designs

Article
Energetic and Financial Optimization of Solar Heat
Industry Process with Parabolic Trough Collectors
Evangelos Bellos * ID
, Ilias Daniil and Christos Tzivanidis
Thermal Department, School of mechanical engineering, National Technical University of Athens,
Heroon Polytechniou 9, Zografou, 15780 Athens, Greece; iliasdan93@gmail.com (I.D.);
ctzivan@central.ntua.gr (C.T.)
* Correspondence: bellose@central.ntua.gr




Received: 14 June 2018; Accepted: 13 July 2018; Published: 16 July 2018


Abstract: The objective of this work is the investigation of a solar heat industry process with parabolic
trough solar collectors. The analysis is conducted for the climate conditions of Athens (Greece) and for
five load temperature levels (100 ◦ C, 150 ◦ C, 200 ◦ C, 250 ◦ C, and 300 ◦ C). The examined configuration
combines parabolic trough solar collectors coupled to a storage tank and an auxiliary heat source for
covering the thermal need of 100 kW. The solar thermal system was optimized using the collecting
area and the storage tank volume as the optimization variables. There are three different optimization
procedures, using different criteria in every case. More specifically, the solar coverage maximization,
the net present value maximization, and the payback period minimization are the goals of the
three different optimization procedures. Generally, it is found that the payback period is between
five and six years, the net present value is between 500–600 k€, and the solar coverage is close to
60%. For the case of the 200 ◦ C temperature level, the optimum design using the net present value
criterion indicates 840 m2 of solar collectors coupled to a storage tank of 15.3 m3 . The optimization
using the solar cover indicates the use of 980 m2 of solar collectors with a tank of 28 m3 , while the
payback period minimization is found for a 560 m2 collecting area and an 8-m3 storage tank volume.
The results of this work can be used for the proper design of solar heat industry process systems with
parabolic trough collectors.

Keywords: Solar energy; heat process; parabolic trough collector; optimization; solar industry

1. Introduction
There are several problems in the domain of energy, which are mainly associated with fossil fuel
depletion [1], increasing energy demand [2] and global warming [3]. The industrial sector is a high
energy-consuming sector with around 50% of the worldwide energy consumption [4]. The majority
of the energy consumption in the industries is for the heat process; this percentage reaches up to
70% [5]. The usual way for obtaining the demanded heat is by using fossil fuels [6], which has negative
environmental impacts, as well a high operational cost.
The use of solar energy for covering totally or partially the heat process demand of the industries
is not a novel idea, but it is revisited [7,8] due to the serious environmental problems, as well as
the fossil fuel depletion in the future [9–11]. The processes in the industries cover a great range of
low, medium, and high temperatures [12,13]. Below, usual industries with the respective typical
temperature ranges for the demanded heat are given [7,8]:

• Dairy: 60–180 ◦ C
• Food: 60–120 ◦ C
• Paper: 60–120 ◦ C

Designs 2018, 2, 24; doi:10.3390/designs2030024 www.mdpi.com/journal/designs

Designs 2018, 2, 24 2 of 23

• Chemical: 60–260 ◦ C
• Bricks and plastics: 60–220 ◦ C
• Automobile: 50–120 ◦ C
• Agriculture: 80–90 ◦ C
• Metal: 160–180 ◦ C
It is essential to state that every industry may need heat for more than one process. For instance,
the dairy industry needs process heat for pressurization at 60–80 ◦ C, sterilization at 100–120 ◦ C, and
drying at 120–180 ◦ C [7].
The parabolic trough solar collector (PTC) is the most mature solar concentrating technology [14,15]
that is able to cover all of the previously presented temperature levels for the heat process in the
industries [7]. The PTC can efficiently produce useful heat for temperatures up to 400 ◦ C with thermal
oil as a working fluid, and up to 550 ◦ C with molten salts [15]. So, the use of PTC is a promising
choice in the solar heat for an industrial process (SHIP). Moreover, other kinds of solar collectors are
the flat plate collectors (FPC) for temperatures up to 100 ◦ C, the evacuated tube collector (ETC) for
temperatures up to 150 ◦ C, and the linear Fresnel reflector (LFR) up to 300 ◦ C [16].
In the literature, there are various studies for SHIP in various locations over the world.
Table 1 summarizes all of the investigated studies. In 2001, Kalogirou [17] theoretically examined a
solar system with PTC for hot water production at 85 ◦ C for Cyprus. He found the optimum collecting
area to be 300 m2 and the optimum storage tank for this collecting area at 25 m3 . The solar coverage for
this energetically optimized system was around 50% for Spain. Guerro and Quijano [18] studied the
use of PTC for heat production at 100 ◦ C for a cork industry. Their system has a nominal capacity of
260 kW with a 432 m2 collecting area and 15 m3 , while the solar coverage was 65%. Abdel-Dayem [19]
investigated a steam production system with PTC for Egypt. The system includes 1958 m2 , that cover
a load of 175 ◦ C in a 10% percentage.
Pietruschka et al. [20] examined the use of different systems in different locations. Firstly, they
investigated a system with FPC for a food industry in Austria. This system produces heat at 95 ◦ C and
includes 1200 m2 of collectors that cover a load of 650 kW. The second system includes LFR for a brick
industry in Italy. This system produces heat at 180 ◦ C and includes 2640 m2 of collectors that cover
a load of 1.5 MW. The last system includes a PTC for a dairy in Spain. This system produces heat at
180 ◦ C and includes 2040 m2 of collectors that cover a load of 1.0 MW.
Silva et al. [21] studied a heat production system at 150 ◦ C with PTC in Spain. The nominal heat
production was 100 kW that is covered in a percentage of 67% with a 1000 m2 collecting area and
100 m3 of storage tank volume. Vittoriosi et al. [22] studied the use of LFR in a 1.2-MW installation in
Italy. They found that the total system coverage was 20% with 2700 m2 of collectors for heat production
at 260 ◦ C. El Ghazzani et al. [23] found that the use of 39,760 m2 of PTCs with a storage tank of 3300 m3
were able to cover 57% of a 10.5-MW load at 160 ◦ C in Morocco.
Recently, in 2018, the combination of PTCs and FPCs was recently examined by Tian et al. [24]
for Denmark. They used 5960 m2 of FPCs for heat production at 75 ◦ C, and 4039 m2 of PTCs for heat
production at 75 ◦ C. There is also a storage volume of 2430 m3 . The load of the districting heating was
covered by both collector types, with the FPC producing a bit lower than 5 kWh/m2 , and the PTC
producing a bit more than 5 kWh/m2 .
The previous literature review indicates that the use of PTC for producing heating for industrial
processes or other heat applications is a promising choice. Various systems have been studied
worldwide, especially in locations with relatively high solar potential. Greece is a country with
high solar potential, which ranges from 1400 kWh/m2 up to 1800 kWh/m2 yearly. Athens is the largest
city in Greece; it is located approximately in the middle of Greece (about 38◦ latitude), and it is a
representative location for investigation with about 1600 kWh/m2 solar potential [25].
The objective of this work is to design an optimum industrial process heat system for the climate
conditions of Athens (Greece). This system includes PTCs and an auxiliary system for covering the
heating load during the period without solar irradiation. This system has a nominal load demand
Designs 2018, 2, 24 3 of 23

of 100 kW, and it is investigated theoretically for temperature levels between 100–300 ◦ C with a
50 ◦ C step. This work is a theoretical approach for a solar-assisted industrial heat process, and the
results can be applied in different industrial processes. This system is studied energetically and
financially for different design scenarios. More specifically, different combinations of solar collecting
areas and storage tank volumes are tested for all the years and periods. The system is optimized with
three different criteria: the maximization of the solar coverage, the maximization of the net present
value (NPV), and the minimization of the payback period (PP) of the investment. The results of this
work clearly show the coverage of a solar system with PTC for heat process, as well as its financial
sustainability. Moreover, the optimum system size is variable with the different optimization goals,
which is discussed in this work. The innovation of this paper is based on the investigation of the
present system in Greece, as well as the optimization with different criteria. The comparison of the
optimization with energy and financial criteria separately is something that is not found in the present
literature, and so this work has to add something new to this domain. The final conclusions of this
work can clearly prove if the use of PTCs for heating production is a promising choice for Greece, and
whether they can be utilized by various researchers and engineers. Finally, it has to be said that the
innovation of this work is mainly associated with the investigation of a solar heat industrial process
system in Greek climate conditions, as well as the optimization of the system with different criteria.

Table 1. Summary of solar heat industrial process studies. PTC: parabolic trough solar collector, FPC:
flat plate collectors, LFR: linear Fresnel reflector.

Application or Collector T Aa V f Q
Study Country
Industry Type
(◦ C) (m2 ) (m3 ) (%) (MW)
Kalogirou [17] Cyprus Hot water PTC 85 300 25 50 -
Guerro and Quijano [18] Spain Cork PTC 100 432 15 65 0.26
Abdel-Dayem [19] Egypt Steam PTC 175 1958 - 10 -
Austria Food FPC 95 1200 - - 0.65
Pietruschka et al. [20] Italy Bricks LFR 180 2640 - - 1.5
Spain Dairy PTC 185 2040 - - 1.0
Silva et al. [21] Spain Heat PTC 150 1000 100 67 0.1
Vittoriosi et al. [22] Italy Bricks LFR 260 2700 - 20 1.2
El Ghazzani et al. [23] Marocco Hot air PTC 160 39,760 3300 57 10.5
FPC 75 5960 - -
Tian et al. [24] Denmark District heating 2430
PTC 95 4039

2. Material and Methods

2.1. The Examined System-General Description

Figure 1 depicts the examined configuration with the proper details. Parabolic trough solar
collectors are used in order for the solar irradiation to be converted into useful heat. Thermal oil
flows in the PTC field, and it is stored in the storage tank. The thermal oil from the tank feeds the
heat exchanger, while there is a boiler in order for the proper heat amount to be given in the load.
More specifically, the examined solar field is assumed to have the modules to parallel connection.
So, all of the pipes from the PTC outlets are connected, and they are delivered in the upper part of the
tank, which is the hot tank region. Cold oil from the tank bottom leaves the tank, and it is separated in
different smaller pipes that feed the various modules. In the other side of the tank, hot thermal oil
leaves the tank, and it goes to the heat exchanger in order to put heat into the load. The colder oil from
the heat exchanger outlet returns to the storage tank bottom region.
In the present work, for a specific combination of collecting area and storage tank volume,
the inputs in the system are the solar direct beam irradiation (Gb ), the ambient temperature (Tam ),
and the load temperature (Tl ). The developed program, which is presented in the following subsections,
calculates the other parameters as the inlet fluid temperature in the solar field (Tc,in ), the outlet fluid
Designs 2018, 2, 24 4 of 23

temperature for the solar field (Tc,out ), the fluid inlet temperature in the heat exchanger (Ts,in ), the outlet
temperature of the heat exchanger (Ts,out ), as well as the various heat rates (Q).
Designs 2018, 2, x 4 of 23

Figure1.1. The
Figure The examined
examined configuration.
configuration.

2.2. The Solar Field

2.2. The Solar Field
The Eurotrough module is used in this work, which is a PTC with an evacuated tube receiver
The Eurotrough module is used in this work, which is a PTC with an evacuated tube receiver [26–28].
[26–28]. This module has a collecting area of 70 m2 and various modules in parallel connection from
This module 2 and various modules in parallel connection from three up to
three up tohas a collecting
14 have area of 70 mThe
been investigated. working fluid is Therminol VP-1 [29], and the mass flow
14 rate
haveinbeen
everyinvestigated. The working
module is selected at 4 kg/sfluid
[30]. is Therminol
Moreover, it isVP-1 [29], and
important the mass
to state flow
that the rate in every
collectors are
module
locatedisin
selected at 4 kg/s
a north–south [30]. Moreover,
direction, and they it is important
track the sun into thestate that the
east–west collectors
direction. are2located
Table includesin a
north–south direction, and they track
the main data about the examined module. the sun in the east–west direction. Table 2 includes the main
data about the examined module.
Table 2. Basic data about the solar collector [26–28].
Table 2. Basic data about the solar collector [26–28].
Parameter Symbol Value
Module area
Parameter Amod
Symbol 70 m2
Value
Number of solar modules Nmod 3 to 14 modules
Module area Amod 70 m2
Number ofFlow
solarrate
modules mc
Nmod 4∙N mod (kg/s)
3 to 14 modules
Module
Flow ratelength mLc 4·N12 m
mod (kg/s)
Receiver diameter
Module length LDr 70 mm
12 m
Receiver diameter
Concentration ratio DCr 70 mm
26.2
Concentration ratio C 26.2
The solar irradiation in the collector aperture (Qs) is calculated as:
The solar irradiation in the collector aperture
= (Qs⋅ ) is calculated as: (1)

Qs = A a · Gb
where the total collecting area (Aa) is given as: (1)
= ⋅ (2)
where the total collecting area (Aa ) is given as:
The thermal efficiency of the solar collector (ηth) is defined as:
A a = Nmod · Amod (2)
= (3)
The thermal efficiency of the solar collector (η th ) is defined as:
The useful heat production (Qu) is calculated as:
Qu
= η⋅th =⋅ ( − ) (4) (3)
Qs
The thermal efficiency (ηth) can be estimated using the following literature formula for the
Eurotrough model [30]:
Designs 2018, 2, 24 5 of 23

The useful heat production (Qu ) is calculated as:

Qu = m · c p · ( Tout − Tin ) (4)

The thermal efficiency (η th ) can be estimated using the following literature formula for the
Eurotrough model [30]:

Tc,in − Tam ( T − Tam )2

ηth = 0.7408 · K (θ ) − 0.0432 · − 0.000503 · c,in (5)
Gb Gb

The incident angle modifier (K) is calculated for this collector, according to the literature [31],
as below with the solar angle (θ) in degrees:

K (θ ) = cos(θ ) − 5.25091 · 10−4 · θ − 2.859621 · 10−5 · θ 2 (6)

The present tracking system makes the PTC follow the sun in the east–west direction, while the
PTC axis is in the north–south direction. In this case, the incident angle (θ) is calculated as below [30,32]:
q
cos(θ ) = cos2 (θz ) + cos2 (δ) · sin2 ( ϕ) (7)

More details about the calculation of the solar angles can be found in [30,32].

2.3. Storage Tank

The storage tank is assumed to be a cylindrical insulated tank with a thermal loss coefficient
equal to 0.8 W/m2 K. The storage tank is an open tank without heat exchangers that is modeled with
five thermal zones, and all of the zones have the same thickness in every case. More details about
this modeling can be found in [30,32,33]. The diameter of the tank is assumed to be the same as its
length [30]. This assumption has been checked with a simple sensitivity analysis, and it is found that it
has no practical impact on the results. Moreover, it is assumed that the stream temperature to the load
(Ts,in ) is the temperature in the upper zone, while the temperature to the solar field (Tc,in ) is equal to
the temperature of the last node. The general energy balance in the storage tank is given below:

Qst = Qu − Qloss − Ql,s (8)

The stored energy (Qst ) is the difference between the heat input from the solar field (Qu ) and the
heat output to the load (Ql,s ), and the thermal losses to the ambient of the tank (Qloss ). The stored
energy can be expressed as:
dTst
Qst = ρ · c p · V · (9)
dt
The volume of the storage tank (V) is a parameter of this work, and it is investigated for a great
range in order to determine its optimum value. More details will be given in the following sections.

2.4. Load Heat Exchanger

The load heat exchanger is used in order for the heat to be transfered from the load to the industrial
stream. In this work, the industrial stream is assumed to have a constant temperature (Tl ) that is
examined parametrically from 100 ◦ C up to 300 ◦ C, with a step of 50 ◦ C. The energy balance in the
heat exchanger is given below:
Ql,s = ms · c p · ( Ts,in − Ts,out ) (10)

The heat exchanger effectiveness (η hex ) was selected at 70%, and it is defined as:

Ts,in − Ts,out
ηhex = (11)
Ts,in − Tl
Designs 2018, 2, 24 6 of 23

The mass flow rate in every case is selected to be the one that gives the maximum load (Ql ),
which is 100 kW for this case. Generally, the minimum pinch difference in the heat exchanger was
about ~5 K in all of the cases. The pressure level in the thermal oil circuit is selected to be at 15 bar in
order to keep the oil in its liquid phase. Moreover, it has to be said that in every case, the thermal oil
has temperature levels similar to the load temperature, and there are not extremely high deviations
between them, because this would increase the exergy destruction losses of the system.

2.5. System Operation

The system is assumed to operate about 350 days per year, or 8400 h per year. The heat demand is
100 kW, which is covered from the solar energy or the boiler.
The energy parameters (E) can be calculated by integrations of the energy rates (Q) for the
entire year: Designs 2018, 2, x 6 of 23
t=8760
Z h
2.5. System Operation
E= Q dt (12)
The system is assumed to operate about 350 days per year, or 8400 h per year. The heat demand
t =0 h
is 100 kW, which is covered from the solar energy or the boiler.
The solar cover (f ) isparameters
The energy a critical(E)
parameter, andbyit integrations
can be calculated is definedofas:
the energy rates (Q) for the entire
year:
El,s
f
= = (12) (13)
El

2.6. Weather DataThe solar cover (f) is a critical parameter, and it is defined as:
,
= (13)
The system is investigated with a usual methodology by investigating 12 typical days, one for
every month. Moreover, the system is assumed to operate only on the sunny days of every month.
The examined Weather Datadata regards the climate conditions of Athens (Greece) with 38◦ latitude.
2.6. weather

The direct solar The system

beam is investigated
irradiation iswith
givena usual
in methodology
Figure 2, and by investigating
the ambient12 typical days, one for in Figure 3.
temperature
every month. Moreover, the system is assumed to operate only on the sunny days of every month.
These resultsThe
have been also given in [30], which is one previous work about PTC. The methods for
examined weather data regards the climate conditions of Athens (Greece) with 38° latitude. The
obtaining these weather
direct data
solar beam are given
irradiation in [30],
is given and 2,it and
in Figure is essential
the ambienttotemperature
state that inthe followed
Figure 3. Thesemethodology
results
is in accordance have
with been
the also givenstandards
ASHRAE in [30], which is one
[34]. previous
Figure work about
4 exhibits PTC. Thedays
the sunny methods for
of every month, as
obtaining these weather data are given in [30], and it is essential to state that the followed
they have been calculated using real-averaged meteorological data for the years 2010–2016 [35–37].
methodology is in accordance with the ASHRAE standards [34]. Figure 4 exhibits the sunny days of
Totally, the solar
every system
month, asoperates
they have about 219 days
been calculated per
using year, which
real-averaged is a reasonable
meteorological percentage
data for the years of 60%.
2010–2016 [35–37]. Totally, the solar system operates
This strategy has been also followed in [38] for a system with PTC. about 219 days per year, which is a reasonable
percentage of 60%. This strategy has been also followed in [38] for a system with PTC.

Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun

Jul Aug Sep Oct Noe Dec
1000
900
800
700
600
Gb (W/m2)

500
400
300
200
100
0
0 3 6 9 12 15 18 21 24
Hours

Figure 2. Daily variation of the solar beam irradiation for all the months in Athens (Greece).
Figure 2. Daily variation of the solar beam irradiation for all the months in Athens (Greece).
Designs 2018, 2, 24 7 of 23
Designs 2018, 2, x 7 of 23
Designs 2018, 2, x 7 of 23

Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun

Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun
Jul Aug Sep Oct Noe Dec
Jul Aug Sep Oct Noe Dec
35
35

30
30

25
25

20
oC)

20
Tam(o(C)
Tam

15
15

10
10

5
5

0
0
0 3 6 9 12 15 18 21 24
0 3 6 9 12 15 18 21 24
Hours
Hours
Figure 3. Daily variation of the ambient temperature for all the months in Athens (Greece).
3. Daily
FigureFigure variation
3. Daily of the
variation ambient
of the ambienttemperature forall
temperature for allthe
themonths
months in Athens
in Athens (Greece).
(Greece).

30
30

25
month

25
everymonth

20
20
Daysofofevery

15
15
SunnyDays

10
10
Sunny

5
5

0
0
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Noe Dec
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Noe Dec
Figure 4. The number of equivalent sunny days for every month in Athens (Greece).
Figure
Figure 4. The
4. The number
number of equivalentsunny
of equivalent sunny days
days for
forevery
everymonth
monthin Athens (Greece).
in Athens (Greece).
2.7. Financial Analysis
2.7. Financial Analysis
2.7. Financial Analysis
In the present work, the financial analysis is a critical part because the industries are interested
In the present work, the financial analysis is a critical part because the industries are interested
in financially
Ininthe viable investments.
present viable
work, This
the financialThis work is
analysis investigates the system
a critical part because with various
thevarious
industriesfinancial indexes
are indexes
interested in
financially investments. work investigates the system with financial
that
financially are defined
viable in this
investments. section.
This First
work of all, the
investigates total cost
the of the
system system
with (K
varioustot) is calculated. This
financial indexes that
that are defined in this section. First of all, the total cost of the system (Ktot) is calculated. This
parameter is depended on the collector field cost, the storage tank cost, and the heat exchanger cost:
are defined
parameterin this section. First
is depended ofcollector
on the all, the total cost the
field cost, of the system
storage tank(K tot ) and
cost, is calculated. This parameter
the heat exchanger cost: is
depended on the collector field cost, the storage = ⋅ + cost, ⋅ + (14)
= ⋅ tank+ ⋅ +and the heat exchanger cost: (14)

Ktot = A a · Kc + V · KV + Khex (14)

The yearly cash flow (CF) is calculated by the energy that the solar collector gives to the industry
(El,s ), the cost of the heat (Kheat ), and the cost of the operation and maintenance (KO&M ).
Designs 2018, 2, 24 8 of 23

CF = El,s · Kheat − KO&M (15)

The cost of the operation and maintenance (KO&M ) is assumed to be the 1% of the capital cost of
Designs[39]:
the system 2018, 2, x 8 of 23

KO&M = 0.01 · Ktot (16)

The yearly cash flow (CF) is calculated by the energy that the solar collector gives to the industry
(El,s), the cost of the heat (Kheat), and the cost of the operation and maintenance (KO&M).
The net present value (NPV) of the investment is calculated as:
= , ⋅ − & (15)
NPV = −Ktot + R · CF (17)
The cost of the operation and maintenance (KO&M) is assumed to be the 1% of the capital cost of
the system [39]:
The equivalent years of the investment (R) are calculated as below:
& = 0.01 ⋅ (16)
N
(1 + is
The net present value (NPV) of the investment −1
r )calculated as:
R= N
(18)
= r−· (1 + r )⋅ (17)

The
Thepayback period
equivalent (PP)
years of the of the investment
investment is calculated
(R) are calculated as:
as below:
(1 
+ ) −1 
= CF (18)
ln⋅ (1
CF+−r ·)Ktot
PP = (19)
(1 + r ) as:
The payback period (PP) of the investment islncalculated

The internal rate of return (IRR) of the lninvestment − ⋅ can be calculated by using the(19) following
=
(non-linear) expression: ln(1 + )
!
CFinvestment can be1 calculated by using the following (non-
The internal rate of return (IRR) of the
IRR = · 1− (20)
linear) expression: Ktot (1 + IRR) N
In this work, the collecting area (Aa ) and = the ⋅storage
1 − ( tank ) volume (V) are examined parametrically.
(20)
According In to this
the economy
work, the of scale theory,
collecting area (A a a)higher
and thequantity
storageoftank
a product
volume has(V) aarelower specific cost
examined
for reasonable production.
parametrically. AccordingSo,
to two curves of
the economy forscale
thetheory,
specific cost of
a higher the collecting
quantity of a productarehas
and the storage
a lower
tank volume
specific are
costgiven in Figures
for reasonable 5 and 6 respectively.
production. So, two curvesThese
for thedata correspond
specific cost of the to reasonable
collecting are andselections
according to the market prices. In the real installations, standard equipment has to be usedtofor both
the storage tank volume are given in Figures 5 and 6 respectively. These data correspond
reasonable selections according to the market prices. In the real installations, standard equipment has
too small or too great installations, which makes the specific cost lower for greater installations.
to be used for both too small or too great installations, which makes the specific cost lower for greater
For example, the control system, the piping, the tracking mechanism, etc., are not so different for small
installations. For example, the control system, the piping, the tracking mechanism, etc., are not so
and great installations,
different andgreat
for small and this is the main reason
installations, and thisfor using
is the the
main costsfor
reason listed
usinginthe
Figures 5 andin6 in this
costs listed
work. These costs correspond to reasonable market costs, in which costs are really
Figures 5 and 6 in this work. These costs correspond to reasonable market costs, in which costs are different between
small and great
really installations
different [39–41].
between small and great installations [39–41].

800
Specific collector cost - Kc (€/m2)

700

600

500

400

300

200

100

0
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200
Collecting area - Aa (m2)
Figure 5. The specific cost of the solar collectors.
Figure 5. The specific cost of the solar collectors.
Designs 2018, 2, 24 9 of 23
Designs 2018, 2, x 9 of 23

Table
Table3 includes
3 includesthethe
other
otherparameters
parameters ofofthis work.
this work. The
The heat exchanger
heat exchangercost
costis is
selected
selectedatat 1010
k€k€[42],
the[42],
project lifetimelifetime
the project (N) is 25(N)
years,
is 25and theand
years, discount factor (r)
the discount is 3%(r)[38].
factor The
is 3% costThe
[38]. of thecostheat
of theis estimated
heat is
be 0.10 €/kWh
to estimated to be 0.10 €/kWh
[43]. [43]. Moreover,
Moreover, the rangetheof
range
the of the specific
specific costscosts
aboutabout
the the solar
solar collectorsand
collectors andthe
the storage
storage tank tank are given
are given in this
in this table,
table, as as they
they havealso
have alsopresented
presented in in Figures
Figures 55and
and6.6.ItItis is
essential
essentialto to
state
state thatthe
that theinstallation
installationcost
cost is
is assumed
assumedto tobe
beincluded
includedinin thethespecific
specificcosts of Figures
costs of Figures5 and 6. 6.
5 and

1400

1200
Specific tank cost - KV (€/m3)

1000

800

600

400

200

0
0 20 40 60 80 100
Storage tank volume - V (m3)
Figure 6. The specific cost of the storage tank.
Figure 6. The specific cost of the storage tank.

Table 3. Data for the financial analysis.

Table 3. Data for the financial analysis.
Parameter Symbol Value
Parameter
Heat exchanger cost Symbol
Khex 10 Value
k€
Specific collector
Heat exchanger costcost KKhex
c 225~70010€/m
k€ 2
Specific tank cost
Specific collector cost K
KcV 225~700 €/m
475~1200 €/m 3 2

Specific tank
Heat costcost KKheat
V 475~1200
0.10 €/kWh €/m 3

Heat cost life

Project KNheat 0.10 €/kWh
25 years
Project
Discount lifefactor N
r 25 years
3%
Discount factor r 3%
O&M costs KO&M 1%∙Ktot
O&M costs KO&M 1%·Ktot

2.8. Followed Methodology

2.8. Followed Methodology
In this work, the industrial heat process system is optimized for five different heat production
In this work,
temperature the
levels industrial
(100 °C, 150 °C,heat process
200 °C, 250system
°C, 300 is optimized
°C). For everyfor five
case, thedifferent heat variables
optimization production
temperature levels (100 ◦ C, 150 ◦ C, 200 ◦ C, 250 ◦ C, 300 ◦ C). For every case, the optimization variables
are the collecting area (Aa) and the ratio of the collecting area to the storage tank (Aa/V). The collecting
arearea
the ranged
collecting area
from 210(Am a )2 and the ratioto
(3 modules) of980
the mcollecting area towhile
2 (14 modules), the storage tank
the ratio (A(A a /V).
a/V) Thefrom
ranged collecting
10
area ranged 2 2
m /m
2 3 up tofrom
100 210
m /m
2 m. The
3 (3 modules)
collecting to 980ism
area (14 modules),
examined while the
for a different ratioof
number (Amodules,
a /V) ranged
and from
so
m2 /mextra
10every 3 up to 100 m2 /m3 . The collecting
module adds an extra 70 m2 toarea is examined
the total forarea.
collecting a different
The reasonnumber of modules,
for using the ratioand
so(A a/V) and
every extranot directlyadds
module the volume
an extra(V)70 is 2 to the
mbased ontotal
the collecting
examination of the
area. Theproper
reasonvolumes
for usingin the
everyratio
(Acase.
a /V) More specifically,
and not directly the there is no reason
volume (V) isfor examining
based on the an extremely great
examination of thetank for the
proper case ofin
volumes three
every
modules,
case. because these
More specifically, there tanks arereason
is no suitable forfor cases withan10extremely
examining modules, great
for instance.
tank forSo,thethe present
case of three
technique
modules, leads tothese
because the examination of the proper
tanks are suitable for casescases. Figure
with 7 shows the
10 modules, examined
for instance.combination in
So, the present
a two-dimensional (2D) depiction.
technique leads to the examination of the proper cases. Figure 7 shows the examined combination in a
two-dimensional (2D) depiction.
Designs 2018, 2, 24 10 of 23

Designs 2018, 2, x 10 of 23
The optimization is performed by examining all of the depicted cases in Figure 7, and then
Thefor
searching optimization is performed
which combinations leadsbytoexamining
the optimumall value
of thefor
depicted cases function.
the objective in Figure Three
7, anddifferent
then
searching for which combinations
optimization procedures are performed: leads to the optimum value for the objective function. Three
different optimization procedures are performed:
(a) Maximization of the solar cover (f )
(a) Maximization of the solar cover (f)
(b) Maximization of the net present value (NPV)
(b) Maximization of the net present value (NPV)
(c) Minimization of the payback period (PP)
(c) Minimization of the payback period (PP)
More
Morespecifically, threethree
specifically, independent optimization
independent procedures
optimization are performed,
procedures and the optimization
are performed, and the
goals
optimization goals in every case are given in the previous bullets (a to c). In every procedure, 228
in every case are given in the previous bullets (a to c). In every procedure, totally cases
totally
are228investigated,
cases are investigated, which are depicted in Figure 7. More specifically, 12 different collectingare
which are depicted in Figure 7. More specifically, 12 different collecting areas
examined,
areas areand for every
examined, collecting
and for everyperiod, 19 different
collecting period,storage tanks are
19 different investigated.
storage tanks areFinally, all of the
investigated.
Finally,
cases all of the cases
are evaluated, and are
theevaluated, and the the
one that satisfies oneoptimization
that satisfies the
goaloptimization
is selected asgoal
theisoptimum
selected asone.
Forthe optimum
instance, forone.
theFor
firstinstance, for theprocedure,
optimization first optimization procedure,
the optimum casethe optimum
is the case
one that is the
leads to one that
maximum
leads
solar to maximum
cover. solaroptimization
In the second cover. In the procedure,
second optimization
the optimumprocedure, optimum
case is the one casemaximum
with the is the onenet
with the
present maximum
value, while innetthepresent value, while in
third optimization the third optimization
procedure, the optimumprocedure,
case is thethe
oneoptimum
with the case
lowest
is the one
payback period.with the lowest payback period.

100
Storage tank volume - V (m3)

80

60

40

20

0
200 400 600 800 1000
Collecting area -Aa (m2)

Figure7.7.Two-dimensional
Figure (2D) depiction
Two-dimensional (2D) depictionofofthe
theexamined
examinedcases.
cases.

Thelast
The laststep
stepisisthe
thediscussion
discussion of of the
the optimum
optimum designs
designs with
withthethedifferent
differentcriteria.
criteria.The solar
The solar
coverage is an energy criterion that indicates the amount of useful energy production by the sun.
coverage is an energy criterion that indicates the amount of useful energy production by the sun.
Higher values of this parameter indicate that higher amounts of the heat process load are cover by
Higher values of this parameter indicate that higher amounts of the heat process load are cover by
the solar energy, and so the auxiliary energy consumption is lower. The (NPV) and the (PP) are the
the solar energy, and so the auxiliary energy consumption is lower. The (NPV) and the (PP) are the
financial criteria that evaluate the viability of the project. The (NPV) evaluates the total net gain of the
financial criteria that evaluate the viability of the project. The (NPV) evaluates the total net gain of the
investment if the capital cost, the yearly cash flow, the discount factor, and the total life of the project
investment if the capital cost, the yearly cash flow, the discount factor, and the total life of the project are
are taken into consideration. The payback period takes into account the capital cost, the yearly cash
taken
flow,into
andconsideration.
the discount The payback
factor, whileperiod takes
the total into account
project the considered
life is not capital cost,inthethis
yearly cash
index. flow,
The
and the discount factor, while the total project life is not considered in this index. The
optimization with these criteria is important in order to investigate the system by different points ofoptimization with
these criteria is important in order to investigate the system by different points of
view. The optimum designs are different because the solar cover maximization generally indicates view. The optimum
designs
greaterare different
systems because
in order forthe solaruseful
higher coverenergy
maximization
amountsgenerally indicatesOn
to be produced. greater systems
the other hand,inthe
order
forfinancial
higher useful energy amounts to be produced. On the other hand, the financial
criteria usually indicate smaller systems, which presents an efficient relationship between criteria usually
indicate smaller
the system scalesystems, which production.
and the energy presents an efficient relationship between the system scale and the
energy production.
Designs 2018, 2, 24 11 of 23

It is useful to state that the IRR has not be used as an optimization goal because its maximization
was equivalent to the minimization of the payback period, and thus there was not any reason for
presenting a fourth optimization procedure.
Now, it is important to state how the dynamic analysis in general and the yearly simulation
has been conducted. Every combination (collecting area, storage tank, and temperature level of the
load) was examined separately for 12 typical days during the year. The sunny days for every month
have been used, and finally, the total yearly operation was developed. For every day, the system was
examined with a time step of 30 seconds. The differential equations of the storage tank have been
solved, and the procedure was performed for three days in order for the results to converge. The initial
values in the tank were assumed to be the same as the load temperature level, but these values are
converged after running the code for some consecutive days. Moreover, it is important to state that the
collector loop was operating when the thermal efficiency was positive. Furthermore, the solar system
feeds the load when the temperature of the thermal oil is higher than the load and there is a minimum
pinch point of ~5 K in the heat exchanger. The proper control functions have been used in the code for
respecting these constraints. It is essential to state that this work has been performed with a developed
program in FORTRAN. Similar programs for the simulation of solar-driven systems in time-depended
conditions have been performed in [39,41]. It is also useful to state that the developed model is based
on the differential equation in the storage tank, while the other parts have been modeled with simple
formulas, which makes the present analysis a pseudodynamic problem. In the end, Table 4 is given,
which includes the main information about this work. This table summarizes information that was
previously given in Section 2.

Table 4. General information about this work.

Description/Parameters
Location
Collector type
Tracking system
Storage type
Working fluid
Heat process load
Yearly operation period
Load temperature level
Collecting area (Aa )
Aa /V
Heat exchanger efficiency (η hex )
Tank thermal loss coefficient (UT )
Data/Information
Athens (Greece), latitude φ = 38◦
PTC, Eurotrough module
One-axis, follow the sun east–west
Sensible storage
Thermal oil (Therminol VP-1)
100 kW
350 days–8400 h
From 100 to 300 ◦ C (variable)
From 210 to 980 m2
From 10 to 100 m2 /m3
70%
0.8 W/m2 K

3. Results and Discussion

The examined configuration is optimized with three different procedures, and the optimization
results are given in Sections 3.1–3.4. The summary and the deeper discussion of the results are given
in Section 3.4.

3.1. Optimization for Maximum Solar Cover

The first optimization procedure is performed with the maximization of the solar coverage as the
goal. Figure 8 is a three-dimensional (3D) depiction of the solar coverage for the various examined
cases with the load temperature level at 200 ◦ C. This temperature level is selected as a representative
intermediate temperature level. Generally, a higher collecting area leads to higher solar cover, which
is reasonable. However, the optimum storage tank changes in every case. Figure 9 illustrates the
optimum storage tank volumes for different collecting areas, and for the six examined load temperature
levels. The general sense is that higher collecting areas need higher storage tanks. Moreover, it is found
that loads of higher temperatures need smaller tanks.
Designs 2018, 2, x 12 of 23
Designs 2018, 2,
Designs 2018, 2, 24
x 12
12 of
of 23
23
The yearly load production from the solar energy is given in Figure 10, and the respective solar
coverTheis given
yearly inload
Figure 11. Thesefrom
production results
theregard the cases
solar energy with in
is given theFigure
optimum10, andstorage tank, as itsolar
the respective has
been The
given yearly
in load production
Figure 9. It is from the
obvious that solar energy
higher is given
collecting in Figure
areas lead 10,higher
to and thecoverrespective
and solar
great
cover is given in Figure 11. These results regard the cases with the optimum storage tank, as it has
cover is given
production in Figure
sun.9.11. These results regard the is cases with in the optimum storage tank, as it has been
been givenby in the
Figure Moreover,
It is obvious the solar
that cover lower
higher collecting higher load to
areas lead temperatures
higher cover because the
and great
given in Figure
operation at higher 9. Ittemperatures
is obvious that higher
leads to collecting
the reduction areasof leadsolar
the to higher
thermalcover and great
efficiency. It production
can be said
production by the sun. Moreover, the solar cover is lower in higher load temperatures because the
by the
that aftersun.560 Moreover, the solar cover
m2, thetemperatures
increasing rate inisthe
lower
solarincover
higher load
isoflower temperatures
compared tobecause the operation
the collecting areas at
for
operation at higher leads to the reduction the solar thermal efficiency. It can be said
higher
up toafter temperatures
560 m 2 leads to the reduction of the solar thermal efficiency.
. m2, the increasing rate in the solar cover is lower compared to the collecting areas for It can be said that after
that 560
2 , the increasing rate in the solar cover is lower compared to the collecting areas for up to 560 m2 .
560 mIt is remarkable that the solar coverage reaches up to 60% approximately. This “upper limit” is
up to 560 m2.
It
reasonable is remarkable
if the maximum that the solaroperation
yearly coverage reaches areup to 60% approximately. This
the“upper
sunny limit”
days ofis
It is remarkable that the solar coverage days reaches considered.
up In other words,
to 60% approximately. This “upper limit” is
reasonable
the year areif the maximum
for Athens,yearly operation daysto theare considered.
data, theIn other words, daysthe sunny daystheof
reasonable if 219
the maximum and according
yearly operation days areused
considered. Inoperation
other words, theare 350 for
sunny days of
the year are
industry. 219 for of
Athens,
219 toand according to the used data, the operation days are is
350 for higher
the industry.
the year The are 219 ratio for Athens, 350andgives a maximum
according to thesolar
usedcoverdata,ofthe62.57%, which
operation daysa bit
are 350 forthan the
The
the ratio
obtained of 219 to
results. 350
So, gives
it is a maximum
found that solar
the cover
examined of 62.57%,
configuration which is
is a bit
able higher
to cover than
the the
heat obtained
load on
industry. The ratio of 219 to 350 gives a maximum solar cover of 62.57%, which is a bit higher than
results.days
sunny So, itinisafound
suitable thatway.
the examined
More configuration
results about the ismonthly
able to cover the heat
variation of load
the on sunny
solar coverage daysarein
the obtained results. So, it is found that the examined configuration is able to cover the heat load on
a suitable
given way. More results about the monthly variation of the solar coverage are given in Section 3.4,
sunnyindays Section in a3.4, whichway.
suitable follows.More results about the monthly variation of the solar coverage are
which follows.
given in Section 3.4, which follows.

60%
60%
50% 50%-60%
-f -f

50%
40%
cover

50%-60%
40%-50%
40%
30%
cover

40%-50%
30%-40%
Solar

30%
20% 30%-40%
20%-30%
Solar

20%
10% 20%-30%
10%-20%
10%
0% 10%-20%
0%-10%
0% 0%-10%
10
25 910
40
55 630 770
10
25
2 3 70 210 350 490
Aa/V (m /m )40 85 Collecting area910 - Aa (m2)
55 100 350 490 630 770
Aa/V (m 2 3) 70 210 Collecting area - Aa (mTl2=) 200 °C.
Figure 8. Solar coverage for /m
the examined 85 of (A
combinations a) and (Aa/V) for load temperature
100
Figure 8. Solar coverage for the examined combinations of (Aa ) and (Aa /V) for load temperature
Figure
T 8.◦Solar coverage for the examined combinations of (Aa) and (Aa/V) for load temperature Tl = 200 °C.
l = 200 C.

45 T = 100 ˚C T = 150 ˚C T = 200 ˚C

volume

45
40 TT==250
100˚C˚C TT==300
150˚C˚C T = 200 ˚C
volume

40
35 T = 250 ˚C T = 300 ˚C
tanktank

35
30
storage
3)

30
25
(m
storage
(m )

25
20
3

20
15
Optimum

15
10
Optimum

10
5
05
0210 280 350 420 490 560 630 700 770 840 910 980
Collecting area - A (m2)
210 280 350 420 490 560 630 a 700 770 840 910 980
Collecting area - Aa (m 2)
Figure 9. Optimum storage tank volumes for different collecting areas with the maximization of the
solar coverage as the optimization criterion.
Figure 9. Optimum storage tank volumes for different collecting areas with the maximization of the
Figure 9. Optimum storage tank volumes for different collecting areas with the maximization of the
solar coverage as the optimization criterion.
solar coverage as the optimization criterion.
Designs 2018, 2, 24 13 of 23
Designs 2018,
Designs 2018, 2,
2, xx 13 of
13 of 23
23

TT == 100
100 ˚C
˚C TT == 150
150 ˚C
˚C TT == 200
200 ˚C
˚C TT == 250
250 ˚C
˚C TT == 300
300 ˚C
˚C
Yearly heat production (MWh) 600
600

500
500

400
400

300
300

200
200

100
100

00
210
210 280
280 350
350 420
420 490
490 560
560 630
630 700
700 770
770 840
840 910
910 980
980
Collecting area
Collecting area -- AAaa (m22))
(m
Figure
Figure
Figure 10.
10.10. Yearly
Yearly
Yearly heat
heat
heat productionfor
production
production fordifferent
for differentcollecting
different collecting areas
collecting areas and
areas and optimum
andoptimum storage
optimumstorage tank
storagetank inin
in
tank order
order toto
to
order
achieve maximum
achieve maximum solar
solar cover.
cover.
achieve maximum solar cover.

TT == 100
100 ˚C
˚C TT == 150
150 ˚C
˚C TT == 200
200 ˚C
˚C TT == 250
250 ˚C
˚C TT == 300
300 ˚C
˚C
70%
70%

60%
60%

50%
50%
Solar cover - f

40%
40%

30%
30%

20%
20%

10%
10%

0%
0%
210
210 280
280 350
350 420
420 490
490 560
560 630
630 700
700 770
770 840
840 910
910 980
980
Collecting area
Collecting area -- AAaa (m22))
(m
Figure
Figure
Figure 11.
11.11. Maximum
Maximum
Maximum solar
solar
solar cover
cover
cover for
forfor different
different
different collecting
collecting
collecting areas
areas
areas (the
(the
(the storagetank
storage
storage tankisis
tank isthe
theoptimum
the optimumone
optimum onefor
one
for every
for every point).
point).
every point).

3.2. Optimization
3.2. Optimization for for Maximum
Maximum NPV
NPV
3.2. Optimization for Maximum NPV
The second
The second optimization
optimization procedure
procedure is is based
based on
on the
the maximization
maximization of of the
the NPV.
NPV. This
This parameter
parameter isis
The second optimization procedure is based on the maximization of the NPV. This parameter
crucial for
crucial for the
the investigation
investigation of
of the
the investment,
investment, andand Figure
Figure 1212 illustrates
illustrates its
its variation
variation with
with the
the
is crucial for the
optimization
optimization
investigation
variables
variables with theofload
with the thetemperature
load investment,to
temperature toand Figure
be 200
be 200 12 illustrates
°C. Generally,
°C. Generally, its variation
the NPV
the NPV withto
reaches close
reaches close tothe
optimization variables with the load temperature to be 200 ◦ C. Generally, the NPV reaches close to
600 k€,
600 k€, and
and itit is
is higher
higher for
for great
great collecting
collecting areas.
areas. Also,
Also, the
the storage
storage tank
tank seems
seems toto play
play an
an important
important
600 k€, and it is higher for great collecting areas. Also, the storage tank seems to play an important
role in the results. Thus, Figure 13 gives the optimum storage tank volumes for different collecting
 Designs 2018, 2, x 14 of 23
Designs 2018, 2, x 14 of 23
Designs 2018, 2, 24 14 of 23
role in the results. Thus, Figure 13 gives the optimum storage tank volumes for different collecting
role in the results. Thus, Figure 13 gives the optimum storage tank volumes for different collecting
areas and temperature levels. Generally, a higher collecting area needs a higher storage tank, but after
areas and
areas temperaturelevels.
levels. Generally,aahigher
higher collecting areaarea needs
needsaahigher
higherstorage tank, but after
490and temperature
m2, the optimum storageGenerally,
tank is close to 15 mcollecting
3. storage tank, but after
490 2m2, the optimum storage tank is close to 15 m33.
490 m ,Figure
the optimum storage tank is close to 15 m .
14 depicts the NPV for different temperature levels and collecting areas with the
Figure 14 depicts the NPV for different temperature levels and collecting areas with the
Figure 14
optimum depicts
storage theas
tanks NPV
theyfor
havedifferent temperature
been defined levels
in Figure 13. and
The collecting
NPV has an areas with the
increasing optimum
rate with
optimum storage tanks as they have been defined in Figure 13. The NPV has an increasing rate with
storage tanks asarea,
the collecting they haveisbeen
which defined
maximized forincollecting
Figure 13. areasThe NPV 770
between has man increasing
2 (for T rate
l = 100 °C) with
and 980the
the collecting area, which is maximized for collecting areas between 7702 m2 (for Tl = 100 °C) and 980 2
◦ C)
collecting
2 is maximized for collecting areas between
2 770 m (for T
m 2 (for Tl = 300 °C). It is important to state that after 630 m 2, the NPV has smalll variations with them
area, which = 100 and 980
m (for Tl = ◦300 °C). It is important to state that after 630 m2 , the NPV has small variations with the
collecting
(for Tl = 300area.
C).Moreover, it has to
It is important to be saidthat
state thatafter
the cases
630 mwith higher
, the NPVtemperature levels have with
has small variations lowerthe
collecting area. Moreover, it has to be said that the cases with higher temperature levels have lower
NPV, because
collecting area. the heat costit is
Moreover, hasthetosame
be in allthat
said of the
the cases,
casesand
withthe collector
higher thermal efficiency
temperature levels is lower
have lower
NPV, because the heat cost is the same in all of the cases, and the collector thermal efficiency is lower
at
NPV, higher temperature
because the heat costlevels.
is the same in all of the cases, and the collector thermal efficiency is lower
at higher temperature levels.
at higher temperature levels.

600
600
(k€)
NPV(k€)

500
500
value- -NPV

400 500-600
400 500-600
presentvalue

300 400-500
300 400-500
300-400
Netpresent

200 300-400
200 200-300
200-300
100 100-200
100 100-200
Net

0 0-100
0 0-100

10
10 25
25 40
40 55 770 910
55 70 490 630 770 910
A 2 3 350 630
Aaa/V
/V (m
(m2/m/m3))
70 85 210 350 490 2
85 210
100 Collecting
Collecting area
area -- A
Aaa (m
(m2))
100
Figure 12. Net present value for the examined combinations of (Aa) and (Aa/V) for load temperature Tl =
Figure
Figure 12.12.Net
Netpresent
presentvalue
value for
for the
the examined
examinedcombinations
combinationsof of
(A(A
a) and (Aa/V) for load temperature Tl =
a ) and (Aa /V) for load temperature
200 °C.
200
T = °C.◦ C.
200
l

18
TT == 100
100 ˚C
˚C TT == 150
150 ˚C
˚C TT == 200
200 ˚C
˚C
18
(m3)3)

16 TT == 250 ˚C
250 ˚C TT == 300 ˚C
300 ˚C
volume(m

16
14
tankvolume

14
12
12
10
storagetank

10
8
8
Optimumstorage

6
6
4
4
Optimum

2
2
0
0
210 280 350 420 490 560 630 700 770 840 910 980
210 280 350 420 490 560 630 7002 770 840 910 980
Collecting
Collecting area
area -- A
Aaa (m
(m2))
Figure 13. Optimum storage tank volumes for different collecting areas with the maximization of the
Figure 13. Optimum storage tank volumes for different collecting areas with the maximization of the
net present
Figure value asstorage
13. Optimum the optimization criterion.
tank volumes for different collecting areas with the maximization of the
net present value as the optimization criterion.
net present value as the optimization criterion.
Designs 2018, 2, 24 15 of 23
Designs 2018, 2, x 15 of 23

Designs 2018, 2, x 15 of 23

T = 100 ˚C T = 150 ˚C T = 200 ˚C

700
TT==100
250˚C˚C TT==150
300˚C˚C T = 200 ˚C
700
(k€)(k€)
600
T = 250 ˚C T = 300 ˚C
600
- NPV

500
- NPV

500
Value

400
Value

400
300
Present

300
Present

200
200
NetNet

100
100
0
0 210 280 350 420 490 560 630 700 770 840 910 980
210 280 350 420 Collecting
490 560 area (m2) 770 840 910 980
630- Aa700
Collecting 2
Figure 14. Maximum net present value for differentarea - Aa (m
collecting areas) (the storage tank is the optimum
Figure 14. Maximum net present value for different collecting areas (the storage tank is the optimum
one for every point).
Figure
one 14. Maximum
for every point). net present value for different collecting areas (the storage tank is the optimum
one for every point).
3.3. Optimization for a Minimum Payback Period
3.3. Optimization for a Minimum Payback Period
3.3. Optimization for a Minimum
The third optimization Payback Period
procedure is conducted with the minimization of the payback period as
The
the The third
criterion. optimization procedure is conducted with inthe minimization of theto payback period as
third This parameter
optimization is important,
procedure and it iswith
is conducted used the many cases inof
minimization order evaluate
the payback choices
period as
thesuch
criterion. This
as the use parameter
of parameter
solar energy is important, and it is used in many cases in order to evaluate choices
the criterion. This is for coveringand
important, a load and
it is substituting
used in many partially
cases in order the conventional
to evaluatefossil fuel
choices
such as the use of solar energy for covering a load and substituting partially the conventional fossil
boiler.
such as the use of solar energy for covering a load and substituting partially the conventional fossil fuel
fuel boiler.
boiler.Figure 15 is a 3D depiction of the simple payback period with the optimization variables when
theFigure
load is15
Figure atisis
15 aa3D
200 °C.depiction
3D This Figure
depiction of
of the
the simple
clearly
simpleshowspayback periodwith
the existence
payback period with
of a thethe
global optimization
minimumvariables
optimization variables
point at 560
whenwhen
m2
collecting area ◦ 2
200with an 8-m storage tank volume the[or (Aa/V) of
=of70 m /m ]. In this case, the
at payback
3 2 3
the
theload
loadisisatat200 C. This
°C. This Figure
Figure clearly
clearly shows
shows the existence
existence a aglobal
global minimum
minimum point
point at 560
560 m2 m
period isarea
4.88withyears, which 3 2 3
collecting
collecting area withan an 8-m3is
8-m a promising
storage
storage tank value, especially
tank volume
volume [or
[or (A for
/V)
(Aaa/V) ==renewable
7070mm 2/m 3]. energy
/m In]. this technologies.
In this case,
case, thethe payback
payback
period
periodisis4.88
4.88years,
years,which
whichis is aa promising
promising value,value, especially
especiallyfor forrenewable
renewableenergy energy technologies.
technologies.
9-10 7-9 5-7 3-5
9-10 7-9 5-7 3-5
(years)
(years)

9
9
- PP- PP

7
period

7
5
period

5
Payback

3
Payback

3
10
25
40 10
55 25
70 40/V (m2/m3)
Aa
Collecting area - Ac (m2) 85 55
100 70 Aa/V (m2/m3)
Collecting area - Ac (m2) 85
Figure 15. Payback period for the examined
100 combinations of (Aa) and (Aa/V) for load temperature Tl =
200 °C.
Figure 15. Payback period for the examined combinations of (Aa) and (Aa/V) for load temperature Tl =
Figure 15. Payback period for the examined combinations of (Aa ) and (Aa /V) for load temperature
200 °C.◦
Tl = 200 C.
Designs 2018, 2, 24 16 of 23
Designs 2018, 2, x 16 of 23
Designs 2018, 2, x 16 of 23

Figure 16 16
Figure exhibits thethe
exhibits optimum
optimumstorage tanks
storage for different
tanks loadload
for different temperatures
temperatures andand
collecting areas.
collecting
Figure 16 exhibits the optimum storage tanks for different load temperatures and collecting
3 for the
Theareas.
optimum storage tank is about 10 m majority of the cases. Figure 17
The optimum storage tank is about 10 m for the majority of the cases. Figure 17 gives the
3 gives the payback
areas. The optimum storage tank is about 10 m3 for the majority of the cases. Figure 17 gives the
period for allperiod
payback of the for
loadalltemperatures, and for the examined
of the load temperatures, and for collecting
the examinedareascollecting
with the optimum
areas with storage
the
payback period for all of the load temperatures, and for the examined 2 for all collecting areas with the
tanks in every
optimum case. tanks
storage The payback
in every period
case. Theis minimized
payback period at 560
is m
minimized of
at the
560temperature
m22 for all of levels
the
optimum◦ storage tanks in every case. The payback 2 . These period is minimized at 560 m for all of the
except 300 C, which is minimized for 630 m results indicate that there is
temperature levels except 300 °C, which is minimized for 630 m . These results indicate that there is
2 a great influence
temperature levels except 300 °C, which is minimized for 630 m2. These results indicate that there is
a great
of the influence
collecting of the
area collecting
to the area to the
minimization ofminimization
the payback of the payback
period. period.was
This result Thisnot
result wasin
found not
the
a great influence of the collecting area to the minimization of the payback period. This result was not
found in theofoptimization
optimization the system of thethe
with system with the maximization
maximization of the NPV, of the NPV,
because in because
this inthere
case, this case,
was there
a great
found in the optimization of the system with the maximization of the NPV, because in this case, there
was a great
“optimum area”“optimum
where the area”
NPV where the NPV
presented presented
a small a small variation.
variation.
was a great “optimum area” where the NPV presented a small variation.

14
14
TT == 100
100 ˚C
˚C TT == 150
150 ˚C
˚C TT == 200
200 ˚C
˚C
(m3)3)

TT == 250
250 ˚C
˚C TT == 300
300 ˚C
˚C
volume(m

12
12
tankvolume

10
10
8
storagetank

8
6
Optimumstorage

6
4
4
Optimum

2
2
0
0
210 280 350 420 490 560 630 700 770 840 910 980
210 280 350 420 490 560 630 700 770 840 910 980
Collecting area
Collecting area -- A (m22))
Ac (m
c
Figure 16. Optimum storage tank volumes for different collecting areas with the minimization of the
Figure
Figure 16.16. Optimum
Optimum storagetank
storage tankvolumes
volumesforfor different
different collecting
collecting areas
areaswith
withthe
theminimization
minimizationofof
thethe
payback period as the optimization criterion.
payback
payback period
period as as
thethe optimizationcriterion.
optimization criterion.

8.0 TT == 100
100 ˚C
˚C TT == 150
150 ˚C
˚C TT == 200
200 ˚C
˚C
8.0
7.5 TT == 250
250 ˚C
˚C TT == 300
300 ˚C
˚C
7.5
(years)
PP(years)

7.0
7.0
6.5
6.5
period- -PP

6.0
6.0
Paybackperiod

5.5
5.5
Payback

5.0
5.0
4.5
4.5
4.0
4.0
210 280 350 420 490 560 630 700 770 840 910 980
210 280 350 420 490 560 630 700 770 840 910 980
Collecting area
Collecting area -- A (m22))
Ac (m
c
Figure 17. Minimum payback period for different collecting areas (the storage tank is the optimum
Figure 17. Minimum payback period for different collecting areas (the storage tank is the optimum
one for
Figure 17. every point).
Minimum payback period for different collecting areas (the storage tank is the optimum one
one for every point).
for every point).
Designs 2018, 2, 24 17 of 23

3.4. Summary and Discussion

The last step in this investigation is the comparisons and the discussion of the obtained results.
Tables 5–7 include the results of the global optimum cases with the three performed optimization
procedures, as they have been described in Sections 3.1–3.3 in detail. These tables give results about
the optimum design (collecting area and storage tank), as well as the values of the crucial parameter
for these cases. These results regard all of the examined load temperature levels.
It can be said that the optimum design is different when the different optimization criteria are
used. This creates many optimum scenarios, and this result needs more investigation. The optimization
with the solar cover lead to the maximum examined collecting areas (980 m2 ), while the NPV gives
values that are a bit lower, from 770 m2 to 980 m2 . The optimization with the PP gives significantly
lower collecting areas between 560–630 m2 .
At this point, the case of 200 ◦ C is selected as an example in order to make a suitable analysis.
Using the solar cover as a criterion (scenario A), the solar cover is 59.89%, the NPV is 572 k€, and
the payback period is 6.01 years. Using the NPV as a criterion (scenario B), the solar cover is 58.37%,
the NPV is 582 k€, and the payback period is 5.44 years. Moreover, using the payback period as a
criterion (scenario C), the solar cover is 52.26%, the NPV is 543 k€, and the payback period is 4.88 years.
These results show that the use of solar cover as criterion leads to a relatively high payback period
(6.01 years from 4.88 years), while the use of the payback period leads to lower solar cover (52.26%
from 59.89%). However, the use of NPV as criterion leads to a small sacrifice in solar cover (58.37%
from 59.89%) and payback period (5.44 years from 4.88 years). So, the optimum design according to
the NPV seems to be the most suitable case. In this scenario, the collecting area is 840 m2 , and the
storage tank volume is 15.3 m3 .
It is also useful to state that the optimum collecting areas are generally higher for higher load
temperatures. Moreover, the optimum storage tanks are lower in higher temperatures for optimization
with solar cover, while they are higher for optimization with financial criteria.
The optimization with the solar cover leads generally to greater storage tanks (24.5 m3 to 39.2 m3 ),
the optimization with the NPV leads to intermediate storage tanks volumes (12.8 m3 to 16.3 m3 ),
while the optimization with the payback period leads to the smallest tanks (8 m3 to 9 m3 ). At this
point, it is important to state that the literature results of Table 1 are generally found with energetic
optimizations, and thus the found storage tanks are generally great, which is also obvious from the
previous comparative discussion.

Table 5. Optimization results for solar cover maximization (Scenario A). NPV: net present value, PP:
payback period, IRR: internal rate of return.

Tl Aa,opt (Aa /V)opt Vopt NPV PP IRR fmax

(◦ C) (m2 ) (m2 /m3 ) (m3 ) (k€) (Years) (%) (%)
100 980 25 39.2 589 5.95 18.32 61.34
150 980 25 39.2 578 6.03 18.09 50.65
200 980 35 28.0 572 6.01 18.15 59.89
250 980 40 24.5 562 6.06 18.00 59.08
300 980 40 24.5 549 6.16 17.71 58.21
Designs 2018, 2, 24 18 of 23

Table 6. Optimization results for NPV maximization (Scenario B).

Tl Aa,opt (Aa /V)opt Vopt NPVmax PP IRR f

◦
( C) (m2 ) (m2 /m3 ) (m3 ) (k€) (years) (%) (%)
100 770 60 12.8 603 5.07 21.38 58.78
150 840 70 12.0 593 5.31 20.64 58.91
200 840 55 15.3 582 5.44 19.99 58.37
250 910 55 16.6 569 5.75 18.95 58.35
300 980 60 16.3 552 6.06 18.01 58.02

Designs 2018, 2, x Table 7. Optimization results for payback period minimization (Scenario C). 18 of 23

TlTable 7.AOptimization
a,opt
results for
(Aa /V) opt
payback NPV
Vopt period minimization
PPmin (Scenario
IRR C). f

(◦ C)
Tl(m2 )Aa,opt (m(A 2 /m 3 ) opt (m
a/V) 3)
Vopt NPV(k€) PPmin(years)IRR (%) f (%)
100 (°C) 560 (m 2) (m
70
2/m3) (m
8.0
3) (k€)573 (years)4.68 (%) (%)
23.09 54.27
150 100560 560 7070 8.0
8.0 573559 4.68 4.7823.09 22.79 54.27 53.30
200 150560 560 7070 8.0
8.0 559543 4.78 4.8822.79 22.17 53.30 52.26
250 200 560 560 60 70 9.3
8.0 543 527 4.88 5.0322.17 52.26 51.26
21.73
300 250 630 560 70 60 9.0
9.3 527 525 5.03 5.2121.73 21.02
51.26 51.69
300 630 70 9.0 525 5.21 21.02 51.69
The IRR is also given in Tables 5–7. It takes values from 17.71 to 23.09%, which are satisfying
values.TheThisIRR is also given
parameter has notin Tables
been used 5–7.as It an
takes values fromgoal,
optimization 17.71 to 23.09%,
because which
the IRR are satisfying
maximization was
values.
found This
to be parametertohas
equivalent thenot been used asof
minimization anthe
optimization goal, because the IRR maximization was
payback period.
found
Theto be step
last equivalent
in thistowork
the minimization
is the presentation of the payback period. results for the solar coverage of
of the monthly
The last step in this work is the presentation
the load. These results are depicted in Figure 18, and they regard of the monthly results
the for theoptimum
three solar coverage
casesofforthethe
load. These results are depicted in Figure 18, and they regard the three
load temperature of 200 ◦ C. The solar cover has the same values among the three scenarios from optimum cases for the load
temperature of 200 °C. The solar cover has the same values among the three scenarios from April to
April to August. This shows that increasing the collecting area is not beneficial during these months.
August. This shows that increasing the collecting area is not beneficial during these months.
However, the greater collecting areas of scenario A and B gives higher solar cover than the scenario
However, the greater collecting areas of scenario A and B gives higher solar cover than the scenario
C for the rest of the year. During the winter, solar coverage of 20~30% is achieved, while in July and
C for the rest of the year. During the winter, solar coverage of 20~30% is achieved, while in July and
August, it reaches close to 90%. The main reason for these results is the number of the sunny days of
August, it reaches close to 90%. The main reason for these results is the number of the sunny days of
every month.
every month.ItItisisimportant
importantto tostate
state that
that thethe days withoutoperation
days without operation(15 (15per
peryear)
year)areare assumed
assumed to to
be be
separated
separatedin all
in of
allthe
of months in thein
the months samethe way.sameThis assumption
way. gives thegives
This assumption properthetime for maintenance
proper time for
during the entire year. Moreover, Table 8 includes the monthly energy
maintenance during the entire year. Moreover, Table 8 includes the monthly energy production production by the solar energy
by
forthe
thesolar
threeenergy
optimumfor thescenarios.
three optimum scenarios.

Scenario A : Aa = 980 m² - Aa/V = 35 m³

100% Scenario B : Aa = 840m² - Aa/V = 55m³
Monthly coverage of the load

90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
Figure 18. Monthly coverage of the load for the optimum cases for load temperature Tl = 200 °C.
Figure 18. Monthly coverage of the load for the optimum cases for load temperature Tl = 200 ◦ C.
Designs 2018, 2, 24 19 of 23

Table 8. Energy production during the months and the year for the three optimum scenarios.

Energy Production by the Solar Energy (MWh)

Period
Scenario A Scenario B Scenario C
January 25.23 21.49 14.84
February 24.00 24.00 17.10
March 36.00 36.00 32.17
April 43.20 43.20 43.20
May 45.60 45.60 45.60
June 50.40 50.40 50.40
July 67.20 67.20 67.20
August 67.20 67.20 67.20
September 45.60 45.60 39.47
October 40.80 39.99 27.43
November 32.09 27.41 18.94
December 25.75 22.20 15.39
Year 503.07 490.29 438.95

4. Conclusions
The objective of this work is the energetic and financial optimization of a solar heat industrial
process system. Parabolic trough solar collectors coupled to a storage tank are used in order to cover
a continuous industrial heat load. The temperature of this load is examined parametrically from
100 ◦ C to 300 ◦ C, covering a great range of possible applications as they have been described in the
introduction section. The optimization is performed with three different procedures with the following
criteria: maximization of the solar cover, maximization of the NPV, and minimization of the payback
period. The optimization variables were the collecting area and the storage tank volume. This analysis
regards the climate conditions of Athens (Greece) and the load was selected at 100 kW. The most
important conclusions of this work are summarized below:

- Higher load temperatures lead to greater optimum collecting areas, lower solar cover, lower NPV,
and a higher payback period.
- The optimum storage tank is greater when the system is optimized with energy criteria
(solar cover) compared to the financial optimization (NPV and payback period).
- The solar cover was generally found close to 60%, which is a high value. This value is restricted
by the number of the sunny days during the year.
- Different criteria lead to the different optimum scenario. Finally, the optimization with the NPV
maximization is found to be the most suitable case. In this scenario with a temperature load of
200 ◦ C, the collecting area is 840 m2 , the storage tank volume is 15.3 m3 , the NPV is 582 k€, and
the solar cover is 58.37%.
- The IRR was found to range from 17.71 to 23.09%, which are acceptable and promising values for
the present technology.

In the end, it can be said that the use of PTC for industrial heat process of various temperature
levels is a financially viable investment with good indexes and high solar coverage.

Author Contributions: E.B. has the idea of this work, he wrote the main text and he made the last step of the
calculations. I.D. made the greatest part of the calculations with the dynamic model. C.T. checked and corrected
the work, as well as he helped in the proper organization of the simulations.
Funding: This research has been funded by Bodossaki Foundation.
Acknowledgments: Evangelos Bellos would like to thank “Bodossaki Foundation” for its financial support.
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest. The funders had no role in the design of the
study; in the collection, analyses, or interpretation of data; in the writing of the manuscript, and in the decision to
publish the results.
Designs 2018, 2, 24 20 of 23

Nomenclature
Aa Collector net area, m2
C Concentration ratio
CF Cash flow, €/year
cp Specific heat capacity under constant pressure, J/kg K
Dr Absorber diameter, m
E Energy, kWh
f Solar cover
Gb Solar direct beam irradiation, W/m2
IRR Internal Rate of Return, %
K Incident angle modifier
Kc Collector specific cost, €/m2
Kheat Cost of the heat energy, €/kWh
Khex Heat exchanger cost, €
KO&M Operation and maintenance cost, €
Ktot Total cost, €
Kv Tank specific cost, €/m3
L Module length, m
m Mass flow rate, kg/s
N Project lifetime, years
NPV Net Present Value, €
Nmod Number of modules
PP Payback period, years
Q Energy Rate, W
Qs Solar irradiation rate, W
R Equivalent investment years, years
r Discount factor, %
T Temperature, ◦ C
t Time, h
UT Tank thermal loss coefficient, W/m2 K
V Storage tank volume, m3
Greek symbols
δ Solar declination angle, ◦
η het Heat exchanger efficiency
η th Thermal efficiency
θ Solar incident angle, ◦
θz Zenith angle, ◦
ρ Density, kg/m3
φ Local latitude, ◦
Subscripts and superscripts
am ambient
c collector
c,in collector inlet
c,out collector outlet
hex heat exchanger to load
l load
l,s load from the solar energy
l,b load from the boiler
loss thermal loss of the tank
max maximum
min minimum
mod module
opt optimum
Designs 2018, 2, 24 21 of 23

r receiver
s sourse of the
s,in sourse of the load inlet
s,out sourse of the load outlet
st stored in the tank
u useful
Abbreviations
ETC evacuated tube collector
FPC flat plate collector
LFR linear Fresnel reflector
O&M Operation and Maintenance
PTC parabolic trough collector
SHIP solar heat industrial process
2D Two-dimensional depiction
3D Three-dimensional depiction

References
1. Fuqiang, W.; Ziming, C.; Jianyu, T.; Yuan, Y.; Yong, S.; Linhua, L. Progress in concentrated solar power
technology with parabolic trough collector system: A comprehensive review. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev.
2017, 79, 1314–1328. [CrossRef]
2. Moreno-Leiva, S.; Díaz-Ferrán, G.; Haas, J.; Telsnig, T.; Díaz-Alvarado, F.A.; Palma-Behnke, R.; Kracht, W.;
Román, R.; Chudinzow, D.; Eltrop, L. Towards solar power supply for copper production in Chile:
Assessment of global warming potential using a life-cycle approach. J. Clean. Prod. 2017, 164, 242–249.
[CrossRef]
3. Sabiha, M.A.; Saidur, R.; Mekhilef, S.; Mahian, O. Progress and latest developments of evacuated tube solar
collectors. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2015, 51, 1038–1054. [CrossRef]
4. International Energy Agency. Energy Technology Perspectives 2012-Pathways to a Clean Energy System;
International Energy Agency: Paris, France, 2012.
5. The International Renewable Energy Agency. Renewable Energy in Manufacturing—A Technology Roadmap for
REmap 2030; The International Renewable Energy Agency: Abu Dhabi, UAE, 2014; Volume 6.
6. BP. Statistical Review of World Energy; BP: London, UK, 2016; Available online: http://www.bp.com
(accessed on 15 March 2018).
7. Jia, T.; Huang, J.; Li, R.; He, P.; Dai, Y. Status and prospect of solar heat for industrial processes in China.
Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2018, 90, 475–489. [CrossRef]
8. Farjana, S.H.; Huda, N.; Mahmud, M.A.P.; Saidur, R. Solar process heat in industrial systems—A global
review. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2018, 82, 2270–2286. [CrossRef]
9. Bellos, E.; Tzivanidis, C. Parametric investigation of nanofluids utilization in parabolic trough collectors.
Therm. Sci. Eng. Prog. 2017, 2, 71–79. [CrossRef]
10. Pavlovic, S.; Daabo, A.M.; Bellos, E.; Stefanovic, V.; Mahmoud, S.; Al-Dadah, R.K. Experimental and
numerical investigation on the optical and thermal performance of solar parabolic dish and corrugated
spiral cavity receiver. J. Clean. Prod. 2017, 150, 75–92. [CrossRef]
11. Bellos, E.; Tzivanidis, C. Parametric analysis and optimization of an Organic Rankine Cycle with nanofluid
based solar parabolic trough collectors. Renew. Energy 2017, 114, 1376–1393. [CrossRef]
12. Fernández-García, A.; Zarza, E.; Valenzuela, L.; Pérez, M. Parabolic-trough solar collectors and their
applications. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2010, 14, 1695–1721. [CrossRef]
13. Bellos, E.; Tzivanidis, C. Analytical Expression of Parabolic Trough Solar Collector Performance. Designs
2018, 2, 9. [CrossRef]
14. Bellos, E.; Tzivanidis, C.; Tsimpoukis, D. Enhancing the performance of parabolic trough collectors using
nanofluids and turbulators. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2018, 91, 358–375. [CrossRef]
15. Bellos, E.; Tzivanidis, C.; Tsimpoukis, D. Thermal, hydraulic and exergetic evaluation of a parabolic trough
collector operating with thermal oil and molten salt based nanofluids. Energy Convers. Manag. 2018, 756,
388–402. [CrossRef]
Designs 2018, 2, 24 22 of 23

16. Bellos, E.; Tzivanidis, C. A review of concentrating solar thermal collectors with and without Nanofluids.
J. Therm. Anal. Calorim. 2018, 1–24. [CrossRef]
17. Kalogirou, S. Parabolic trough collectors for industrial process heat in Cyprus. Energy 2001, 27, 813–830.
[CrossRef]
18. Guerrero-Quijano, A.; Perez, M.; Valenzuela, L.; Zarza, E. Modelling of a Small-Sized Parabolic-trough Solar
Collector Field for Process Heat in the Cork Industry. In Proceedings of the 30th ISES Biennial Solar World
Congress 2011, Kassel, Germany, 28 August–2 September 2011. [CrossRef]
19. Abdel-Dayem, A.M. Numerical-simulation and experimental-validation of the largest Egyptian solar
process-heat system. J. Renew. Sustain. Energy 2011, 3, 043102. [CrossRef]
20. Pietruschka, D.; Fedrizzi, R.; Orioli, F.; Söll, R.; Stauss, R. Demonstration of Three Large Scale Solar Process
Heat Applications with Different Solar Thermal Collector Technologies. Energy Procedia 2012, 30, L755–L764.
[CrossRef]
21. Silva, R.; Pérez, M.; Fernández-Garcia, A. Modeling and co-simulation of a parabolic trough solar plant for
industrial process heat. Appl. Energy 2013, 106, 287–300. [CrossRef]
22. Vittoriosi, A.; Fedrizzi, R.; Brock, R.; Orioli, F.; Orioli, V.; Pietruschka, D. Monitoring of a MW Class Solar
Field Set up in a Brick Manufacturing Process. Energy Procedia 2014, 48, 1217–1225. [CrossRef]
23. El Ghazzani, B.; Plaza, D.M.; El Cadi, R.A.; Ihlal, A.; Abnay, B.; Bouabid, K. Thermal plant based on parabolic
trough collectors for industrial process heat generation in Morocco. Renew. Energy 2017, 113, 1261–1275.
[CrossRef]
24. Tian, Z.; Perers, B.; Furbo, S.; Fan, J. Analysis and validation of a quasi-dynamic model for a solar collector
field with flat plate collectors and parabolic trough collectors in series for district heating. Energy 2018, 142,
130–138. [CrossRef]
25. Tzivanidis, C.; Bellos, E.; Mitsopoulos, G.; Antonopoulos, K.A.; Delis, A. Energetic and financial evaluation
of a solar assisted heat pump heating system with other usual heating systems in Athens. Appl. Therm. Eng.
2016, 106, 87–97. [CrossRef]
26. EuroTrough: Development of a Low Cost European Parabolic Trough Collector—EuroTrough. Final Report,
Research Funded in Part by The European Commission in the Framework of the Non-Nuclear Energy Programme
JOULE III; Contract JOR3-CT98-0231; EuroTrough: Almería, Spain, 2001.
27. Geyer, M.; Lüpfert, E.; Osuna, R.; Esteban, A.; Schiel, W.; Schweitzer, A.; Zarza, E.; Nava, P.; Langenkamp, J.;
Mandelberg, E. EUROTROUGH—Parabolic Trough Collector Developed for Cost Efficient Solar Power
Generation. In Proceedings of the 11th SolarPACES International Symposium on Concentrated Solar Power
and Chemical Energy Technologies, Zurich, Switzerland, 4–6 September 2002.
28. Kearney, D.W. Parabolic Trough Collector Overview: Notes on a Bit of History, Development after Luz, and a Recent
Surge in Trough Collector Technology Offerings; Parabolic Trough Workshop 2007 at the National Renewable
Energy Laboratory: Golden, CO, USA, 2007.
29. Available online: http://twt.mpei.ac.ru/tthb/hedh/htf-vp1.pdf (accessed on 15 July 2018).
30. Bellos, E.; Tzivanidis, C.; Belessiotis, V. Daily performance of parabolic trough solar collectors. Sol. Energy
2017, 158, 663–678. [CrossRef]
31. Montes, M.J.; Abánades, A.; Martínez-Val, J.M.; Valdés, M. Solar multiple optimization for a solar-only
thermal power plant, using oil as heat transfer fluid in the parabolic trough collectors. Sol. Energy 2009, 83,
2165–2176. [CrossRef]
32. Duffie, J.A.; Beckman, W.A. Solar Engineering of Thermal Processes, 3rd ed.; John Wiley and Sons Inc.: Hoboken,
NJ, USA, 2006.
33. Bellos, E.; Tzivanidis, C.; Moschos, K.; Antonopoulos, K.A. Energetic and financial evaluation of solar
assisted heat pump space heating systems. Energy Convers. Manag. 2016, 120, 306–319. [CrossRef]
34. Kouremenos, D.A.; Antonopoulos, K.A.; Domazakis, E.S. Solar radiation correlations for the Athens, Greece,
area. Sol. Energy 1985, 35, 259–269. [CrossRef]
35. Athens: Annual Weather Averages. Available online: www.holiday-weather.com/athens/averages/
(accessed on 15 July 2018).
36. Climate Athens. Available online: www.meteoblue.com/en/weather/forecast/modelclimate/athens_
greece_264371 (accessed on 15 July 2018).
37. Athens Monthly Climate Averages. Available online: www.worldweatheronline.com/athens-weather-
averages/attica/gr.aspx (accessed on 15 July 2018).
Designs 2018, 2, 24 23 of 23

38. Bellos, E.; Tzivanidis, C.; Torosian, K. Energetic, exergetic and financial evaluation of a solar driven
trigeneration system. Therm. Sci. Eng. Prog. 2018, 7, 99–106. [CrossRef]
39. Bellos, E.; Tzivanidis, C.; Symeou, C.; Antonopoulos, K.A. Energetic, exergetic and financial evaluation of a
solar driven absorption chiller—A dynamic approach. Energy Convers. Manag. 2017, 137, 34–48. [CrossRef]
40. Turchi, C.S.; Kurup, P.; Zhu, G. Revisiting Parabolic Trough Concentrators for Industrial Process Heat in
the United States. In Proceedings of the ASME Power Conference, V001T08A018, Charlotte, NC, USA,
26–30 June 2016. [CrossRef]
41. Tzivanidis, C.; Bellos, E.; Antonopoulos, K.A. Energetic and financial investigation of a stand-alone
solar-thermal Organic Rankine Cycle power plant. Energy Convers. Manag. 2016, 126, 421–433. [CrossRef]
42. Braimakis, K.; Karellas, S. Integrated thermoeconomic optimization of standard and regenerative ORC for
different heat source types and capacities. Energy 2017, 151, 570–598. [CrossRef]
43. Bellos, E.; Tzivanidis, C. Multi-objective optimization of a solar driven trigeneration system. Energy 2018,
149, 47–62. [CrossRef]

© 2018 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access
article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution
(CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).