 1.26 VAkola 4.95 9206 29.1 0.26 13.45 23.68 9496 1.05 VAurangabad 6.02 10967 27.2 0.27 10.92 13.11 55938 1.32 VBelgaum 4.87 9780 25.5 0.29 12.45 18.02 26226 1.15 VBhopal 5.57 11729 31.2 0.25 10.46 12.14 67531 1.37 VGwalior 4.62 11167 38.9 0.23 11.89 16.44 37667 1.19 VIndore 6.55 11778 27.4 0.25 9.83 10.63 80738 1.48 VJabalpur 4.10 10236 36.9 0.25 13.25 23.02 12223 1.06 VJamnagar 5.29 10537 30.7 0.25 11.76 15.63 39251 1.22 VMumbai 2.97 7688 36.8 0.27 18.91 NA �60839 0.72 NVNagpur 5.11 11279 32.4 0.26 11.45 14.88 46502 1.24 VPanaji 2.48 7251 53.4 0.21 21.54 NA �89240 0.62 NVPune 4.34 8912 27.6 0.28 13.91 27.27 3291 1.02 VRajkot 6.21 11480 27.9 0.25 10.24 11.51 70984 1.42 VRatnagiri 2.67 7530 37.5 0.29 19.97 NA �73027 0.67 NVSholapur 4.62 10115 30.0 0.28 12.83 20.18 19806 1.10 VSurat 3.37 9033 39.0 0.26 16.04 NA �30280 0.86 CVVeraval 3.24 7327 34.6 0.26 18.70 NA �54337 0.73 NV(c) Northern IndiaAllahabad 4.24 10578 39.5 0.23 12.85 20.67 19238 1.10 VAmritsar 4.83 9788 40.1 0.19 12.75 19.50 21162 1.12 VBarmer 5.40 10494 40.2 0.23 13.04 21.78 15829 1.08 VBikaner 5.80 11098 34.1 0.21 10.86 13.01 57388 1.33 VDehradun 3.51 9656 47.9 0.20 14.51 42.03 �8271 0.96 CVGorakhpur 3.29 9096 45.8 0.22 16.06 NA �31053 0.86 CVHissar 4.44 9542 38.8 0.21 13.38 23.25 10796 1.06 VJaipur 5.46 12178 37.5 0.22 10.53 12.45 67884 1.36 VJaisalmer 5.80 11167 34.3 0.22 11.00 13.44 54868 1.31 VJodhpur 6.21 11419 31.5 0.23 10.39 11.85 67876 1.39 VKota 5.04 11850 37.8 0.23 11.18 14.22 53297 1.27 VLucknow 4.51 10046 36.1 0.22 12.65 19.16 22924 1.12 VNew Delhi 4.58 10484 41.0 0.21 12.60 19.23 23804 1.12 VSaharanpur 4.78 10108 38.3 0.20 12.35 17.79 28109 1.15 VSundernagar 3.83 10021 49.8 0.19 14.00 30.48 �560 1.00 CV(d) Southern IndiaBangalore 3.81 9290 34.8 0.31 16.02 NA �31553 0.86 CVChennai 3.07 10709 43.0 0.31 15.75 NA �34710 0.87 CVChitradurga 4.45 10184 29.1 0.30 12.99 21.23 16832 1.09 VHyderabad 4.89 10651 29.1 0.28 11.97 16.49 35503 1.19 VKurnool 4.83 10917 29.3 0.29 11.94 16.51 36415 1.19 VMangalore 3.20 8623 32.8 0.31 16.80 NA �39396 0.82 CVNellore 3.04 9784 40.0 0.30 16.29 NA �38849 0.84 CVRamagundam 3.74 10455 37.1 0.27 13.79 28.36 2239 1.01 CVTiruchirapalli 5.15 12678 29.2 0.32 10.62 12.85 67714 1.33 VTrivandrum 4.3 11566 31.9 0.33 12.57 19.70 24737 1.11 VVisakhapatnam 3.31 9655 39.6 0.28 15.79 NA 51632 0.87 CV

a NA: not applicable.b CV: conditionally viable.c NV: not viable.d V: viable.


when the LEC is greater than INR 18.44. Based on the present anal-ysis, it is found that 32 locations are viable, 16 locations are condi-tionally viable and 10 locations are found not viable out of 58locations. The solar thermal power generation may be made viablewhen the plant capacity increases.

The sensitivity analysis of LEC has been carried out to study theeffect of uncertainties in the input parameters such as capital cost,O & M cost, capacity factor, discount rate and plant life time on theLEC. In sensitivity analysis, it is also important to predict the trendof LEC with change in input parameters and it is shown in Fig. 16.

Fig. 17. An atlas for viability of standalone 5 MWe solar parabolic dish power plant for Indian conditions.


The LEC increases with increase in capital cost, O & M cost and dis-count rate. The effect of capital cost and discount rate on LEC ismore than the O & M cost. The LEC decreases with increase incapacity factor and plant life. At lower plant capacity factor, theLEC is very high due to lower annual power generation and the ratedecrease in LEC is cost less than the rate of increase in plant life andcapacity factor. The LEC mainly depends on the capital cost, capac-ity factor and discount rate.

4.2. CDM benefits

The clean development mechanism (CDM) is an element underthe Kyoto Protocol for promoting the technology transfer and

investment from industrialized countries to the developing coun-tries to reduce the emissions of green house gases. Such technolo-gies can earn saleable certified emission reduction (CER) credits,each equivalent to 1 tonne of CO2, which can be counted towardsmeeting the Kyoto targets. The CER are climate credits (or carboncredits) issued by the CDM executive board for emission reduc-tions achieved by CDM projects [12]. The CO2 emission mitigationbenefit depends on the amount of electricity generated. Theamount of carbon credits is the product of the energy generatedby the plant and the emission coefficient. The emission coefficientof Indian sub-critical power plant is 0.84 kg/kW h power genera-tion [26]. Based on the European Energy Exchange, the compensa-tion for mitigation of 1 tonne of CO2 is INR 881 (1EURO = INR 65).

Table A1Monthly mean daily available direct normal solar radiation for different regions of India, kW h/(m2 day) [17].

Location Months Yearly average

January February March April May June July August September October November December

(a) Eastern IndiaBhagalpur 3.41 4.19 5.71 4.56 3.55 2.13 1.67 1.59 1.85 2.58 4.39 3.70 3.28Bhubaneshwar 5.34 4.97 5.77 4.02 4.25 2.93 2.05 2.04 1.45 2.82 2.88 3.86 3.53Dibrugarh 2.86 2.85 2.78 2.63 2.13 1.77 1.29 1.75 1.37 1.91 3.77 3.22 2.36Guwahati 2.82 3.03 3.30 4.08 2.42 1.69 1.31 1.58 1.25 1.67 2.76 2.56 2.37Imphal 4.80 4.88 5.15 2.47 3.07 1.58 1.74 1.71 1.78 2.93 2.78 4.17 3.09Jagdelpur 4.70 5.94 6.11 6.06 4.88 2.65 1.46 1.30 1.77 2.55 3.56 4.78 3.81Jorhat 2.49 3.40 4.60 2.87 2.11 2.00 2.18 2.09 1.93 2.17 2.55 2.93 2.61Kolkata 3.71 4.12 3.40 2.77 2.53 1.76 1.36 1.56 1.36 2.09 2.35 3.50 2.54Patna 3.02 5.72 6.14 6.42 5.57 4.17 1.38 1.88 1.63 1.93 3.36 1.00 3.52Raipur 5.41 4.90 6.35 6.43 7.09 4.20 1.78 1.50 2.19 3.81 3.09 3.74 4.21Ranchi 4.80 6.30 5.09 7.53 6.63 4.54 2.70 1.76 2.16 3.34 4.35 3.98 4.43Raxaul 2.47 3.86 5.53 6.12 3.91 2.54 1.82 1.56 1.79 2.83 4.26 3.15 3.32Shillong 2.79 3.56 3.72 4.58 2.35 1.57 1.30 1.63 1.40 1.94 2.46 2.92 2.52Tezpur 3.27 3.40 3.15 3.54 1.88 1.62 1.11 1.21 1.16 2.19 2.57 2.91 2.33(b) Western IndiaAhmedabad 5.64 5.81 6.98 7.55 5.94 4.96 2.85 1.73 3.95 5.30 5.82 5.31 5.16Akola 4.48 7.66 5.47 7.51 7.55 4.21 3.23 2.51 3.83 4.15 4.13 4.68 4.95Aurangabad 5.86 7.36 7.38 8.97 9.46 6.60 3.13 4.00 4.78 4.34 4.63 5.72 6.02Belgaum 6.30 8.02 7.80 6.92 5.37 3.18 1.72 1.82 2.81 4.39 4.15 5.94 4.87Bhopal 5.11 5.97 7.30 9.02 8.62 6.74 2.33 2.80 4.36 3.89 5.50 5.22 5.57Gwalior 4.22 4.59 6.28 7.35 6.13 5.27 2.77 2.57 3.68 3.75 4.09 4.76 4.62Indore 5.87 7.04 9.29 9.13 10.1 6.04 4.06 3.47 4.88 5.83 6.29 6.60 6.55Jabalpur 4.47 5.24 6.27 6.64 7.05 3.89 1.46 1.60 2.31 3.01 3.55 3.66 4.10Jamnagar 5.99 6.77 6.23 5.65 6.23 6.24 3.92 2.64 3.60 3.95 6.21 6.05 5.29Mumbai 4.32 4.97 3.85 2.84 2.42 1.52 1.63 1.60 1.74 2.34 3.84 4.63 2.97Nagpur 5.43 7.07 6.39 8.28 7.98 4.74 2.89 2.71 3.07 3.65 4.48 4.62 5.11Panaji 4.31 4.21 2.55 2.33 2.27 1.41 1.43 1.25 1.55 1.86 2.64 3.89 2.48Pune 5.58 6.72 7.94 7.52 5.70 2.23 1.41 1.41 1.78 2.60 4.30 4.93 4.34Rajkot 5.82 6.85 8.02 8.42 8.92 6.91 2.98 2.91 5.67 5.90 6.02 6.10 6.21Ratnagiri 4.44 4.29 3.19 2.71 2.07 1.48 1.04 1.13 1.66 2.54 3.33 4.13 2.67Sholapur 4.48 6.73 6.71 6.88 6.07 3.48 3.05 1.82 3.67 3.94 4.18 4.39 4.62Surat 4.81 4.54 5.10 4.16 3.22 2.08 1.56 1.32 1.17 2.90 4.57 4.96 3.37Veraval 5.17 4.74 3.64 2.80 2.33 2.25 2.07 1.92 1.92 3.12 4.17 4.76 3.24

(c) Northern IndiaAllahabad 4.31 3.78 6.07 7.53 5.86 5.11 2.06 1.98 1.56 4.41 5.13 3.10 4.24Amritsar 4.10 7.20 5.43 7.47 7.61 4.40 3.22 2.51 3.82 4.11 3.80 4.30 4.83Barmer 4.85 4.92 6.85 6.99 7.69 6.76 3.91 2.82 4.40 5.49 4.89 5.22 5.40Bikaner 5.21 6.35 5.73 7.96 8.68 7.15 3.36 3.87 4.95 5.84 6.11 4.42 5.80Dehradun 4.03 3.73 4.75 4.73 4.62 4.09 1.36 1.31 2.30 2.70 4.28 4.27 3.51Gorakhpur 2.49 2.89 5.01 6.27 5.96 2.60 1.42 1.37 1.44 2.56 4.03 3.43 3.29Hissar 3.42 5.37 5.00 7.11 5.95 5.10 2.59 2.07 2.81 4.76 4.60 4.48 4.44Jaipur 4.54 6.36 6.73 7.78 7.22 6.09 4.02 3.08 4.86 5.09 5.52 4.25 5.46Jaisalmer 5.87 5.67 6.29 7.09 7.83 6.39 3.93 4.35 5.02 6.57 5.55 4.99 5.80Jodhpur 5.19 6.91 7.84 8.71 6.10 7.68 4.89 4.19 5.73 6.29 5.58 5.43 6.21Kota 4.60 5.49 6.35 7.55 8.33 5.94 2.87 2.03 3.66 5.61 3.41 4.59 5.04Lucknow 3.60 6.87 5.62 6.84 5.81 5.20 1.65 1.86 2.97 4.11 4.36 5.26 4.51New Delhi 4.06 3.53 5.50 7.36 5.40 5.35 3.78 2.78 3.36 4.04 5.26 4.54 4.58Saharanpur 4.05 6.51 5.91 7.46 6.06 4.27 3.47 1.88 2.37 4.66 5.71 4.99 4.78Sundernagar 3.09 2.65 4.16 5.99 6.80 4.79 1.43 1.84 2.08 4.87 4.59 3.68 3.83

(d) Southern IndiaBangalore 4.61 6.51 5.27 5.21 4.00 2.96 3.14 1.77 2.57 2.48 3.58 3.64 3.81Chennai 3.12 3.70 2.75 2.94 3.89 3.95 3.15 3.55 3.24 2.23 1.92 2.46 3.07Chitradurga 5.14 7.16 7.72 6.66 5.22 3.67 2.68 2.01 3.05 2.96 2.93 4.22 4.45Hyderabad 4.50 7.40 6.18 6.47 6.95 5.24 3.87 3.01 2.95 3.49 4.56 4.04 4.89Kurnool 5.44 6.57 6.35 5.65 6.53 4.75 2.86 3.23 3.32 4.62 4.88 3.80 4.83Mangalore 5.04 4.68 4.04 3.47 4.07 1.89 1.43 1.40 1.75 2.37 3.36 4.94 3.20Nellore 2.50 3.24 3.80 3.10 4.51 3.92 3.47 3.44 2.67 2.25 1.42 2.18 3.04Ramagundam 4.66 4.31 4.52 5.80 5.84 3.50 1.67 1.74 2.27 3.02 3.54 4.02 3.74Tiruchirappalli 4.39 5.88 5.98 5.76 6.11 6.86 6.47 6.38 4.73 3.24 2.35 3.64 5.15Trivandrum 5.58 6.15 6.15 4.50 3.91 2.45 2.96 3.43 4.13 3.73 3.64 4.93 4.30Visakhapatnam 4.57 3.46 4.76 4.59 3.82 3.24 2.73 2.60 2.12 2.05 1.82 3.91 3.31


The dependability of solar power plant has been carried out interms of Plant Capacity Factor (PCF). Plant Capacity Factor is de-fined as the ratio of actual power generation to maximum powergeneration. The levelised electricity cost (INR/kW h) and PCF (inpercentage) for 5 MWe solar power generation by dish power plantis shown in Fig. 17 for 58 locations of India. The locations that areviable for solar parabolic dish based power generation is shown ingreen. The places that are conditionally viable and unattractive for

solar dish based power generation is shown in blue and redrespectively.


5. Conclusion

The solar parabolic dish collector field for standalone powerplant has been analyzed for 5 MWe power generations. Thetechno-economic feasibility of solar dish power plant at 58 loca-tions in India has been studied. The land area required for the dif-ferent plant operating hours and different insolation conditionswere analyzed. The monthly mean daily power output from theparabolic dish collector power plant for different plant operatinghours has been calculated. From the analysis, it was found thatthe configuration corresponding to the plant operating from 1 hafter sunrise to 1 h before sunset with spacing distance in east–west direction equal to the shadow length after 2 h sunrise andspacing distance in north–south direction equal to shadow lengthat noon on winter solstice is found to be the best. The economicanalysis of the plant and the levelised electricity cost of the plantwith CDM using direct steam generation based power plant hasbeen determined. Based on LEC, it is observed that most of north-ern locations are viable. In southern region, the locations like Chi-tradurga, Hyderabad, Kurnool, Tiruchirapalli and Trivandrum areviable and other locations are conditionally viable. In western re-gion, the locations like Mumbai, Panaji, Ratnagiri, Veraval are notviable for power generation, but other locations in the region areviable. In Eastern region most of the locations are conditionally via-ble or not viable except Raipur and Ranchi.

Appendix A

See Table A1.

References

[1] Grossman JW, Houser RM, Erdman WW. Prototype dish testing and analysis atSandia National Laboratory, SANDIA Laboratory Report; 1994.

[2] Kaushika ND, Reddy KS. Performance of a low cost solar dish steam generatingsystem. Energy Convers Manage 2000;41(7):713–26.

[3] Lovegrove K, Burgess G, Pye J. A new 500 m2 paraboloidal dish solarconcentrator. Sol Energy 2011;85(4):620–6.

[4] Robert OH. Effects of tracking errors on the performance of point focusing solarcollectors. Sol Energy 1980;24(1):83–92.

[5] Arabab H, Jazi B, Rezagholizadeh M. A computer tracking system of solardishwith two-axis degree freedoms based on picture processing of bar shadow.Renew Energy 2009;34(4):1114–8.

[6] Barra O, Conti M, Santamata E, Scarmozzino R, Visentin R. Shadows’ effect in alarge scale solar power plant. Sol Energy 1977;19(6):759–62.

[7] Appelbaum J, Bany J. Shadow effect of adjacent solar collectors in large scalesystems. Sol Energy 1979;23(6):497–507.

[8] Groumps PP, Khouzam K. A generic approach to the shadow effect of largesolar power system. Sol Cells 1987;22(1):29–46.

[9] Aronova ES, Grilikhes VA, Shvarts MZ. Optimization of arrangement ofphotoelectric power plants with radiation concentrators in solar electricpower plant design. Appl Sol Energy 2008;44(4):237–42.

[10] Beerbaum S, Weinrebe G. Solar thermal power generation in India – a techno-economic analysis. Renew Energy 2000;21:153–74.

[11] Poullikkas A. Economic analysis of power generation from parabolic troughsolar thermal plants for the Mediterranean region – a case study for the islandof Cyprus. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2009;13:2474–84.

[12] Purohit I, Purohit P. Techno-economic evaluation of concentrating solar powergeneration in India. Energy Policy 2010;38(6):3015–29.

[13] Duffie JA, Beckman WA. Solar engineering of thermal processes. 2nd ed. NewYork: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.; 1991.

[14] Cycle–Tempo. Cycle–Tempo release 5.0: Delft University of Technology, 2007.[15] Zarza E, Rojas ME, Gonzalez L, Caballero JM, Rueda F. INDITEP: the first pre-

commercial DSG solar power plant. Sol Energy 2006;80:1270–6.[16] Montes MJ, Abanades A, Martinez-Val JM, Valdes M. Solar multiple

optimization for a solar-only thermal power plant, using oil as heat transferfluid in the parabolic trough collectors. Sol Energy 2009;83:2165–76.

[17] ISHRAE weather data are � 2005; Indian Society of Heating, Refrigerating andAir-Conditioning Engineers, New Delhi, India. <http://www.ishrae.in/>.

[18] Lovegrove K, Zawadski A, Coventy J. Paraboloidal dish solar concentrators formulti-megawatt power generation. Beijing: Solar World Congress 2007;September 18–22 2007.

[19] Pitz-Paal R, Dersch J, Milow B, Tellez F, Ferriere A, Langnickel U, et al.Development steps for parabolic trough solar power technologies withmaximum impact on cost reduction. J Sol Energy Eng 2007;129:371–7.

[20] Price H. A parabolic trough solar power plant simulation model. In: Int. SolarEnergy Conference 2003. Hawaii.

[21] MNRE Report-2007. Minimum technical specification of various componentsof solar steam generating system. <http://www.mnre.gov.in/solar-air-heating-system.htm>.

[22] AQUA-CSP Report 2007. Concentrating solar power for seawater desalination.<http://www.dlr.de/tt/aqua-csp>.

[23] Suresh MVJJ, Reddy KS, Kolar AK. 3-E analysis of advanced power plants basedon high ash coal. Int J Energy Res 2009;34:716–35.

[24] Kandpal TC, Garg HP. Financial evaluation of renewable energytechnologies. New Delhi: Macmillan India Ltd.; 2003.

[25] CERC, 2009. Central Electricity Regulatory Commission, New Delhi, India.<http://www.cercind.gov.in/>.

[26] Suresh MVJJ, Reddy KS, Kolar AK. 4-E (energy, exergy, environment andeconomic) analysis of solar thermal aided coal-fired power plants. Energy SustDev 2010;14:267–79.

http://www.ishrae.in/

http://www.mnre.gov.in/solar-air-heating-system.htm

http://www.mnre.gov.in/solar-air-heating-system.htm

http://www.dlr.de/tt/aqua-csp

http://www.cercind.gov.in/

Documents

Viability analysis of solar parabolic dish stand-alone power plant for Indian conditions