TRANSIENT PERFORMANCE MODELING OF A CSP PLANT WITH CASCADED SENSIBLE AND LATENT TES SUBSYSTEMS

S. Bergmann , J. Rheinlnder and M. R. Erbes

1

Dipl.-Ing. Stefan Bergmann, Process Simulation Engineer, SimTech GmbH, Riesstr. 120, A-8010 Graz, Austria, phone +43 316 38627847, e-mail: s.bergmann@simtechnology.com
2

Dr.-Ing. Jrgen Rheinlnder, Solar Thermal Power Engineer, Silcherstr. 11, D-71083 Herrenberg, Germany
3

Dr. Michael R. Erbes, Enginomix, 713 Santa Cruz Ave., Suite 11, Menlo Park, CA 94025, USA

Abstract In those regions where direct solar irradiance and power demands can justify investment in CSP technologies, the availability of potable water is typically limited. Thus, to assess the viability of many CSP projects, the cogeneration of power and potable water should be investigated. This study considers the integration of a latent low-temperature (phase-change material) heat storage system with the heat transfer fluid (HTF) circuit of a parabolic trough collector (PTC) solar power plant. In addition, PTC integration with a proven sensible two-tank medium-temperature (molten salt) storage system is investigated. While moltensalt storage technology enables extension of power generation past sunset, latent-heat storage technology generates low-pressure steam from low-temperature solar energy, which can be used to drive an MED process; this low-temperature solar energy would not otherwise be utilized. Not only are the processes in the cascaded heat storage systems transient, but the large thermal masses of HTF and steel in the solar field necessitate transient modeling of the heat and mass transfer processes in order to generate a realistic simulation of plant performance. Selected results from this study show how the plant performance is affected by solar irradiance, power and water demands, state of charge of heat storage systems, ambient conditions and history of previous hours of operation. Time steps of ten minutes or less are needed for realistic simulation of start-up and to assess the effects of rapid changes in solar irradiance. Continuous 24-hour year-round production of desalinated water is feasible, if the winter water demand can be reduced to two-thirds of that in the summer. Keywords: CSP, desalination, cascaded thermal energy storage, performance modeling, transient simulation 1. Introduction One of the key challenges one faces when modeling solar thermal power plants is realistic simulation of the intrinsically transient processes in solar fields (SF) and thermal energy storage (TES) subsystems. The large masses of heat transfer fluid (HTF) and steel in the solar field cause large delays in heating the circuit during plant start-up after sunrise. Stochastic changes in the intensity of the solar irradiance cause delayed oscillation of temperature levels at the HTF outlet from the SF. The mass in the TES systems undergoes daily cyclic changes between high and low energy contents, characterized by large changes in temperature for the case of single-phase storage material, and by changes in the physical state for the case of phase change material (PCM). The proposed system configuration with sensible and latent TES and cascading heat usage enables efficient integration and operation of these individual subsystems with different demand profiles. The goal is to develop an efficient and cost-effective design to couple two inherently continuous processes, the multipleeffect desalination (MED) process used for water production and the electrical power generation in the steam cycle, with the inherently transient primary solar heat source. Most thermal desalination processes (e.g., MED), as well as membrane processes (e.g., reverse osmosis or RO), require a continuous supply of heat or electrical power for cost-effective operation. Therefore, CSP cogeneration plants require large capacities of energy storage to enable them to produce continual supplies of desalinated water. At these larger storage levels, thermal energy storage (TES) technologies are generally superior to battery storage technologies.

Using the IPSEpro process modeling framework, the authors have developed process models for solar collector fields, thermal energy storage systems, power generation technologies and desalination systems. The IPSEpro model library RESYSpro covers a wide range of CSP technologies, including subsystems for sensible and latent thermal energy storage. Transient modeling of energy content and flow is implemented for all of the plant components with large masses of fluids and containment material. Time-series simulation is based on the prediction at each time step of the solar field mass flow for the next time step, using a correlation accounting for expected irradiance and power demand, actual heat content in SF components, thermal losses from collectors and piping, and actual state of charge in the TES. Transient PTC solar field modeling was tested by comparison to measured SEGS VI performance [1] and to results from other simulation tools through bench-marking tests run as part of the SolarPACES task force on Standardized Methodology for CSP Performance Prediction [2]. 2. System Specification The example system investigated in the current work is a CSP plant with cascaded sensible and latent TES subsystems, designed for cogeneration of electrical power and potable water. The transient analysis focuses on the heat-supply sections of the plant, since steady-state operation is preferred for the power block and the MED plant. The heat-supply system includes: Solar field of parabolic trough collectors using Solutia Therminol VP1 as the heat transfer fluid (HTF). The field consists of 1,200 ET 150 collectors (EUROTROUGH) in 4 subfields with 50 loops each (6 collectors per loop) resulting in 981,000 m total aperture area with 695 MWth nominal heat output. High-temperature (280 to 390C) sensible thermal energy storage system (HT-TES) consisting of two tanks (hot and cold) filled with molten Alkali-Nitrate-Salt mixture (melting point ~220C). The HT-TES capacity is designed for eight full-load hours (FLH) of power block operation. Low-temperature (100 to 200C) latent thermal energy storage system (LT-TES) consisting of several tanks filled with phase change material (PCM) Durferrit ASD (melting point ~142C), hot-side piping for charging the TES using heat supply from HTF, and cold-side piping for discharging the TES by generating saturated low-pressure steam for the MED system. The capacity of the LT-TES is designed for 11 full-load hours (FLH) of MED operation. The solar multiple (SM) is 5.2: this parameter relates the nominal heat output of the solar field to the total nominal heat demand (in this case, from the power block and the MED process). Auxiliary fossil-fired heater for HTF and balance of plant components (pumps, valves, manifolds, etc.) The solar field operates with the HTF temperature ranging from ~150C up to 400C. The lower temperature is typical for the HTF leaving the charging tubes of the LT-TES. The upper temperature is set by the chemical stability of the fluid. 390C is the design exit temperature of the HTF from the last solar collectors. A large fraction of the HTF passes first through the high-pressure steam generator, which includes superheating and economizing sections; the remainder of the HTF runs in parallel through the reheaters. The temperature of the HTF leaving both sections is ~290C. Additional heat transfer from the combined HTF flow occurs in the LT-TES, melting the PCM. In this way, steam generation and PCM melting occur in cascaded processes. The overall process configuration is shown in figure 1. When the solar irradiance is large, excess solar heat collected by the HTF is stored in the HT-TES subsystem by heating molten salt up to ~380C. The accumulated hot salt is used as a heat reserve for extending operation of the power block after sunset. As was done with the power block circuit, the HTF flow leaving the HTF/molten salt heat exchangers at ~290C is cooled down further in the LT-TES to melt the PCM. The full-load thermal demand of the power block is 91 MW. Combined with the 43 MW of thermal energy required by the three MED trains, the integrated process requires a maximum thermal input of 134 MW. The integration concept shown above was developed for a number of reasons. There is no reduction of power block efficiency required to operate the MED process. After sunset and exhaustion of the HT-TES, the MED operation continues. The cascaded design enables better utilization of the solar field equipment with a larger

temperature rise from inlet to outlet. The collector efficiency in the solar collectors added, which operate at lower temperatures, is higher due to reduced thermal losses. The constant temperature in the phase change material matches well with generation of saturated steam. The partitioning of the MED subsystem into three trains enables the adjustment of the number of active trains based on the seasonal variation in water demand and the availability of solar energy. In the worst case, which would be after several days without solar irradiation, two of the three MED trains can be run with heat supply from the auxiliary boilers only.

Fig. 1: Integration of PTC Solar Field with Cascaded Sensible and Latent TES, Power Block and MED 3. Design and Operation of the TES-PCM Module One of the core components of the proposed process configuration is the TES-PCM module. The latent heat of liquefaction of the PCM Durferrit ASD is 84 kJ/kg. To allow for a storage capacity of 11 full-load hours of the MED process, 21,400 tons of PCM is required. The corresponding volume may be split into an array of cylindrical PCM-tanks connected as shown schematically in figure 2. It is essential to charge from the top to the bottom of the PCM modules to allow for the increase in PCM volume due to the melting and the rise in liquid temperature. Charge and discharge flow directions are indicated schematically in figure 2. The pipes for HTF (downcomers) and steam (risers) are not shown separately. The TES-PCM subsystem is operated simultaneously as both a heat exchanger and energy storage system. Energy is stored continuously by extracting it from the HTF leaving the PB steam generator and reheater, from the HTF leaving the heat exchangers between HTF and the molten salt of the HT-TES, and/or from the HTF directly coming from the solar field, as long as the solar field outlet temperature is lower than the minimum limits set for supply to the PB or to the HT-TES. On the other side of the TES-PCM, a constant energy flow is extracted by the MED process. As the steam quality at the outlet of the TES-PCM varies depending on the state of charge, the condensate mass flow is adjusted accordingly to meet the heat demand.

charging

discharging

Fig. 2: Large modular TES-PCM tank arrangement (source: [3]) 4. Performance Analysis

Fig. 3: TES-PCM temperature and steam quality profiles as functions of state of charge

From the annual performance simulation runs conducted during this study, results for selected days in July and January are discussed here. Water demand in July is assumed to be 100%, requiring continuous operation of all three MED trains. In January, 66% of nominal water demand is assumed, and therefore only two MED trains are operated. The daily profiles of the primary energy flows and gross and net power generation for July are shown in figure 4, along with the mass flow through the solar field, the state of charge of the two TES subsystems and the inlet and outlet HTF temperatures.

Fig. 4: Day Performance July

During this representative day in July, eleven hours of full-load operation of the power block (PB) is achieved with energy supplied directly from the solar field from 7:00 until 18:00 (6 PM). After sundown, heat is supplied to the power block for another nine hours from the HT-TES and from auxiliary heating. The initial spike in energy to the PB at 7 AM shown in figure 4 is caused by the initiation of mass flow through the HTF/steam heat exchangers of the PB. Due to the slowly rising temperature of the HTF leaving the solar field, the live steam temperature also rises slowly, and a maximum rate of ~2K/min is dictated by the steam turbine start-up requirements. As a result, the PB needs about one hour to increase from 40 to 100% load. The large solar multiple of 5.2 enables early filling of both TES subsystems. Therefore, during July the solar collectors must be periodically defocused to avoid raising the HTF temperature exiting the last collectors in the loops above 400C. The impact of this defocusing is seen in the sharp decrease of solar field mass flow from 10:30 onwards. Correspondingly, the parasitic power consumption for pumping decreases, and the difference between gross and net power output is reduced. The impact of the thermal mass of HTF fluid and steel causes the ~1 hour delay seen between the beginning of the direct incident irradiance on absorbers and the start of the increase in energy flow from the solar field. In fact, from sunrise at 5:00 until 6:15, the energy transport from the solar field is actually negative, since a large mass of cold HTF must be pushed out of the normally hot end of the headers and runners before the temperature of the HTF leaving the last collectors is warmer than that of the HTF entering the solar field. When the HT-TES reaches a 100% state of charge (SOC) during the afternoon, eight hours of full-load power generation can be achieved with about 1.5 FLH energy supply from the auxiliary heaters. Thus, power generation can continue for 9.5 hours after sunset. Since the analysis time steps are set to one hour during the night and early morning, during the shut-down period between 4:00 and 5:00, the power output displayed in the figure above ends abruptly at 4:00. The energy in the HT-TES remains exhausted from 4:00 to 8:00. The LT-TES is fully charged (SOC=1) even earlier than the HT-TES, and is large enough not to be exhausted during a 24 hour cycle, therefore the energy supply to the MED process is constant and uninterrupted. For the representative day in July, figure 5 shows a comparison of the energy flows transported by HTF through the various subsystems with the irradiance on the aperture area of the solar field.

Fig. 5: Distribution of heat from SF July Day The characterization of the energy flows over a full day as shown in figure 5 is difficult to interpret when there are large variations in energy content in components with large thermal masses. It is easier to interpret

the more nearly steady-state operation from 14:00 until about 18:00. Here Q_from_SF is simply the sum of Q_to_PB and Q_to_TES_PCM while all of the other energy flows are zero. No energy is carried to the HT-TES (Q_to_TES_MS = 0) since it is already full. The energy flow Q_to_TES_PCM is the energy actually used by the MED process, since the TES-PCM is full around 9:00. The large difference between Q_DII_field and Q_from_SF between 10:00 and 18:00 indicates the rejection of irradiance by defocusing. A few further details: Around 6:00 the heat flow from the solar field is negative, since cold HTF is still leaving the SF, pushing warmer HTF from the BOP piping to the SF and a fraction of this through the TES-PCM. Therefore, the latter receives more heat than supplied by the solar field during this period until 7:10, when for the first time on this day, energy is sent to the power block for the start-up of the turbine. The performance patterns for January, shown in figure 6, are similar to those for July. Yet the available irradiance is much lower, and therefore the daily power and water outputs are much less. Only five hours of full-load operation of the power block is achieved with direct supply from the solar field between 7:00 and 16:00. After 16:00, energy is supplied for another three hours to the power block from the HT-TES and from auxiliary heating. The start-up of the steam turbine is delayed until 9:30. Again, live steam temperature rises slowly at ~2K/min, and the power start-up ramp requires about one hour to go from 40% to 100% load.

Fig. 6: Day Performance January Despite the large solar multiple of 5.2, there is not enough irradiance available on this day and the state of charge (SOC) in the HT-TES does not reach 30%. The charging of the LT-TES is much slower than in July, but SOC=1 is reached in the afternoon. Thanks to the seasonal reduction of water demand, the TES-PCM is not exhausted before the next sunrise. The balance of HTF flow from the solar field and the different utilizations of this flow are shown in figure 7. Remarkable in these results is the delay of more than one hour from the start of irradiance until the increase of energy flow leaving the solar field. As the intensity and gradient of increase of irradiance are much lower than in July, the solar field mass flows are lower and it therefore takes much more time for the freshly heated HTF to pass from the last collectors in the loops to the exit from the solar field. Correspondingly, in the late afternoon the decrease of heat collection in the solar field is relatively delayed compared to the rapid decrease in irradiance. At 16:40, the same amount of energy seems to leave the field as reaches the collectors through irradiance. Later, with the low mass flow rate through the solar field, energy is still extracted from the hot-end piping of the solar field, even though irradiance has ceased completely.

Fig. 7: Distribution of heat from SF January Day Figures 4 through 7 show how the auxiliary heating is used for two purposes. Its main task is to extend the operating hours of the power block in the evening by augmenting the energy supply from the HT-TES. By contributing a fraction of energy continuously during discharge, the exhaustion of the HT-TES is delayed and the power block operation is extended. The other task of auxiliary heating is to maintain the temperature of HTF sent to LT-TES above 200C during the initial hours of solar field start up, when energy from the collectors is not yet transported through the large volumes of headers and runner pipes to the solar field outlet. As these two uses of auxiliary heat do not happen simultaneously, no extra capacity of the auxiliary heaters is required for the benefit of the LT-TES. 5. Performance Comparison with a Power Only Plant with the Same Electric Output The benefit of integrating an MED process with a CSP-PTC power plant can be identified by comparing the performance of the integrated system with that of a reference system designed for the same power generation capacity but without any desalination. This was studied by specifying a CSP-PTC plan with a solar field comprising the same numbers of subfields and loops per subfield, but with only four ET 150 solar collectors per loop. In this case, the total aperture area of the solar field is 2/3 of that for the integrated system. The LTTES and MED subsystems were also eliminated, and the power blocks have different gross generator capacity to achieve the same nominal net power of 30 MW: 35 MW gross power for the integrated system and 33 MW gross power for the power-only system, corresponding to the lower nominal parasitic power demand of the latter system. Analyzing the performance of both systems using the same climatic data, the annual energy balance was calculated and the results are summarised in Table 1. The last column in Table 1 is the ratio of the corresponding values for the two systems, e.g. 1.5 for the ratio of the solar field aperture areas of integrated power and water system (P+W) to the power-only system (P). For the rows printed in bold italics, the ratio would be 1.5 if the MED process did not influence the power generation process. But the results show that the irradiance portion lost by defocusing is slightly lower for the integrated system and the energy harvested from the solar field is larger. The integrated system demands only 11% more auxiliary heat than the power-only system, and therefore the total energy supplied to the integrated processes (power and desalination) is greater than the increase corresponding to the 50% larger installed aperture area. The performance of the HT-TES is practically identical in both cases (the same amount of energy passes through the HT-TES with the same number of charge/discharge cycles per year). The power block performance (efficiency) is nearly the same as well, but less energy is supplied to the power block of the power only system and therefore the electrical output is lower. Since the parasitic power

consumption is larger in the integrated system due to the additional HTF pumped through the LT-TES and the pumps for the MED subsystem, the calculated values for annual net power output and hours of full-load power generation hours do not differ very much. The fact that the ratios for heat from solar field and total heat supplied are larger than 1.5 and the ratio for irradiance defocused is smaller than 1.5, indicates that there is a benefit to integration of the two energy-use processes within a single plant: cogeneration of power and potable water production in an integrated system is advantageous. Table 1: Annual performance key results for 30 MW power-only plant and integrated 30 MW plant with cogeneration of potable water by MED process P+W item P = power only system P+W = power + water system P Solar field aperture m 654,000 981,000 1.5 Irradiance incident GWh 960 1440 1.5 Irradiance defocused GWh 263 378 1.44 Heat loss in solar field GWh 202 206 1.02 Heat from solar field GWh 495 856 1.73 Heat from aux. heater GWh 45 50 1.11 Total heat supplied GWh 540 906 1.68 Heat to power block GWh 517 545 1.05 Heat to HT-TES GWh 191 192 1.01 HT-TES cycles 1/a 256 255 1.00 Heat to LT-TES GWh n/a 346 n/a Electric efficiency (gross) % 37.9 38.0 1.00 Power gross GWh 196 207 1.06 Power parasitics % 6.6 8.7 1.32 Power net GWh 183 189 1.03 Full load hours net h/a 6100 6300 1.03 6. Conclusions In this study, transient simulation of a CSP plant with cascaded sensible and latent TES subsystems was conducted for representative days for a typical site, such as might be found in Egypt on the Red Sea coast. The plant operation is affected by solar irradiance, power and water demands, state of charge of the energy storage systems, ambient conditions and the history of previous hours of operation. The analysis shows that transient simulation of the process is necessary to realistically model the impact of large thermal capacities of HTF and solid component materials. Analysis time steps of ten minutes or less are needed for realistic simulation of start-up processes and rapid changes of solar irradiance. Continuous (24 hour per day) water production (100% load during summer, 66% load during winter) is feasible and cogeneration of power and potable water in an integrated system offers advantages which should be considered further. References [1] J. Rheinlnder, M.R. Erbes, S. Bergmann: Simulation of the startup behavior of the solar field of a PTCCSP plant, 16th SolarPACES International Symposium on Concentrated Solar Power and Chemical Energy Technologies (2010) Perpignan, France [2] G. Kolb: STAMP Work Package 9.2 Model Benchmarking, SolarPACES workshop Task I, February 23, 2011, Granada, Spain [3] D. Hunold: Zur Auslegung und Konstruktion von thermischen Energiespeichern mit einem fest/flssig Phasenwechsel des Speichermaterials fr Parabolrinnen-Solarkraftwerke, Fortschrittberichte VDI, Reihe 6, Nr. 308, 1994, VDI Verlag, Germany