Energy & Buildings 217 (2020) 110 0 05

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Energy & Buildings

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

Technical and economic analyses of a combined cooling, heating and

power system based on a hybrid microturbine (solar-gas) for a
residential building
Mahmood Chahartaghi∗, Amirali Baghaee
Faculty of Mechanical Engineering, Shahrood University of Technology, Shahrood, Iran

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: One of the ways to increase the efficiency of energy conversion and reduce the generation of pollutants
Received 3 October 2019 in the building sector is using combined cooling, heating and power (CCHP) systems. These systems have
Revised 21 February 2020
different types of prime movers such as micro gas turbine (MGT). In this study, a novel CCHP system
Accepted 19 March 2020
based on the prime mover of hybrid solar micro turbine have been simulated and the annual perfor-
Available online 20 March 2020
mance of the cycle, in actual conditions has been evaluated for a residential building in Iran. By adding
Keywords: solar receiver to available micro gas turbines, solar energy can provide part of the required cycle heat.
CCHP The components of this cycle include: micro gas turbine, solar dishes (parabolic dishes), solar receiver, ab-
Micro gas turbine sorption chiller, auxiliary boiler, and heat recovery steam generator. The effects of changing the number
Solar receiver of micro turbines and the area of the parabolic dishes have been studied on system performance. Also,
Heat recovery steam generator the levelized cost of electricity (LCoE) is calculated in different prices and the best scenario is proposed.
Hybrid prime mover
Additionally, the appropriate economic conditions are introduced and some of their technical specifica-
Levelized cost of electricity
tions are evaluated. Ultimately, the LCoE produced by this cycle is compared to that for the photovoltaic
systems.
© 2020 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction low maintenance requirements, and compatibility with various fu-

The building sector is one of the major energy consumers and
contributors of pollution. Consequently, conducting a research to
increase energy efficiency in buildings as well as using clean and
unlimited energy sources can be essential [1]. Combined cooling,
heating and power (CCHP) system is one of the ways to increase
energy efficiency as well as decrease of pollutants in various appli-
cations such as the building sector [2,3].
There are different arrangements of these systems according to
their prime movers. Gas turbines, steam turbines, reciprocating en-
gines, fuel cells, Stirling engines, and micro gas turbines are some
of these prime movers as main power production unit [4–10].
There are different studies about analysis of CCHP systems from
thermodynamic, and economic points of view [11,12].
Also, some studies focused of selecting the prime movers and
choosing proper scenarios for building applications [8,13,14].
In small scales and building applications, a micro gas turbine
(MGT) can be a suitable suggestion for power generation and uti-
lizing in combined generation systems due to its high reliability,
∗
Corresponding author.
E-mail address: chahartaghi@shahroodut.ac.ir (M. Chahartaghi).
els [15].
James et al. [16] performed environmental, economic, and tech-
nical analyses of a CCHP system with micro gas turbine for five
building types in Atlanta, USA. They estimated the emission pro-
duction, energy consumption and cost of the system at various
time periods of year.
One of the features of the micro gas turbine is its ability to
combination with solar energy. Instead of providing all the heat
required by the micro turbine, supplied by fossil fuels, some part
of required heat is supplied by solar energy. The solar radiation on
the surface of the Earth can be collected by parabolic dishes and
concentrated in their focal point. The solar energy collected in the
focal point of the parabolic dishes makes it possible to reach tem-
peratures above 10 0 0 °C due to its high flux density [17,18]. The
heat required for the cycle is provided by inserting a receiver in
the focal point of parabolic dishes and a working fluid absorbs this
heat. However, because of unsteady condition of the solar radia-
tion and ensuring the stable operation of the micro turbine, the
use of fossil fuels is inevitable as a support. Therefore, the working
fluid after passing through the solar receiver enters the combus-
tion chamber and its temperature increases and then enters the
turbine.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enbuild.2020.110 0 05
0378-7788/© 2020 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
2 M. Chahartaghi and A. Baghaee / Energy & Buildings 217 (2020) 110005

Nomenclature C, W City Water

cl, nb Clear sky, Normal plane, beam(direct) Radiation
A Area of Parabolic Dishes(aperture) d drop
a0 Solar adjustment factor D, H, W Domestic hot water
b Solar adjustment factor elec Electricity or electrical
B0 Capital cost of Conventional HVAC system f Fuel
By Operational cost of Conventional HVAC system in g Gas (in turbine cycle)
y’th year gen Generator(in microturbine cycle)
CP, a Air Specific Heat gen, AC Generator (in absorption chiller cycle)
CP, W Water Specific Heat H Heating (in building)
C0 Capital Cost of CCHP system based on hybrid Micro- HRSG Heat recovery steam generator
turbine F Full Load
Cy Operational Cost of CCHP system based on hybrid m mechanical
Microturbine in y’th year micro microturbine
d Discount rate on Outside of atmosphere, normal plane beam(direct)
DG Distributed Generation of electricity Radiation
Ey Electricity generation in y’th year p, d Pressure drop
G Solar radiation density P Part Load
Gsc Solar constant rec Solar Receiver
h Enthalpy Re Recuperator
hr Local time sol Solar
k Pressure drop factor tot Total
ka The atomicity coefficient of air w Water
l Solar adjustment factor
L Number of full load microturbine
LCoE The levelized cost of electricity
LHV Low Heating Value Some of the benefits of this cycle are the generation of less pol-
m Mass lutants, higher reliability and lower dependency to the fossil fuels.
n Day number In the context of the technical feasibility of hybrid solar micro-
N Number of installed microturbine turbine based on the parabolic dishes, various studies have been
P Pressure performed so far. Wang et al. [19] presented a new integrated
Q Heat load design of a 25 kWe hybrid solar microturbine. In their proposed
r Pressure ratio model, the receiver, combustion chamber and turbine have been
t Turbine integrated to improve the efficiency and minimizing the size of the
T Temperature system.
W Work Arroyo et al. [20] examined the dynamics of a 6 kWe solar mi-
y Year number croturbine rotor at high rotational speeds and different shaft struc-
δ declination tures.
 Changes in any parameter Giostri and Macchi [21] studied the effect of increasing turbine
ɛ The performance of Recuperator inlet temperature on the cycle efficiency for an integrated system
η Efficiency of solar dish and microturbine. In order to withstand high tem-
θ hr Solar Hour Angle peratures, they proposed a ceramic turbine and reported a 26.4%
θz Zenith Angle of The Sun annual efficiency. Also, they examined the shadow interaction on
τb The atmospheric transmittance the arrangement of parabolic dishes in the solar field.
∅ Latitude Aichmayer et al. [22] conducted a trade-off between pres-
ω Humidity ratio sure drop, materials, and economic issues to design receivers for
SSTE Share of the Sun from Total Energy 10 kWe solar-powered micro turbines. Also, the optimal location
HRSG Heat recovery steam generator of the receivers has been investigated.
The analysis of solar thermal Brayton cycle from the second
Subscripts thermodynamics law is also evident in studies by Roux et al. [23–
1 Compressor inlet 25]. While addressing the optimal geometry of the recuperator and
2 Compressor outlet the entropy minimization of the receiver, they reported an opti-
3 Receiver inlet mal condition of the cycle at a point that the internal irreversibil-
4 Combustion Chamber inlet ity is 3 times greater than the external irreversibility. Also, some
5 Turbine inlet studies have been performed based on the cost and applications of
6 Receiver inlet the hybrid solar micro turbines. Gavagnin et al. [26] calculated the
7 HRSG Gas inlet total cost of the hybrid cycle, including installation cost, as well
8 HRSG Gas outlet as transmission and production costs. The total cost has been re-
a Air ported between 250 0 and 330 0 €/kWe. They showed that the hy-
amb ambient brid system has the potential to become competitive with the pho-
aux, B Auxiliary Boiler tovoltaic systems.
c Compressor Sunchez et al. [27] used a new method to estimating the po-
comb Combustion Chamber tential markets for selling small-scale solar thermal power gen-
cons Consumed erators. By combining some parameters such as the availabil-
ity of solar energy, energy consumption intensity, population
 M. Chahartaghi and A. Baghaee / Energy & Buildings 217 (2020) 110005
distribution, economic indicators, and business environment
among the 20 selected countries, they introduced the most suit-
able markets.
Semprini et al. [28] compared the performance of the micro-
turbine in both solar-only and hybrid models for Seville, Spain.
The comparison has been conducted under different strategies and
capacities. The results showed that the electricity generation effi-
ciency was between 16.7% and 18.3%. Also, in terms of average an-
nual efficiency and annual work hours, the hybrid mode was pre-
ferred to solar-only.
Aichmayer et al. [29] have simulated a 150 MWe combined cy-
cle power plant that uses a large number of hybrid solar micro-
turbine with a parabolic dish, instead of a gas turbine. Then they
compared the performance of the proposed cycle with the hybrid
solar-tower combined system. The results showed that the com-
bined parabolic dish power plant could reach to the greater qual-
ities of solar integration than other systems. In another study, the
technical and economic analyses for a CCHP system with prime
mover of hybrid solar microturbine were performed for a remote
village of electricity grid [30]. Also, the impacts of the sizing and
degree of solar integration of the solar microturbine on the perfor-
mance of a CCHP system were analyzed. By changing these param-
eters and selecting their proper values, carbon dioxide emissions
and equivalent annual costs were reduced.
Among the studies that have been performed so far on the
cycle, there is no application for residential buildings. Few stud-
ies have been conducted on the economic issues on this plan. On
the other hand, due to the high impact of climate conditions on
this cycle, it is necessary to evaluate the operation of the cycle in
different climates. However, most of the previous researches have
been performed in laboratory space and design conditions and few
works have been taken into account the impact of climate on the
system performance. It is also necessary estimating the cycle per-
formance in the long run (plan lifetime), but less attention have
been paid in the previous studies.
This paper presents the technical and economic analyses of a
CCHP system based on the hybrid solar microturbine prime mover
for a residential building in Iran. The parabolic dishes are used
to collect solar energy and natural gas can be used as a backup
fuel. The system simulations have been performed for three differ-
ent conditions including moderate, warm and wet, and warm and
dry climates and calculations have been presented for the entire
year. The generated electricity by micro turbines is sold to the grid
and the waste heat of the micro turbines is recovered by a heat
recovery steam generator and used to building heating, domestic
hot water and generator of absorption chiller. The auxiliary boiler
is also used to compensate the lack of heat. With the change in
the number of microturbines and the area of the parabolic dishes,
the best scenario has been determined from the economic point
of view and the levelized cost of electricity (LCoE) has been calcu-
lated. The main contributions and innovations of the present study
are presented as follows:
• The combined cooling, heating and power (CCHP) system has
been performed based on hybrid solar microturbine for a resi-
dential building, which has not been presented in the previous
studies.
• Various scenarios for natural gas prices are considered. These
scenarios include subsidized gas and non-subsidized gas. Ira-
nian government policies on gradually eliminating subsidies are
also considered in the calculations.
• The Iranian government policies for protection of distributed
electricity generation and generating electricity from renewable
energy sources, which are made in the form of guaranteed pur-
chases are considered in the calculation.
3
• A new relation for calculating the guaranteed power purchase
rate from a hybrid solar microturbine has been proposed to the
Iranian government.
• The optimum number of hybrid microturbines has been esti-
mated.
• The optimum area of solar arrays as well as required land for
project have been evaluated.
• Three different climates conditions in Iran have been consid-
ered for system performance.
• An economic comparison between the proposed cycle and the
photovoltaic system has been performed.
2. Thermal modeling of CCHP based on hybrid microturbine
prime mover
The schematic diagram of the proposed CCHP cycle based on
the hybrid solar microturbine is shown in Fig. 1.
The proposed CCHP system consists of 4 section. The first sec-
tion consists of a hybrid solar microturbine and parabolic dishes.
The ambient air, after increasing the pressure in a compressor,
enters the recuperator and its temperature increases somewhat.
Then, it enters the solar receiver and receives the heat from the
parabolic dishes. If the operating fluid temperature in the outlet of
the receiver does not reach to the required value for entering the
turbine, it will reach to the desired temperature in the combus-
tion chamber by burning the natural gas. The working fluid after
passing through the turbine and the recuperator enters the sec-
ond section of the cycle, the heat recovery steam generator (HRSG)
as a heat exchanger. In the heat recovery steam generator, it loses
its heat and discharged into the atmosphere slightly above its dew
point.
The vapor generated in the heat recovery steam generator en-
ters the third section of the system that is the auxiliary boiler. The
auxiliary boiler can neutralize the instantaneous heat fluctuations
and in the absence of heat, it can compensate the shortage of heat
due to the use of natural gas. The fourth section of the cycle is
known as the final consumers of heat of the cycle. This part in-
cludes: hot water consumption of the building (domestic hot wa-
ter), heat required for heating systems (for the winter), and the
heat required for the generator of the absorption chiller (for the
summer).
3. Control strategy
Generally, CCHP systems are controlled by one of two strate-
gies:
1- Priority of heat: In this case, the microturbines operate based
on the heat supply requirements of the building and the sur-
plus electricity is sold to the grid. Also, in some cases, the
whole of the electricity generated can be sold to the grid.
2- Priority of power consumption: In this case, the microturbines
operate based on the electrical demand of the building and the
additional heat generated is wasted to the atmosphere or can
be stored.
In the present work, the control of the system is based on the
priority of the supply of heat and the electricity generated by the
microturbines is sold to the electricity grid. The thermal energy
requirement of the building can be determined by the mass flow
of vapor consumption. The microturbines can operate in full load
or partial load.
Fig. 2 shows the control strategy diagram and operating con-
ditions of the microturbines. Q˙ cons is the heat consumed (demand)
by the building. Lf and Lp are the number of full-load and part-load
microturbines, respectively. Also, Q˙ HRSG,F and Q˙ HRSG, P are the sum
4 M. Chahartaghi and A. Baghaee / Energy & Buildings 217 (2020) 110005
Fig. 1. Schematic diagram of the CCHP system based on hybrid solar microturbine.
of recovery heat of HRSG by full-load and part-load microturbines,
respectively. N is the total number of microturbines in the project.
If the heat demand for the building (Q˙ cons ) is equal to the heat
produced by one or more microturbines in full load (Q˙ HRSG,F ) the
same number of microturbine enter the circuit and operate at full
load condition (according to Fig. 2). However, if the required heat
of building is somewhat lower than the total capacity of several
microturbines at full load, one of microturbines operates at part
load and the others work at full load. If the total amount of heat
generated by the heat recovery steam generator (Q˙ HRSG ) is less
than the heat required for the building, and part of the heat gener-
ated by the parabolic dishes (Q˙ sol ) is higher than the needs for the
microturbines (Q˙ micro,tot ) this additional heat can be transferred to
the auxiliary boiler (according to Fig. 3). And, if there is no ad-
ditional heat in the parabolic dishes, the lack of heat is compen-
sated by burning natural gas in the auxiliary boiler(Q˙ Aux,B ). Fig. 3.
shows the control strategy diagram of auxiliary boiler and combus-
tion chamber.
In Fig. 3, Q˙ sol and Q˙ waste, sol are respectively the total heat gen-
erated by parabolic dishes and the heat generated by parabolic
dishes that are not consumed (the wasted part of heat). Q˙ micro,tot is
the total heat required by the microturbines which is the sum of
heat consumed in the receiver and the combustion chamber. Q˙ HRSG
is the total heat produced by the HRSG (recovered from full load
and part loaded microturbines). Q˙ aux,B is the heat produced by the
auxiliary boiler. Q˙ comb,micro,tot is the sum of the heat produced by
the combustion chambers of the microturbines.
The number of microturbines in operation is determined in
such a way that the sum of heat produced by the HRSG (Q˙ HRSG )
meets the thermal requirement of the building (Q˙ cons ) However,
the heat required by the building may be higher than capacity of
microturbines(Q˙ HRSG ). In this case, the control system compares
the heat collected by the parabolic dishes(Q˙ sol )with the heat re-
quired by the solar receiver of microturbines(Q˙ micro,tot ). Therefore,
there different conditions may be take place:
i) The heat generated by the parabolic dishes (Q˙ sol ) is lower
than the heat required by the solar receiver of microturbines
(Q˙ micro,tot ). In this case, the auxiliary boiler can compensate the
lack of building heat demand and the lack of heat of the so-
lar receiver is also compensated by the combustion chamber of
microturbines.
ii) The heat generated by the parabolic dishes(Q˙ sol ) is equal to
the heat required by the solar receiver of the microturbines
(Q˙ micro,tot ) In this case, the building heat shortage is compen-
sated by the auxiliary boiler and no fuel is used in the combus-
tion chamber of microturbines(Q˙ comb,micro,tot = 0 ).
iii) The heat generated by the parabolic dishes(Q˙ sol ) is greater
than the heat required by the solar receiver of microtur-
bines(Q˙ micro,tot ). In the other words, the microturbines can-
not use the whole heat of parabolic dishes and some heat
from parabolic dishes is wasted. In this case, the building
heat shortage is compensated by the excess heat of parabolic
dishes. If there is still excess heat in the dishes, it will not be
used and will be wasted(Q˙ waste,sol > 0 ). Obviously, in this case
no fuel is used in the combustion chamber of the microtur-
bines(Q˙ comb,micro,tot = 0 )
 M. Chahartaghi and A. Baghaee / Energy & Buildings 217 (2020) 110005 5

Fig. 2. The control strategy of microturbines.

Fig. 4 shows the schematic of the solar dish and radiation con- total heat requirement of the building is equal to:
trol system. Direct solar radiation received from the sun focuses on
the focal point of the parabolic dish after it hits the dish surface. It Q˙ cons = Q˙ gen, AC + Q˙ D,H,W + Q˙ H (1)
is then redirected by a convex mirror in the direct path and trans-
mitted to the consumer units (for example receiver of microturbine In Eq. (1), Q˙ cons , is the total heat required for the building,
and boiler) by a flat mirror. Changing the position of the mirrors Q˙ gen, AC is the heat load of the generator of absorption chiller,
changes the amount of received energy. Q˙ D,H,W , is the heat required for domestic hot water, and Q˙ H is the
heating requirements for the building.
Also, the heat generated by the system is equivalent to the total
4. Thermal equation heat requirement of the building which is equal to sum of the heat
generated by heat recovery steam generator, auxiliary boiler, and
In order to determine the energy balance equations for different excess heat of parabolic dishes and is presented by Eq. (2).
components of the cycle, first it is necessary to provide thermal  
relations between different elements of the system in Fig. 1. The Q˙ cons = Q˙ HRSG + Q˙ aux, B + Q˙ sol − Q˙ rec (2)
6 M. Chahartaghi and A. Baghaee / Energy & Buildings 217 (2020) 110005

Fig. 3. The control strategy diagram of auxiliary boiler and combustion chamber.

Where Q˙ HRSG is the heat load of heat recovery steam generator,
Q˙ aux, B is the heat generated by the auxiliary boiler, Q˙ sol is the heat
collected by the parabolic dishes, and Q˙ rec is the receiver heat load
of microturbine.
The third term of Eq. (2), (Q˙ sol − Q˙ rec ), indicates that if the heat
collected in the parabolic dishes is more than the required heat
of the microturbine, the surplus heat is transferred to the auxiliary
boiler in order to consumption in the building. This will reduce the
fuel consumption of the auxiliary boiler.
 M. Chahartaghi and A. Baghaee / Energy & Buildings 217 (2020) 110005 7

Fig. 4. The schematic of solar dish and radiation control system.

The heat generations in the heat recovery steam generator and is the specific heat of water, which is equal to4.186 ( kg.K kJ
) . TD, H, W
solar receivers are calculated from the following equations: and TC, W are the domestic water temperature and the temperature

L of hot water, respectively.
Q˙ HRSG = Q˙ HRSG,P + Q˙ (HRSG,F )i (3) In Eqs. (1) to (5), initially, Q˙ gen, AC , Q˙ D,H,W , Q˙ H , Q˙ cons , and

i=1
Q are calculated directly and are used as the input values in the
sol

L

L
Q˙ Rec = Q˙ rec,P + Q˙ (rec,F )i (4) next steps. But, to calculateQ˙ aux, B ,Q˙ HRSG,P , Q˙ (HRSG,F )i , Q˙ rec,P , and
i=1 i=1

L
Q˙ (rec,F )i the system of thermodynamic equations are solved si-
In Eqs. (3) and (4). Q˙ HRSG,P is the heat load of the heat re- i=1
covery steam generator for part load operation of microturbine, multaneously. In this set of equations, the performance of the mi-
L
croturbine is simulated in two modes of part load and full load.
Q˙ (HRSG,F )i is the total amount of heat load of the heat recovery
i=1
steam generator for full load operation of microturbines, Q˙ Rec,P is
the receiver heat load of part load operation of microturbine, and 4.1. Compressor
L
Q˙ (Rec,F )i is the total amount of receiver heat load in full load op- The compressor work is calculated from Eq. (6) [31]:
i=1
eration of microturbines. L indicates the number of microturbines
W˙ c = m˙ a .(h2 − h1 ) (6)
which work in full load mode.
The heat requirement of the domestic hot water in the building where W˙ c is the power consumption of the compressor, m˙ a is the
is equal to: working fluid (air) mass flow rate, h1 and h2 are the enthalpy of
the inlet and outlet air of the compressor, respectively. h1 is deter-
Q˙ D,H,W = m˙ D,H,W . CP,W .(TD,H,W − TC,W ) (5)
mined based on the temperature, the humidity ratio and the inlet
In Eq. (5), m˙ D,H,W is the mass flow rate of hot water consumed air pressure. Since the inlet air first enters the generator and then
which can be estimated based on Iranian building standards, CP, W enters the compressor [32], to determine the air inlet conditions to
8 M. Chahartaghi and A. Baghaee / Energy & Buildings 217 (2020) 110005

the compressor the following equations can be presented:

P7 = P6 − Pd,Re,g (21)
P1 = Pamb − Pd,gen (7)

Pd,gen = Pamb .kP,d,gen (8) Pd,Re,g = P6 .kP,d,Re,g (22)

T1 = Tamb + Tgen (9) ω3 = ω2 (23)

Q˙ gen ω7 = ω6 (24)
Tg = (10)
ma .CP,a
˙
In Eqs. (18) to (24), P3 is the air pressure outlet of the recuper-
ator, and P6 and P7 are the inlet and outlet gas pressures of the
Q˙ gen = W˙ m .(1 − ηgen ) (11)
recuperator, respectively. In addition, kP, d, Re, a and kP, d, Re, g are the
coefficients of pressure drop for air and gas sides in the recupera-
ω1 = ωamb (12) tor, respectively and ω3 , ω6 , and ω7 are the humidity ratios of the
outlet air, inlet gas and outlet gas from recuperator, respectively,
In Eqs. (7) to (12), P1 is the compressor inlet air pressure, Pamb
and ɛRe is the effectiveness of the recuperator.
is the ambient air pressure, Pd, g is the pressure drop during gen-
erator cooling, kP, d, g is the coefficient of air pressure drop in the
generator, T1 is the temperature of the air entering the compres- 4.3. Receiver
sor, Tamb is ambient air temperature, Tg is change of air temper-
ature during cooling of the generator, Q˙ g is the produced heat of The heat received by the solar receiver is calculated from the
the generator, CP, a is the specific heat of air at ambient tempera- conditional Eqs. (25), and (26):
ture and pressure, ηg is the electrical efficiency of the generator. i f : Q˙ sol ≤ m˙ a .(h5 − h3 ) → Q˙ rec = Q˙ sol (25)
Also, ωamb and ω1 are the humidity ratio of the ambient air and
compressor inlet air, respectively.
To determine h2 , at first T2 , P2 and ω2 are calculated as below i f : Q˙ sol > m˙ a .(h5 − h3 ) → Q˙ rec = m˙ a .(h5 − h3 ) (26)
[31]. In these equations, h5 is enthalpy of turbine inlet gas. These
 1
 ka −1
 equations explain that; if the sum of the heat collected by the
T2 = T1 . 1 + rc ka −1 (13)
ηc parabolic dishes is smaller or equal to the heat required to reach
the inlet gas to the standard conditions, the total heat of the dishes
P2 = rc .P1 (14) is absorbed by the receiver. Also, if the heat accumulated by the
dishes exceeds the amount of cycle requirement (receiver heat
load), the receiver only absorbs the amount of required heat (to
ω2 = ω1 (15)
prevent the damage of equipments due to high temperatures).
In Eqs. (13) to (15), P1 and P2 are, the inlet and outlet air pres- The air conditions at the outlet of the receiver are presented as:
sures of the compressor, respectively and rc is the compressor pres-
sure ratio, ηc is the isentropic efficiency of the compressor, ka is the P4 = P3 − Pd,rec (27)
specific heats ratio of air at the average temperature, and, T1 and
T2 are the inlet and outlet air temperatures of the compressor, re-
Pd,rec = P3 .kP,d,rec (28)
spectively.

4.2. Recuprator Q˙ rec = m˙ a .(h4 − h3 ) (29)

The heat transfer in the recuperator is illustrated as [31]:

ω4 = ω3 (30)
Q˙ Re = m˙ g .(h6 − h7 ) = m˙ a .(h3 − h2 ) (16)
In Eqs. (27) to (30)P4 , Pd, rec and kP, d, rec are the outlet air pres-
In Eq. (16), Q˙ Re is the heat transfer rate in the recuperator, and,
sure, the pressure drop and coefficient of pressure drop of the re-
m˙ g , and m˙ a , are the mas flow rates of gas and air in the recupera-
ceiver, respectively.
tor, respectively. h2 , and h3 are the enthalpy of inlet and outlet air
Also, h4 and ω4 are the enthalpy and humidity ratio of the out-
of the recuperator, respectively, and h6 and h7 are the enthalpy of
let air from the receiver, respectively.
the inlet and outlet gas of the recuperator, respectively.
The gas mass flow rate through the recuperator is obtained
from Eq. (17): 4.4. Combustor

m˙ g = m˙ a + m˙ f (17) The energy balance in the combustion chamber can be pre-

Where, m˙ f is the mass flow rate of fuel consumed in the com- sented by Eqs. (31) to (34) [31].
 
bustion chamber of microturbine. m˙ g .h5 = (m˙ a .h4 ) + m˙ f .LHV .ηcomb (31)
The output conditions of the recuperator can be calculated as:

P3 = P2 − Pd,Re,a (18) Q˙ comb = m˙ f .LHV (32)

Pd,Re,a = P2 .kP,d,Re,a (19) P5 = P4 − Pd,comb (33)

T3 = T2 + εRe .(T6 − T2 ) (20) Pd,comb = P4 .kP,d,comb (34)

 M. Chahartaghi and A. Baghaee / Energy & Buildings 217 (2020) 110005 9

Where the ηcomb is the combustion chamber efficiency, LHV pressure drop and the pressure drop coefficient in the HRSG, re-
is the lower heating value of the fuel, Q˙ comb is the heat re- spectively.
leased in the combustion chamber (combustion chamber heat The coefficient of 1.01 in Eq. (46) is used to create a positive
load), P5 ,Pd, comb , and kP, d, comb , are the outlet pressure, the pres- relative pressure for discharge of combustion products into the at-
sure drop and the coefficient of pressure drop in the combustion mosphere.
chamber.
In Eq. (31) to determineh5 , the humidity ratio of the combus- 5. Power equation
tion chamber (ω5 ) must be known.
Regarding the use of the natural gas as a support fuel, and with The electrical power output, the electrical efficiency, and the to-
the considerations of Iranian natural gas combinations [33,34] and tal microturbine efficiency are obtained from Eqs. (48) to (51).
the use of stoichiometric relationships, ω5 can be calculated as:
W˙ m = W˙ t − Wc (48)
m˙ w,comb = 2m˙ f (35)

W˙ elec = W˙ mech .ηgen (49)

m˙ w,5 = m˙ w,4 + m˙ w,comb (36)

W˙ elec
ω4 =
m˙ w,4
(37)
ηelec = (50)
m˙ a − m˙ w,4 Q˙ rec + Q˙ comb

m˙ w,5 W˙ elec + Q˙ HRSG

ω5 = (38) ηtot,micro = (51)
m˙ g − m˙ w,5 Q˙ rec + Q˙ comb
In Eqs. (35) to (38) m˙ w,comb , m˙ w,4 , and m˙ w,5 are the mass flow 
In these equations, W˙ m , W , ηelec , and ηtot, micro are the mechan-
rate of the vapor produced in the combustion chamber, the mass elec
flow rate of the inlet water vapor and the mass flow rate of the ical power output, the electrical power output, the electrical effi-
outlet water vapor from the combustion chamber, respectively. ciency, and the total efficiency of the microturbine.

4.5. Turbine 6. Part load mode

The work output and the temperature of the outlet gas from Part load operations of microturbines are performed by chang-
the turbine can be presented by [31]: ing in the fuel mass flow and the variation of the shaft ro-
tational speed. By changing the rotational speed of the shaft,
W˙ t = m˙ g .(h5 − h6 ).ηm (39)
some of the cycle parameters such as the pressure drop in the
 components, the compressor and turbine isentropic efficiencies,
T5 the efficiency of the recuperator may be changed. On the other
T6 = T5 − ηt . T5 − 
kg −1
 (40) hand, the equations presented above are valid for ISO condi-
tion (on-design condition). Which the ISO conditions are Tamb =
kg
rt
15◦C, Pamb = 101kPa, and RHamb = 60% [35]. RHamb is the relative
P5
rt = (41) humidity of ambient air. However, in the present study, the actual
P6
conditions have been investigated. Therefore, it is required to use
relationships to modify the performance of the microturbine in the
ω6 = ω5 (42)
part load and outside of the design conditions (off-design condi-
In Eqs. (39) to (42);W˙ t , ηm , ηt , rt and kg are the work out- tion).
put, the mechanical efficiency, the isentropic efficiency, the turbine Malinowski et al. [32] made an analytical model of the micro-
pressure ratio, and the specific heat ratio at average temperature, turbine in the part load and off-design condition, and extracted
respectively. the corresponding equations. In addition, to provide the innova-
tive relationships, they investigated the performance of different
4.6. HRSG parts of the microturbine in the part load and off-design condition.
Then, the overall performance of the microturbine was analyzed
The energy balance in the heat recovery steam generator and compared with the experimental data of Capstone’s microtur-
(HRSG) can be presented as: bine performance in the part load operation. In their model, the
change of load of the microturbine was accomplished by chang-
Q˙ HRSG = m˙ g .(h7 − h8 ) (43)
ing the fuel flow into the combustion chamber. During the load
change, the rotational speed of the shaft and the turbine inlet tem-
P8 = P7 − Pd,HRSG (44) perature changes, but the temperature of the outlet gas from the
turbine remains constant [32].

Pd,HRSG = P7 .kP,d,HRSG (45)

7. Auxiliary boiler

P8 = 1.01 .Pamb (46) To determine the mass flow rate of the auxiliary boiler fuel is
presented by Eq. (52).

ω8 = ω7 (47) Q˙ aux, B
m˙ f,aux,B = (52)
LHV .ηaux,B
In Eqs. (43) to (47) h8 , P8 , and ω8 are the enthalpy, the pres-
sure and the humidity ratio of the outlet gas from the HRSG which In Eq. (52), m˙ f,aux,B and ηaux, B are the fuel mass flow rate and
is discharged to the atmosphere. Also Pd, HRSG and kP, d, HRSG are the the auxiliary boiler efficiency, respectively.
10 M. Chahartaghi and A. Baghaee / Energy & Buildings 217 (2020) 110005
Fig. 5. The schematic of a light pipe.
8. Solar radiation
The solar radiation on the surface of the Earth consists of direct
radiation and diffuse radiation. The parabolic dishes are only able
to receive and concentrate direct radiation. The parabolic dishes fo-
cus the radiation on the focal point and transmit them through a
light pipe to a microturbine receiver or an auxiliary boiler.
As the solar radiations reach to the Earth surface in parallel
lines, they converge regularly after hitting the parabolic dish sur-
face (Fig. 4). In a parabolic dish, by placing a convex mirror, the
converging beams are again paralleled (with higher densities). The
parallel beams are directed to the desired location by light pipes.
The light pipes consist of light reflecting tubes and addition to
internal reflection, they transmit light from one place to another
place. The schematic a light pipe has been presented in Fig. 5. The
inner surface of the light pipe is coated with a thin layer of sil-
ver or other highly reflective material. Flat mirrors have also been
used at the bending locations to improve light transmission). As
mentioned, the beams entered are parallel to the light pipes, but
due to some optical problems, some of the light is emitted in non-
parallel lines.
In order to determine the received solar energy (Q˙ sol ), first,
the direct radiation incident on the plane normal to the radiation
should be obtained, and then it must be multiplied with the effi-
ciency of the parabolic dish and the efficiency of the optical trans-
mission system.
Q˙ sol = Gcl, nb .Adishes .ηsol
Gcl, nb = Gon .τb
In Eqs. (53) and (54), Adishes is the total area of the parabolic
dishes, ηsol is the efficiency of the dishes and Gcl, nb and Gon are
The clear-sky direct normal radiation and the extraterrestrial ra-
diation incident on the plate perpendicular to the radiation on
the nth day of the year respectively, τ b is the atmospheric trans-
mittance for direct radiation. Also, Gon and τ b are determined by
Eqs. (55) and (56) [36].
  360n 
Gon = Gsc . 1 + 0.033 cos
365
−l
τb = a0 + b .exp (56)
cosθz
Where Gsc is the solar constant and equals to 1366 and n is the
day number of the year from January 1. The constantsa0 , b, and l
are determined according to the altitude, the horizontal visibility,
and season and climate of the region [36].
To calculate cosθ z , the following equations can be presented.
cosθz = cos∅ .cosδ .cosθhr + sin∅ .sinδ (57)
 
284 + n
δ = 23.45sin. 360 (58)
365
θhr = 15(hr − 12 ) (59)
In Eqs. (57) to (59), θ z ∅, δ , θ hr , t are the Zenith Angle (defined
as the angle between the vertical and the line to the sun), latitude
(defined as the angular location south or north of the equator),
declination (defined as the angular position of the sun at the solar
noon according to the equator plane), hour angle (defined as the
(53) angular displacement of the sun west or east of the local merid-
ian because of rotation of the earth on its axis at 15° per hour; for
morning it is negative, for afternoon it is positive), and apparent
(54) solar time (AST), respectively. The apparent solar time is calculated
in this equation on the basis of noon.
9. Case study
The building under study is a residential complex consisting of
four blocks of four floors. The total area of this complex is 4120 m2 .
The materials used in the construction of this complex are consid-
ered as usual in Iran’s architecture. The external wall components
(55) are presented in Table 1:
 M. Chahartaghi and A. Baghaee / Energy & Buildings 217 (2020) 110005 11

Also, the roof materials are presented in Table 2: 10. Economic strategy
The ceiling has an aluminum coating to reflect the solar radia-
tion. From the economic point of view, in this study, two goals have
Each floor has 257 m2 area with 2 residential units. The build- been followed:
ing is occupied all day and all year round.
1- Finding the best combination of the area of the parabolic dishes
The outdoor windows and doors of the building are metal type
and the number of microturbine for each of the studied cities
with single-walled glass. The average of total heat transfer coeffi-
from economic aspect (based on the Levelized Cost of Electric-
cient of the external walls is 1.476 mW
2. K .
ity (LCoE)).
Calculations are performed for 3 cities in Iran. Tehran is rep-
2- Economic analysis for the best combination which mentioned
resented as a mild climate, Yazd, is represented as a warm and
in the first clause (Cost comparison with the photovoltaic sys-
dry climate, and Bandar Abbas is considered as a warm and hu-
tem, the share of each equipment in the capital cost, and the
mid climate. Some features of the selected cities are summarized
share of each equipment in the operational cost).
in Table 3 [37].
In Table 4, the technical specifications of the microturbine used First, with assumption of one microturbine with capacity
in this study are presented in ISO and full load conditions (on- of 30kWand total area of 0m2 for parabolic dishes (with-
design condition): out parabolic dishes), the economic calculations are carried
out. Then, the area of the dishes are changed to values of
50 0, 10 0 0, 150 0, 20 0 0, 250 0, 30 0 0m2 , and again the total calcula-
Table 1 tions are repeated for each of the three cities. In the next step,
The properties of the external wall of the building. a same microturbine is added and calculations are performed for
Material Thickness (cm) all of the above areas. This work is performed for up to 7 micro-
turbine and tested for 7 different areas each time. The most cost-
Gypsum plaster 2
Cement plasters 1.5 effective area for any given number of microturbine has been re-
Hollow clay tile (pottery) 20 ported. At the end, the most economical combination of microtur-
Cement plasters 1.5 bine and dish area is identified from 49 modes for each city sepa-
Brick facade 1 rately.
In order to achieve the above two goals, the levelized cost of
electricity (LCoE) has been used and presented by Eq. (60) [45].
Table 2
The properties of the roof. T otal li f e cycle cost($ )
Material Thickness (cm)
LCoE( $
kW h ) = T otal l i f etime el ectricity yeil d(kW h) (60)

Plaster 2
Eq. (60) shows the ratio of the total net cost of system to
Clay blocks 30
Non-reinforced concrete 4 total cycle electricity generation. This equation simply describes
Moisture insulation 1 how much the system electricity sales price to the grid should be
to compensate the additional costs for installation, operation and
maintenance of the system rather than the conventional system
Table 3 during the life of the project. Obviously, if the price of electricity
Specifications of studied cities. sold to the network is less than LCoE, the implementation of this
Index Unit Tehran Yazd Bandar Abbas system is uneconomical. The detailed form of LCoE is presented by
Eq. (61).
Average maximum temperature ˚C 23 27 32
Average minimum temperature ˚C 13 13 22 o Cy o By
C0 − B0 + y=1 (1+d )y + y=1 (1+d )y
Average annual temperature ˚C 18.5 20 27
Average annual humidity % 40 30 65
LCoE( $
kW h )= o Ey
(61)
Altitude from sea level M 1190 1230 10 y=1 (1+d )y
Latitude Degree 35 31 27
Total annual sunny hours Hrs. 2990 3390 3245
In Eq. (61), C0 ($) is the capital cost of the project (combined
cooling, heating and power system based on a hybrid microtur-

Table 4
Specifications of the proposed microturbines.

Specifications Symbol Unit Value Reference

Microturbine model - - CapstonC30 -

Microturbine electrical power W˙ elec kW 30 -
Compression ratio of compressor rc - 3.64 [38]
Isentropic efficiency of the compressor ηc % 0.79 [38]
Isentropic efficiency of the turbine ηt % 0.843 [38]
Combustion chamber efficiency ηcomb % 0.98 [32]
Mechanical efficiency of micro turbine ηm % 0.99 [32]
Generator efficiency ηg % 0.92 [32]
Recuperator efficiency ɛRe % 0.86 [38]
The temperature of the gas entering the turbine T5 K 1098 [38]
Outlet gas temperature from HRSG T8 K 393 -
The air pressure drop coefficient in the generator kP, d, g - 0.01 [32]
The air-side pressure drop coefficient in the recuperator kP, d, Re, a - 0.02 [32]
The gas-side pressure drop coefficient in the recuperator kP, d, Re, g - 0.03 [32]
The air pressure drop coefficient in the solar receiver kP, d, rec - 0.03 [39]
The gas pressure drop coefficient in the combustion chamber kP, d, comb - 0.02 [32]
The gas pressure drop coefficient in the HRSG kP, d, HRSG - 0.03 -
12 M. Chahartaghi and A. Baghaee / Energy & Buildings 217 (2020) 110005

Table 5
Some input data for performing calculations.

Specifications Symbol Unit Value Reference

◦
Average temperature of the hot water consumed TD, H, W C 35 -
◦
City water temperature TC, W C 15 -
Water consumption flow rate m˙ D,H,W kg/s 0.17 [40]
Lower heating value of natural gas LHV kJ/kg 36000 [33]
Auxiliary boiler efficiency ηaux, B % 75 [41]
Concentrator, solar transmitter and solar receiver efficiency ηsol % 55 [17,42,43]
Coefficient of performance of single effect LiBr-water absorption chiller COPAC - 0.75 [44]
Coefficient of performance of compression chiller COPCC - 4.5 [44]

Table 6
The studied economic scenarios.

Electricity purchased from the grid for electricity produced that purchased gas from the grid for the gas purchased from the grid for the
scenario the conventional system sold to the grid conventional system CCHP

1 Exports 2013 LCoES1 Exports 2013 Exports 2013

2 Exports 2016 LCoES2 Exports 2016 Exports 2016
3 subsidized, residential up to 2016 LCoES3 subsidized, residential up to 2016 subsidized, residential up to 2016
4 subsidized, residential up to 2013 LCoES4 subsidized, residential up to 2013 subsidized, residential up to 2013
5 subsidized, residential up to 2016 LCoES5 subsidized, residential up to 2016 subsidy, power plant up to 2016
6 subsidized, residential up to 2013 LCoES6 subsidized, residential up to 2013 subsidy, power plant up to 2013
7 subsidized, residential up to 2016 DG + LCoES7 subsidized, residential up to 2016 subsidized, residential up to 2016
8 subsidized, residential up to 2013 DG + LCoES8 subsidized, residential up to 2013 subsidized, residential up to 2013
9 subsidized, residential up to 2016 DG + LCoES9 subsidized, residential up to 2016 subsidy, power plant up to 2016
10 subsidized, residential up to 2013 DG + LCoES10 subsidized, residential up to 2013 subsidy, power plant up to 2013

bine), B0 ($) is the capital cost of the conventional HVAC (air condi-
tioning) system (which is saved because of the implementation of
the CCHP system). Cy ($) is the operational cost of the CCHP system,
which includes maintenance and fuel costs. By ($) is the operational
cost of the conventional HVAC (air conditioning) system (which is
saved because of the implementation of the CCHP system) yis the
number of years, d(%) is the discount rate, Ey (kWh) is the electricity
sold to the grid in the year of y and O(year) is the lifetime of the
system.
10.1. Iranian energy policy
2- Energy subsidy elimination: According to this policy, the price
of energy carriers in Iran will rise at an export price over the
next five years, and energy subsidies will be eliminated [46].
Obviously, after this stage, due to fluctuations in the price of
energy, a fixed price cannot be considered for energy carriers.
Therefore, different pricing scenarios have been considered in
this research.
2- Protecting renewable power and renewable energy: The Iranian
Ministry of Energy has provided many policies to support the
producing electricity from distributed generation (DG) and the
renewable resources. A 20-year warranty contract has reduced
the investment risk in this field. The guaranteed electricity pur-
chase tariff from DG plants with fossil fuels in 2016 for ca-
pacities of less than 200 kWelec is equal to 0.031( kWh $
) and
for higher capacities is 0.028( kWh
$
). Also, for each 1 kWh of
electricity produced by these power plants, Iranian govern-
ment pays equivalent to the price of 0.2 m3 of natural gas [47].
The guaranteed purchase of electricity from small solar power
plants is also equal to 0.2( kW$ h ) for less than 100 kW capacity
and 0.028( kWh
$
) for higher capacities [48,49].
The guaranteed purchase tariffs for both types of power plants
(DG and solar) are adjusted each year according to the exchange
and inflation rates. Furthermore, for the solar power plants, the
guaranteed purchase price will be multiplied by 0.7 from the 10th
to 20th years. At the end of the 20-year contract period, the owner
of the power plant is allowed to continue the contract with the
Ministry of Energy, or choose the self-consumption of electricity,
or exports the electricity within the framework of Iranian law.
In the present study, 10 economic scenarios have been investi-
gated, which is shown in Table 6. In each scenario, LCoE has been
calculated. Each of the scenarios of the Table 6 has been tested for
49 situations which is described.
The export prices in the Table 6 are the export prices of Ira-
nian gas and electricity in 2013 and 2016. The reason for consid-
ering these two scenarios is the high difference of price in these
two years. The term of subsidy means the calculation of the price
based on the law of targeting subsidies in Iran. Since the natural
gas sales tariff are different in the residential sections and power
plants, both assumptions are considered in the fourth column. “Up
to 2013” and “up to 2016” is due to the fact that after the law
of targeting subsidies in Iran, the global prices are not exactly
known, so we have to consider the minimum and maximum possi-
ble prices. As 2013 was one of the most expensive years and 2016
was one of the cheapest years, these two years as the representa-
tive of the maximum and minimum prices have been considered.
In the third column, the term of LCoESi means the final price of
electricity for that scenario. DG + LCoESi is the proposed formula
for the price of electricity generation. To calculate the share of the
sun in electricity generation a coefficient named the share of the
sun from total energy (SSTE) has been used according to Eq. (62).
Q˙ rec
SST E = (62)
Q˙ rec + Q˙ comb
T otal li f e cycle cost($ )
= (SST E .LCoEs7 _ s10 )
T otal l i f e el ectricity yeil d(kW h)
 
+ (1 − SST E ) .DG price (63)
In Eqs. (62) and (63), SSTE is the share of the sun in the elec-
tricity produced in percent, LCoEs7−s10 is the cost of the solar elec-
tricity in terms of kW$ h for rows of 7 to 10 of Table 6, with condi-
tion that the share of fossil fuels for electricity generation is calcu-
lated at a government-guaranteed fixed price of Iran. Also, DGprice
is the guaranteed purchase price of gas-fired power generation by
the Iranian government.
 M. Chahartaghi and A. Baghaee / Energy & Buildings 217 (2020) 110005 13

Table 7
Equipment price list and energy carriers.

Equipment Capital O &M Reference

Auxiliary boiler 45( kW$ ) 3% Investment per year [50]

th
Microturbine 1100( kW $
e
) 25( kW$
e
) + 1.49( MW$ he ) [51,39]
Receiver 185( kW )
$
11( kW$ ) + 0.69( MW$h ) [51]
th th th
Dish 260( m$2 ) 1% Investment per year [43]
Heat recovery steam generator 100( kW $
) 0.03% Investment per year [39]
e,microturbine

Absorption chiller (6240 + (292 Q˙ r,max ) − (0.121Q˙ r,max

2
))($ ) 0.03% Investment per year [52,53]
Cooling tower (10 0 0 0 + 20(Q˙ r,max − 233 ))($ ) 0.03% Investment per year [52]
Export natural gas (Minimum price) 0.13 ( m$3 ) - [54]
Export natural gas (Maximum price) 0.43 ( m$3 ) - [54]
Average prices of residential natural gas (Iran subsidy 2016( 0.04 − 0.09 ( m$3 )∗ - [55]
Natural gas prices for power plants (Iran subsidy 2016) 0.027 ( m$3 ) - [55]
Export power (Minimum price) 0.08 ( kW$ h ) - [46]
Export Power (Maximum price) 0.12 ( kW$ h ) - [46]
Average residential electricity prices (Iran subsidy 2016) 0.017 − 0.09( kW$ h )∗ - [56]
Guaranteed purchasing power DG ≤ 200kW 0.031 + 0.2Eq1m3 NG ( kW$ h )∗∗ - [47]
Guaranteed purchasing power DG > 200kW 0.028 + 0.2E q1m3 NG ( kW$ h )∗∗ - [47]
Guaranteed purchasing power Solar ≤ 100 kW 0.2( kW$ h )∗∗∗ - [48,49]
Guaranteed purchasing power Solar > 100 kW 0.14( kW$ h )∗∗∗ - [48,49]
Average urban water prices 0.1 − 0.5( m$3 )∗∗∗∗ - [46]
∗
The Iranian Ministry of Energy, with regard to climate, season and monthly consumption, applies different tariffs.
∗∗∗
0.2Eq1m3 NG is the equivalent of 0.2 cubic meters of natural gas, the numbers 0.031 and 0.028 each year are adjusted according to the rate of exchange
and inflation.
∗∗∗∗
From the 10th to the 20th year, this number is multiplied by 0.7, and also adjusted annually depending on the rate of exchange and inflation.
∗∗∗∗
The Iranian Ministry of Energy, with regard to monthly consumption, presents various tariffs.

The price list of equipment and fuels used is summarized in

Table 7.

11. Results and discussion

In order to simulate the performance of the system, first the

building hourly profile was determined using the relationships in
the ASHRAE standards and the solar panel hourly profile using the
relationships presented in Section 8. To calculate both profiles, Mi-
crosoft Excel software has been used. Then, the microturbine and
CCHP operation relationships with the load profile of the build-
ing and solar radiation in engineering equation solver (EES) soft-
ware was introduced and the software has been used to analyze
the hourly performance of the cycle. Then, the output of EES soft-
ware was returned to the Microsoft Excel software for economic
and technical analyses. The method is repeated 49 times, with a
change in the number of microturbine from 1 to 7 and the area
of the parabolic dishes from 0 to 30 0 0 m2 , for three cities and for Fig. 6. Monthly heat consumption profile of the residential complex to meet the
10 economic scenarios, which in total is 1470 times. Then, for each heating, cooling, and hot water requirements.
economic scenario, the best combination of number of microtur-
bine and parabolic dish area has been proposed and its technical
parameters have been evaluated. 11.1. Direct solar radiation to parabolic dishes
The thermal load profile of the building for the studied cities
have been shown in Figs. 6 and 7. Fig. 6 shows the total monthly The amount of direct radiation received from the sun is shown
heating demand of the building and Fig. 7 illustrates the average in Figs. 8 and 9. Comparison of Figs. 6 and 8 shows that the radia-
energy intensity at different hours. In this study, in order to ease tion is higher, in months when the building needs more heat. But,
the calculation, the 15th of each month is selected as the represen- unlike to Fig. 6, which shows that the highest heat consumption
tative day and the energy consumption of this day is extended to occurs in Bandar Abbas, Figs. 8 and 9 shows less direct solar radi-
the whole month. On selected days, 8 different moments are in- ation in Bandar Abbas. This is due to the high humidity in Bandar
vestigated with a 3-hour interval and the calculation result is gen- Abbas and consequently the direct solar radiation decreases.
eralized for these hours. Figs. 6 and 7 reveal that: 1- The building
load profile for the cities of Yazd and Tehran has not much differ- 11.2. Economic simulation results
ence, but for Bandar Abbas, the difference is relatively high, and 2-
the peak energy consumption of the building is in period of July to After calculating the LCoE for 49 compounds from the number
September. of micro turbines and the area of the Parabolic dishes for the stud-
The most energy consumed by the building will occur at hours ied cities, the lowest values of LCoE are summarized in Tables 8–
of 9 to 21, which is in most parts of the year coinciding with the 10. For the city of Tehran, Table 8 shows that in terms of the num-
sunny hours. ber of microturbines, 3 microturbine devices with 30 kw in most
14 M. Chahartaghi and A. Baghaee / Energy & Buildings 217 (2020) 110005

Fig. 7. Average hourly consumption of building heat.

Fig. 8. Direct solar radiation on the plane normal to the radiation on ground level at different months of the year.

Table 8
Results of the economic study of the project in Tehran.

Scenario N A(m2) LCoE ($/kWh) Elec. Tariff ($/kWh) Difference (%)

1 3 1000 0.21 0.12 77

2 3 0 0.1 0.08 22
3 3 0 0.07 0.031 122
4 3 1000 0.12 0.031 289
5 2 0 0.06 0.031 78
6 3 1000 0.1 0.031 232
7 3 1000 0.24 0.2 18
8 3 1000 0.37 0.2 84
9 3 1000 0.21 0.2 7
10 3 1000 0.32 0.2 62
 M. Chahartaghi and A. Baghaee / Energy & Buildings 217 (2020) 110005 15

Fig. 9. Average direct solar radiation intensity on the plane normal to the radiation on ground level at different hours of day.

Table 9
Economic analysis of the project in Yazd.

Scenario N A(m2) LCoE ($/kWh) Elec. tariff ($/kWh) Difference (%)

1 5 1500 0.23 0.12 89

2 3 0 0.1 0.08 25
3 3 0 0.07 0.031 130
4 3 1000 0.13 0.031 329
5 3 0 0.06 0.031 85
6 3 1000 0.11 0.031 266
7 3 1000 0.25 0.2 23
8 5 1500 0.38 0.2 90
9 3 1000 0.22 0.2 11
10 5 1500 0.34 0.2 72

Table 10
The economic analysis of the project in Bandar Abbas.

Scenario N A(m2) LCoE ($/kWh) Elec. tariff ($/kWh) Difference (%)

1 7 2000 0.21 0.12 79

2 5 0 0.09 0.08 10
3 5 0 0.07 0.031 113
4 7 2000 0.13 0.031 305
5 5 0 0.05 0.031 66
6 7 2000 0.11 0.031 241
7 6 2000 0.22 0.2 8
8 7 2500 0.35 0.2 74
9 6 2000 0.19 0.2 -4
10 7 2500 0.31 0.2 56

economic scenarios have the lowest LCoE. In terms of dish area,
except in scenarios 2, 3 and 5, in the remaining scenarios the area
of 10 0 0 m2 is the most appropriate amount. In scenarios 2, 3, and
5, the appropriate area of 0 m2 is obtained. It is due to the very
low cost of natural gas on the one hand, and the non-consideration
of a separate tariff for the share of the sun on the other hand. As
described below of Table 6, in the first six scenarios, only one LCoE
as an electricity cost has been obtained. But, in the next four sce-
narios, an innovative method is used to calculate LCoE. It is as-
sumed that some percentage of the produced electricity of micro-
turbines which generated by fossil fuels is calculated at the guar-
anteed rate of distributed generation (DG) indicated in rows 15 and
16 of Table 7, and for the rest of the electricity generated by the
solar powered device, the LCoE is calculated. Because, always the
guaranteed purchase price of electricity generated by gas fired DG
system is lower than LCoE. Therefore, the greater share of the sun
in generating electricity, leads to reduction of LCoE. Of course, this
does not mean that the larger the area of the dishes is more suit-
able. Because, the higher area of dishes increases the capital and
operational costs.
The fifth column of Table 8 shows the electricity purchase tariff
by the national grid for different scenarios. Obviously, if the LCoE
is greater than electricity tariff, the implementation of this project
is not economically feasible. The column 6 of Table 8 (Difference)
shows the LCoE ratio to the electricity tariff. The numbers in this
column states that how much the cost of purchasing electricity by
the national grid should be increased to make the implementation
economically feasible. In Table 8, N and A are the number of mi-
croturbine and the area of the parabolic dishes, respectively.
As can be seen, in the scenarios 7 and 9, the differences are
very low. An important point to be noted here is the high LCoE at
high gas prices. The use of the CCHP cycle leads to increase of the
gas consumption, which in the summer results in a sharp increase
of the costs. Because, as indicated in Table 5, the COP of absorption
16 M. Chahartaghi and A. Baghaee / Energy & Buildings 217 (2020) 110005

Table 11
Combination of area and optimal number of microturbine.

City N microturbins Adishes (m2 ) η elec,annual η total,micro,annual η CCHP,annual Q lose,annual (GJ) Land (m2 )

Tehran 2 0 0.20 0.55 0.56 3.2 0

3 0 0.20 0.55 0.53 5 0
3 1000 0.20 0.57 0.54 490 3260
Yazd 3 0 0.20 0.55 0.54 8.2 0
3 1000 0.20 0.57 0.55 377.2 2681
5 1500 0.20 0.58 0.49 1286.7 4021
Bandar 5 0 0.21 0.57 0.50 4.6 0
Abbas 6 2000 0.21 0.60 0.51 393.5 4309
7 2000 0.21 0.60 0.51 163.5 4309
7 2500 0.21 0.60 0.51 163.5 5386

Fig. 10. The electricity generation and the fuel consumption charts for Tehran.

Fig. 11. The electricity generation and the fuel consumption charts for Yazd city.
 M. Chahartaghi and A. Baghaee / Energy & Buildings 217 (2020) 110005
Fig. 12. The electricity generation and the fuel consumption charts for Bandar Abbas.
refrigeration cycle is less than that for the compression refrigera-
tion cycle. On the other hand, because of rising ambient temper-
atures in the summer, the microturbine efficiency decreases. This
leads to rise of the operational costs. Therefore, using the multi-
effect absorption refrigeration cycle or high pressure ratio micro-
turbine can make the system more economical, which is suggested
to be investigated in the future researches.
Edalati et al. [53] have calculated the LCoE for the photo-
voltaic systems in different cities of Iran. The reported amounts are
0.23( kW$ h )for Tehran, 0.2( kW$ h )for Yazd and 0.245( kW$ h )for Bandar
Abbas.
Here, by comparing the values of LCoE in Table 8 with the LCoE
reported by the reference [57], the following points are presented:
Scenario 1: The LCoE obtained by the present study is less than
the LCoE of the photovoltaic system, but is higher than Iran’s elec-
tricity exports tariff in 2013. Therefore, if the electricity purchase
tariff of the CCHP system is equivalent to the 2013 export tariff,
has no economic justification, but it is preferable in comparison
with the photovoltaic system.
Scenario 2: The LCoE obtained in Scenario 2 is much lower than
Scenario 1, because of the difference in gas prices between 2013
and 2016. Despite the decline in LCoE in Scenario 2, it is still higher
than Iran’s electricity export tariffs in 2016. But, it is less than the
LCoE of the photovoltaic system.
Scenarios 3 to 6: In these scenarios, the LCoE of the CCHP sys-
tem is less than the LCoE of the photovoltaic system, and higher
than the guaranteed electricity purchase tariff by the Iranian gov-
ernment.
An important point to be noted here is that the LCoE
of the photovoltaic system for Tehran is constant and equal
with0.23( kW$ h ), and this constant value has been used for com-
paring the different scenarios of the present study. The cause of
being constant of the photovoltaic LCoE is its independence from
the natural gas grid. Therefore, change of the gas price does not
affect it. But, in the CCHP cycle, the LCoE is severely influenced by
the gas tariffs.
Scenarios 7, 8, and 10: In these scenarios, the LCoE of the CCHP
cycle is higher than the LCoE of the photovoltaic system, as well
17
as Iran’s guaranteed solar power purchasing tariff. Although, in
scenarios 7 to 10 it is assumed that a portion of the electricity
produced by the fossil fuels is calculated on the basis of guaran-
teed electric power purchasing from the gas-fired power plants.
But, scenarios 3 to 6 do not include any indication of the price
of electricity sales to the grid. Therefore, the LCoE calculated in
scenarios 7 to 10 is higher than the calculated LCoE in scenarios
3 to 6.
Scenario 9: The description of this scenario is similar to sce-
narios 7, 8 and 10, with difference that in this scenario, while
part of the electricity produced by the CCHP system is sold at the
government-approved price to the national electricity grid, but the
LCoE is still less than LCoE of the photovoltaic system.
The results of calculations for cities of Yazd and Bandar Abbas
are almost similar to those presented for Tehran. However, due
to the peak energy consumption of the building in the summer
in these two cities, the number of microturbine and consequently,
the optimal area of the dishes in some scenarios have slightly in-
creased. The important point about the city of Bandar Abbas is that
the LCoE is lower than the current guaranteed purchase price in
scenario 9.
It is observed from Tables 8 to 10 that the optimal economic
conditions occur in some specific combinations of the number of
microturbines and the area of the dish.
For each city, 10 different scenarios are examined. The optimal
modes (in terms of dish area and number of microturbines) are
similar in some scenarios. For example, in Tehran for scenarios 1,
4, 6, 7, 8, 9 and 10, the area of 10 0 0 m2 with 3 microturbines is
the optimal case. Also, for scenarios 2 and 3, area of 0 m2 with
3 microturbines, and for scenario 5, area of 0 m2 with 5 micro-
turbines are as optimal modes. Therefore, the optimal mode for
Tehran is summarized in 3 specific combinations of area and num-
ber of microturbines. For Yazd, there are 3 optimal combinations of
dish area and number of micro turbine and for the city of Bandar
Abbas, optimal cases for 10 scenarios occur in 4 different combi-
nations of dish area and microturbine number.
In Table 11 a summary of these states with their technical spec-
ifications has been shown:
18 M. Chahartaghi and A. Baghaee / Energy & Buildings 217 (2020) 110005
Fig. 13. The share of each equipment for capital and annual operational and maintenance costs (for Tehran).
As shown in Table 11, the electrical efficiency is almost the
same in all cases. However, the total efficiency of the microturbine,
and the efficiency of the CCHP system in different modes, changes
slightly.
The last column of Table 11 shows the land area of the solar
dishes.
11.3. Generated electricity and consumed fuel in optimum modes
In Figs. 10 to 12, the electricity generation and the total
fuel consumption are shown monthly for different scenarios in
Table 11.
Most of the fuel consumption and electricity generation for
Tehran are for 4th, 5th and 11th months. Also, the lowest values
are for months 1, 8 and 12. The reason for these changes is the
need for heat in the building. As shown in Fig. 10, despite the fact
that the electricity generation in the state of (N = 3, A = 10 0 0)
is greater than that for the state of (N = 2, A = 0), but its fuel
consumption is less. It is due to the difference in the area of the
parabolic dishes, and consequently the heat received from the sun.
Unlike Figs. 10 and 11, which the highest fuel consumption and
electricity generation happens at month 11, Fig. 12 shows that the
lowest fuel consumption and electricity generation are for month
11. It is due to the climate difference in these cities.
11.4. The share of each equipment from the capital and annual
operational costs
The high value of the capital cost of the system is one of the
main obstacles to the development of this technology. Therefore,
calculating the share of each equipment can help the researchers
and policymakers to choose a good strategy for cost reduction. In
Figs. 13, 14, and 15, the share of each equipment is shown by the
capital and operational costs. The costs are provided only for the
optimum modes (elements in Table 11). The area is presented in
square meters.
As shown in Fig. 13, about 90% of the capital and operational
costs in all scenarios are related to microturbine, absorption chiller,
and parabolic dishes. Also, about 54% of the capital costs and 30%
of the operational costs are for parabolic dishes, which are very
high values.
In the case of Yazd city, the cost of parabolic dishes, absorption
chillers and microturbine are the same as in Tehran.
The results of Bandar Abbas are similar to those observed in
Yazd and Tehran, with the difference that due to its lower value
of direct solar radiation intensity in comparison with Tehran and
Yazd, the area of parabolic dishes in Bandar Abbas is higher than
the other cases. In the presence of parabolic dishes, about 60% of
the capital cost and 33% of the operational costs are for parabolic
dishes.
11.5. The shares of the solar receiver and combustion chamber in
supply of the required heat of the microturbine
Table 12 shows the share of the solar receiver and combustion
chamber to the supply of the required heat of microturbine.
Table 12 shows that how much energy can be provided if one
of the energy sources of the microturbine supplies energy lonely
and the other source is out of the circuit. For example, in the case
of Tehran (for N = 3, A = 10 0 0), if only solar energy is used to
supply the energy needs of the microturbine for a few days, the
sun can only supply 35% of the energy needs of the microturbine.
 M. Chahartaghi and A. Baghaee / Energy & Buildings 217 (2020) 110005 19

Fig. 14. The share of each equipment for capital and annual operational and maintenance costs (for Yazd).

Fig. 15. The share of each equipment for capital and annual operational and maintenance costs (for Bandar Abbas).

Table 12
Shares of the solar receiver and combustion chamber to the supply of the required heat of microturbine.

City Tehran Yazd Bandar Abbas

N, microturbine 2 3 3 3 3 5 5 6 7 7
A, Dishes 0 0 1000 0 1000 1500 0 2000 2000 2500
Receiver % 0 0 35 0 35 38 0 35 35 38
Combustor % 100 100 65 100 65 62 100 65 65 62
20 M. Chahartaghi and A. Baghaee / Energy & Buildings 217 (2020) 110005
Table 13
Share of each equipment in supply of heat for building.
City Tehran
N, microturbine 2 3
A, Dishes 0 0
Auxiliary boiler 48 29
Heat recovery steam generator 52 71
Wasted heat of Dishes∗ 0 0
∗
Wasted heat of dishes: Part of the heat collected by the parabolic dishes which is higher than heat required by
the receiver of microturbines and so it is wasted.
11.6. The share of each equipment in supply of the heat for building
In Table 13, the share of each equipment is specified for supply
of heat requirements of the building.
Table 13 shows that how much of the building heat require-
ments can be provided by each element. For example, for the city
of Tehran (at N = 3, A = 10 0 0), 19% of the annual heating require-
ments of the building is provided by the auxiliary boiler, 69% is
supplied by the heat recovery steam generator, and 12% is supplied
from the wasted heat of the parabolic dishes, which represents the
high share of heat recovery steam generator and the low shares of
auxiliary boiler and parabolic dishes for supply of the heat needs
of the building.
12. Conclusion
In this study, a combined cooling, heating and power cycle,
which uses a hybrid solar microturbine as a prime mover was pro-
posed for building applications. First, the load profile of the build-
ing and solar radiation were obtained, and then by using the EES
software, the simulation of the cycle was carried out in different
scenarios. Three cities in Iran were chosen where each of them
represents a specific climate condition. For each city, 49 different
modes by changing the number of microturbines and surface area
of the parabolic dishes were investigated under 10 economic sce-
narios. In order to investigate the economic justification of the cy-
cle utilization, the LCoE method was used and the best combina-
tion was obtained for the number of microturbines and the area of
the parabolic dishes for each city. In addition, the power and fuel
consumption are studied and the share of each equipment derived
from the total capital and operational costs.
The main findings of the present research can be summarized
below:
2- The best combination of the number of microturbines and the
area of the parabolic dishes is depend on different economic
scenarios.
2- In most scenarios, the obtained LCoE is less than LCoE of the
photovoltaic system, but it is more than electricity purchase tar-
iffs to grid. This means that, despite the fact that under current
conditions and with current tariffs, the use of this cycle has lit-
tle economic attractiveness, but in most scenarios it is better
than the photovoltaic system.
2- Since the project under consideration in this study is a new de-
sign and so far no serious investment has been made on its
industrial and mass productions, it can be hoped that in the
event of industrial generation and technological progress, the
LCoE of this system would be much less than the photovoltaic
system.
2- Since about 90% of the total capital and operational costs of
the project are due to three main equipments (microturbine,
parabolic dishes and absorption chiller), if the cost of each
of these three equipments reduces, the total cost decreases
sharply.
Yazd Bandar Abbas
3 3 3 5 5 6 7 7
1000 0 1000 1500 0 2000 2000 2500
19 32 21 5 25 8 5 4
69 68 66 88 75 81 88 88
12 0 13 7 0 10 7 8
2- Due to the possibility of hybrid arrangement of this project, it
is highly reliable, which can be considered as a great advan-
tage for the system. However, in the photovoltaic systems, there
is low possibility for installation of the hybrid configuration or
they have high cost.
2- This system can be designed in different capacities (from 5kW
to several hundred kilowatts). The microturbine can also be
placed at the center of the dish or out of its center and on the
ground, which the utilization of the cycle will be possible in a
wide range of applications.
2- In most projects, the efficiency of the electricity generation is
about 20% and the CCHP efficiency is about 55%.
Declaration of Competing Interest
None.
Supplementary materials
Supplementary material associated with this article can be
found, in the online version, at doi:10.1016/j.enbuild.2020.110 0 05.
CRediT authorship contribution statement
Mahmood Chahartaghi: Conceptualization, Methodology, Su-
pervision, Data curation, Investigation, Project administration,
Writing - review & editing. Amirali Baghaee: Methodology, Soft-
ware, Data curation, Writing - original draft, Visualization, Investi-
gation, Validation.
References
[1] D. Zhao, A.P. McCoy, J. Du, P. Agee, Y. Lu, Interaction effects of building tech-
nology and resident behavior on energy consumption in residential buildings,
Energy Build. 134 (2017) 223–233.
[2] M. Ebrahimi, A. Keshavarz, Designing an optimal solar collector (orientation,
type and size)for a hybrid-CCHP system in different climates, Energy Build.
108 (2015) 10–22.
[3] J. Jiang, W. Gao, X. Wei, Y. Li, S. Kuroki, Reliability and cost analysis of the
redundant design of a combined cooling, heating and power (CCHP) system,
Energy Convers. Manage. 199 (2019) 111988.
[4] M. Abbasi, M. Chahartaghi, S.M. Hashemian, Energy, exergy, and economic
evaluations of a CCHP system by using the internal combustion engines and
gas turbine as prime movers, Energy Conv. Manage 173 (2018) 359–374.
[5] K. Roman, J. Alvey, Selection of prime mover for combined cooling, heating,
and power systems based on energy savings, life cycle analysis and environ-
mental consideration, Energy Build. 110 (2016) 170–181.
[6] M. Chahartaghi, M. Sheykhi, Energy, environmental and economic evaluations
of a CCHP system driven by Stirling engine with helium and hydrogen as work-
ing gases, Energy 174 (2019) 1251–1266.
[7] M. Chahartaghi, M. Sheykhi, Thermal modeling of a trigeneration system based
on beta-type Stirling engine for reductions of fuel consumption and pollutant
emission, J. Clean. Prod. 205 (2018) 145–162.
[8] L. Feng, X. Dai, J. Mo, L. Shi, Comparison of capacity design modes and opera-
tion strategies and calculation of thermodynamic boundaries of energy-saving
for CCHP systems in different energy supply scenarios, Energy Convers. Man-
age. 188 (2019) 296–309.
[9] Y. Chen, J. Wang, C. Ma, Y. Gao, Thermo-ecological cost assessment and opti-
mization for a hybrid combined cooling, heating and power system coupled
with compound parabolic concentrated-photovoltaic thermal solar collectors,
Energy 176 (2019) 479–492.
 M. Chahartaghi and A. Baghaee / Energy & Buildings 217 (2020) 110005
[10] R. Jiang, F.G.F. Qin, X. Yang, S. Huang, B. Chen, Performance analysis of a liquid
absorption dehumidifier driven byjacket-cooling water of a diesel engine in a
CCHP system, Energy Build. 163 (2018) 70–78.
[11] H. Ghaebi, M.H. Saidi, P. Ahmadi, Exergoeconomic optimization of a trigen-
eration system for heating, cooling and power production purpose based on
TRR method and using evolutionary algorithm, Appl. Therm. Eng. 36 (2012)
113–125.
[12] M. Sheykhi, M. Chahartaghi, M.M. Balakheli, B.A. Kharkeshi, S.M. Miri, Energy,
Exergy, Environmental, and Economic Modeling of Combined Cooling, Heating
and Power System with Stirling Engine and Absorption Chiller, Energy Convers.
Manage. 180 (2019) 183–195.
[13] P. Hanafizadeh, J. Eshraghi, P. Ahmadi, A. Sattari, Evaluation and sizing of a
CCHP system for a commercial and office buildings, J. Build. Eng. 5 (2016)
67–78.
[14] M.M. Balakheli, M. Chahartaghi, M. Sheykhi, S.M. Hashemian, N. Rafiee, Analy-
sis of different arrangements of combined cooling, heating and power systems
with internal combustion engine from energy, economic and environmental
viewpoints, Energy Convers. Manage. 203 (2020) 112253.
[15] F. Basrawi, Th.K. Ibrahim, Kh. Habib, T. Yamada, Effect of operation strategies
on the economic and environmental performance of a micro gas turbine tri-
generation system in a tropical region, Energy 97 (2016) 262–272.
[16] J.A James, V.M. Thomas, A. Pandit, D. Li, J.C. Crittenden, Water, Air Emissions,
and Cost Impacts of Air-Cooled Microturbines for Combined Cooling, Heating,
and Power Systems: A Case Study in the Atlanta Region, Engineering 2 (2016)
470–480.
[17] G. Xu, Y. Wang, Y. Quan, H. Li, S. Li, G. Song, W. Gao, Design and characteristics
of a novel tapered tube bundle receiver for high-temperature parabolic dish
system, Appl. Therm. Eng. 91 (2015) 791–799.
[18] L.A. Andrade, M.A.S. Barrozo, L.G.M. Vieira, A study on dynamic heating in
parabolic dish concentrators, Renew. Energy 87 (2016) 501–508.
[19] W. Wang, G. Ragnolo, L. Aichmayer, T. Strand, B. Laumert, Integrated design of
a hybrid gas turbine-receiver unit for a parabolic dish system, Energy Procedia
69 (2015) 583–592.
[20] A. Arroyo, M. McLorn, M. Fabian, M. White, A.I. Sayma, Rotor-dynamics of dif-
ferent shaft configurations for A 6 kW micro gas turbine for concentrated solar
power, in: Proceedings of ASME Turbo Expo, 2016.
[21] A. Giostri, E. Macchi, An advanced solution to boost sun-to-electricity effi-
ciency of parabolic dish, Sol. Energy 139 (2016) 337–354.
[22] L. Aichmayer, J. Spelling, B. Laumert, Preliminary design and analysis of a novel
solar receiver for a micro gas-turbine based parabolic dish system, Sol. Energy
114 (2015) 378–396.
[23] W.G. Le Roux, T. Bello-Ochende, J.P. Meyer, Optimum small-scale open and
direct solar thermal Brayton cycle for Pretoria, South Africa,
Proceedings of the ASME 2012 6th International Conference on Energy Sus-
tainability.
[24] W.G. Le Roux, T. Bello-Ochende, J.P. Meyer, Optimum performance of the smal-
l-scale open and direct solar thermal Brayton cycle at various environmental
conditions and constraints, Energy 46 (2012) 42–50.
[25] W.G. Le Roux, T. Bello-Ochende, J.P. Meyer, The efficiency of an open-cavity
tubular solar receiver for a small-scale solar thermal Brayton cycle, Energy
Convers. Manage. 84 (2014) 457–470.
[26] G. Gavagnin, D. Sánchez, G.S. Martínez, J.M. Rodríguez, A. Muñoz, Cost analysis
of solar thermal power generators based on parabolic dish and micro gas tur-
bine: Manufacturing, transportation and installation, Appl. Energy 194 (2017)
108–122.
[27] D. Sánchez, A. Bortkiewicz, J.M. Rodríguez, G.S. Martínez, G. Gavagnin,
T. Sánchez, A methodology to identify potential markets for small-scale solar
thermal power generators, Appl. Energy 169 (2016) 287–300.
[28] S. Semprini, D. Sánchez, A. De. Pascale, Performance analysis of a micro gas
turbine and solar dish integrated system under different solar-only and hybrid
operating conditions, Sol. Energy 132 (2016) 279–293.
21
[29] L. Aichmayer, J. Spelling, B. Laumert, Thermoeconomic analysis of a parabolic
dish micro gas turbine combined-cycle power plant, Energy Procedia 69 (2015)
1089–1099.
[30] L. Aichmayer, J. Spelling, B. Laumert, Small Scale Hybrid Solar Power Plants for
Polygeneration in Rural Areas, Energy Procedia 57 (2014) 1536–1545.
[31] P. Ahmadi, I. Dincer, Exergoenvironmental analysis and optimization of a co-
generation plant system using Multimodal Genetic Algorithm (MGA), Energy
35 (2010) 5161–5172.
[32] L. Malinowski, M. Lewandowska, Analytical model-based energy and exergy
analysis of a gas microturbine at part-load operation, Appl. Therm. Eng. 57
(2013) 125–132.
[33] H. Sharifi, S.H. Babapur, S.H. Sherkati, Investigation of the problems caused by
the thermal value depletion of gas consumption in Iran’s water heater plants,
International Power System Conference, 98-F-EPG-608
[34] A. Zargar, S.E. Razavi, V. Piroz panah, The effect of Iran natural gas components
on performance and pollution of 135 TI engine, Iran. J. Energy 12 (2) (2009)
61–72 (in Persian).
[35] Capstone Turbine Corporation, (2006). www.microturbine.com, September
2018
[36] J.A. Duffie, W.A. Beckman, Solar Engineering of Thermal Processes, Fourth Edi-
tion, Wiley, 2013.
[37] Meteorological Organization (Iran). http://www.iranhydrology.net/meteo.asp.
October 2018
[38] , Final Technical Report, Capstone Turbine Corporation, 2008 March 31.
[39] G. Ragnolo, A techno-economic comparison of a Micro Gas-Turbine and a Stir-
ling EngineEngine for Parabolic dish application, Master of science thesis, KTH
School of Industrial Engineering and Management, (2013-2014).
[40] Ministry of Energy (Iran). http://news.moe.gov.ir/Detail?anwid=17472. February
2018
[41] Energy Standard for Buildings Except Low-Rise Residential Buildings, ASHRAEE
STANDARD, (2004).
[42] A.C. Ferreira, Thermodynamic and economic optimization of a solar-powered
Stirling Engine engine for micro-cogeneration purposes, Energy 111 (2016)
1–17.
[43] Energy systems INC. http://www.solartronenergy.com. July 2018
[44] TRANE Co. http://www.trane.com. July 2018
[45] S. Edalati, M. Ameri, M. Iranmanesh, H. Tarmahi, M. Gholampour, Technical
and economic assessments of grid-connected photovoltaic power plants: Iran
case study, Energy 114 (2016) 923–934.
[46] Ministry of Energy (Iran). http://www.moe.gov.ir. February 2018
[47] Ministry of Energy (Iran). http://wamp.tavanir.org.ir/getFile/?id=
CA3D3B930D2423920CC8B73172DE0E30. February 2018
[48] Ministry of Energy (Iran). http://privatesectors.suna.org.ir/suna_content/media/
image/2016/05/4575_orig.pdf. February 2018
[49] Ministry of Energy (Iran). http://www.tavanir.org.ir/ren_dg/. February 2018
[50] J. Wang, Y.-Y. Jing, C.-F. Zhang, Optimization of capacity and operation for CCHP
system by genetic algorithm, Appl. Energy 87 (2010) 1325–1335.
[51] L. Aichmayer, J. Spelling, B. Laumert, Thermoeconomic analysis of a parabolic
dish micro gas turbine combined-cycle power plant, Energy Procedia 69 (2015)
1089–1099.
[52] BROAD X NON-ELECTRIC CHILLER, https://www.broadusa.net/en/wp-content/
uploads/2015/03/Broad- X- chiller- Model- selection- design- manual- C.pdf.
[53] W Somcharoenwattana, Study of operational parameters improvement of nat-
ural-gas cogeneration plant in public buildings in Thailand, Energy Build. 43
(2011) 925–934.
[54] Oil Ministry (Iran). http://www.iies.ac.ir/Data/BulletinFiles/TH1.pdf. February
2018
[55] National Gas Company (Iran). http://mgd.nigc.ir/MGD2/_Documents/dir_2/_
Download/tarefeh94.pdf. February 2018
[56] Ministry of Energy (Iran). http://bahaye_bargh.tavanir.org.ir/. February 2018