Solar Energy by Gerard M Crawley

World Scientific Series in Current Energy Issues Volume 2
Solar Energy
9637_9789814689496_TP.indd 1 2/2/16 2:42 PM

World Scientific Series in Current Energy Issues
Series Editor: Gerard M Crawley (University of South Carolina & Marcus Enterprise
â•… LLC, USA)
Published
Vol. 1 Fossil Fuels: Current Status and Future Directions

edited by Gerard M Crawley
Vol. 2 Solar Energy

Forthcoming
Energy from the Nucleus: The Science and Engineering of
Fission and Fusion
Dipa - Solar Energy.indd 1 17/2/2016 2:22:03 PM

World Scientific Series in Current Energy Issues Volume 2
Solar Energy
Editor
Gerard M Crawley
Marcus Enterprise LLC, USA
&
Professor and Dean Emeritus
University of South Carolina, USA
World Scientific
NEW JERSEY • LONDON • SINGAPORE • BEIJING • SHANGHAI • HONG KONG • TAIPEI • CHENNAI • TOKYO
9637_9789814689496_TP.indd 2 2/2/16 2:42 PM

Published by
World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd.
5 Toh Tuck Link, Singapore 596224
USA office: 27 Warren Street, Suite 401-402, Hackensack, NJ 07601
UK office: 57 Shelton Street, Covent Garden, London WC2H 9HE
Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data

Names: Crawley, Gerard M., editor.
Title: Solar energy / [compiled by] Gerard M Crawley (University of South Carolina, USA &
Marcus Enterprise LLC, USA).
Other titles: Solar energy (World Scientific (Firm))
Description: [Hackensack] New Jersey : World Scientific, 2016. |
Series: World Scientific series in current energy issues ; vol. 2 |
Includes bibliographical references.
Identifiers: LCCN 2015031779 | ISBN 9789814689496 (alk. paper)
Subjects: LCSH: Solar energy.
Classification: LCC TJ810 .S488175 2016 | DDC 621.47--dc23
LC record available at http://lccn.loc.gov/2015031779
British Library Cataloguing-in-Publication Data

A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library.
Copyright © 2016 by World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd.

All rights reserved. This book, or parts thereof, may not be reproduced in any form or by any means,
electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording or any information storage and retrieval
system now known or to be invented, without written permission from the publisher.
For photocopying of material in this volume, please pay a copying fee through the Copyright Clearance
Center, Inc., 222 Rosewood Drive, Danvers, MA 01923, USA. In this case permission to photocopy
is not required from the publisher.
In-house Editor: Dipasri Sardar
Typeset by Stallion Press

Email: [email protected]
Printed in Singapore
Dipa - Solar Energy.indd 2 17/2/2016 2:22:03 PM

February 11, 2016 14:6 Solar Energy - 9in x 6in b2236-fm page v
Contents
Foreword to the World Scientific Series on Current Energy Issues xv
1. Introduction to Solar Energy 1

R. Corkish, W. Lipiński and R. J. Patterson
1 What is Solar Energy? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
2 Advantages and Disadvantages Associated with Solar
Energy Use . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
3 History of Solar Energy Use . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
4 Modern Applications of Solar Energy . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
4.1 Photovoltaics for Large-Scale Electricity Production . . 10
4.2 Photovoltaics for Small Scale on Homes and
Commercial Buildings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
4.3 Photovoltaics for Small-Scale Off-grid Applications . . 12
4.4 Concentrating Solar Thermal Electricity . . . . . . . . 13
4.5 Solar Thermochemical Processes . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
4.6 Solar Water Heating . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
4.7 Passive Heating of Buildings and Solar Architecture . . 15
4.8 Evaporative Cooling . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
4.9 Biomass and Biofuels . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
4.10 Artificial Photosynthesis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
5 Economics of Solar Energy Use . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
6 Social and Policy Aspects . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
7 Summary/Conclusions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
v
February 11, 2016 14:6 Solar Energy - 9in x 6in b2236-fm page vi
vi Contents
2. Fundamentals of Photovoltaic Cells and Systems 31

Ignacio Rey-Stolle
1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
2 Solar Radiation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
2.1 Fundamentals . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
2.2 Basic PV Terminology and Notation for Solar
Radiation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33
2.3 Components of the Solar Radiation . . . . . . . . . . . 33
2.4 World Distribution of Solar Radiation . . . . . . . . . . 35
2.5 Solar Radiation Collected by PV Systems . . . . . . . . 35
3 Solar Cells . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36
3.1 Definition . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36
3.2 Basic Solar Cell Equations and Equivalent Circuits . . 37
3.2.1 Simple equivalent circuit for a solar cell
and I–V characteristic . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37
3.2.2 General equivalent circuit for a solar cell
and I–V characteristic . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38
3.3 The I–V Curve of a Solar Cell . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38
3.3.1 General look and key parameters . . . . . . . . . 38
3.3.2 Effect of variations in series and parallel resistance
on the I–V curve . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39
3.3.3 Effect of variations in irradiance on the
I–V curve . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40
3.3.4 Effect of variations in temperature . . . . . . . . 41
3.3.5 Standard test conditions for solar cells . . . . . . 41
3.4 Overview of Solar Cell Technologies . . . . . . . . . . . 42
4 PV Modules . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42
4.1 Fundamentals . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42
4.1.1 Concept and mission . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42
4.1.2 Construction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43
4.2 Characteristic Equation and I–V Curve . . . . . . . . . 44
4.2.1 I–V characteristic of a PV module . . . . . . . . 44
4.3 Electrical Performance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46
4.3.1 Standard test conditions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46
4.3.2 Factors affecting the electrical power of solar
panels under real operation . . . . . . . . . . . . 47
February 11, 2016 14:6 Solar Energy - 9in x 6in b2236-fm page vii
Contents vii
4.3.3 Modeling the equilibrium cell temperature

in a PV module . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47
4.3.4 Electrical power of solar panels at any irradiance
and temperature . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48
4.3.5 Electrical Energy from a PV module . . . . . . . 48
5 PV Arrays and Systems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49
5.1 Basic Definitions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49
5.2 Balance of System Components of PV Systems . . . . . 49
5.2.1 Power conditioning . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49
5.2.2 Storage . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50
5.2.3 Electric components . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50
5.2.4 Mounting structures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50
5.3 Types of PV Systems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51
5.4 Designing a PV System . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52
5.4.1 Location . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52
5.4.2 Orientation and tilt . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52
5.4.3 Sizing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53
5.5 PV System Performance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54
5.5.1 Output power of PV systems . . . . . . . . . . . 54
5.5.2 Energy rating of PV systems . . . . . . . . . . . 55
5.5.3 Alternative (simpler) energy rating
of PV systems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55
6 Uses and World Market of PV Solar Energy . . . . . . . . . 57
6.1 Overview on the Uses of PV Energy . . . . . . . . . . . 57
6.2 World PV Market . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57
6.2.1 Size and historic evolution of the world
PV market . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57
6.2.2 PV cell production by technology . . . . . . . . . 59
6.2.3 Evolution of costs of PV modules and PV
electricity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59
7 Material Usage and Environmental Impact
of PV Solar Energy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61
7.1 The Value Chain of PV Technology . . . . . . . . . . . 61
7.2 Material Usage of PV Technology . . . . . . . . . . . . 61
7.3 Energy Payback Time of PV Systems . . . . . . . . . . 61
7.4 Greenhouse (GHG) Gas Emissions of PV Systems . . . 62
February 11, 2016 14:6 Solar Energy - 9in x 6in b2236-fm page viii
viii Contents
7.5 Operational Hazards of PV Systems . . . . . . . . . . . 63

7.6 PV Module Decommissioning and Recycling . . . . . . 64
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64
3. Large-Scale Solar Thermal Plants (CSP) 69

Manfred Becker, Robert Pitz-Paal and Wes Stein
1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 70
2 Solar Radiation and Concentration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 71
3 Receiving and Absorbing Solar Radiation . . . . . . . . . . . 72
3.1 Energy Balance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 72
3.2 Selective Surface Theory . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 73
4 Types of Solar Collectors for Power and Fuels . . . . . . . . 75
4.1 Solar Pond . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 75
4.2 Solar Chimney . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 77
4.3 Parabolic Trough . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 78
4.3.1 Trough technology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 78
4.3.2 Heat transfer field . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 82
4.4 Linear Fresnel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 86
4.5 Central Receiver (Power Tower) . . . . . . . . . . . . . 87
4.5.1 Heliostats and field layout . . . . . . . . . . . . . 87
4.5.2 Receivers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 90
4.6 Dish Concentrators . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 91
5 Thermal Storage . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 95
5.1 Two-Tank Molten Salt . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 96
5.2 Single Tank Molten Salt . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 97
5.3 Alternative Thermal Storage Options . . . . . . . . . . 97
5.4 Thermochemical Storage . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 99
5.5 Cost Reduction of Thermal Storage Through Higher
Temperatures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 99
6 CSP Systems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100
6.1 Rankine Cycle Based . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 101
6.2 Brayton Cycle . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 102
6.3 Stirling Cycle . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 104
7 New Commercial Power Stations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 105
7.1 Parabolic Troughs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 105
7.2 Central Receivers (Power Towers) . . . . . . . . . . . . 107
8 Economy and Cost Reductions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 112
8.1 CSP in the Market . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 112
February 11, 2016 14:6 Solar Energy - 9in x 6in b2236-fm page ix
Contents ix
8.2 Cost Developments and Cost Reductions . . . . . . . . 115

8.2.1 Cost reduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 116
8.2.2 Scaling up . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 116
8.2.3 Volume production . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 117
8.2.4 Technology innovations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 117
9 Conclusions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 118
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 119
4. Large-Scale Photovoltaic Power Plants 125

G. Almonacid Puche, P. G. Vidal and E. Muñoz-Cerón
1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 125
2 Electrical Engineering: Key Points in Large
PV Generators . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 127
2.1 Layout of a Large-Scale PV Plant . . . . . . . . . . . . 127
2.2 Inverter Topology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 130
2.3 Capacitive Leakage Current . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 131
2.4 Grounding . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 132
2.5 Insulation Resistance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 134
2.6 Electrical Hazards . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 134
3 Grid Connection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 136
3.1 Grid-Connection Requirements for Large-Scale
PV Plants . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 137
3.1.1 Voltage control under normal operating
conditions — Static voltage support . . . . . . . 137
3.1.2 Dynamic grid support in fault operation . . . . . 137
3.1.3 Active power output . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 139
3.1.4 Unintentional islanding . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 140
3.2 Power Quality . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 141
3.2.1 Voltage fluctuations at the PPC . . . . . . . . . 141
3.2.2 Limitation of DC injection . . . . . . . . . . . . 142
3.2.3 Harmonics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 142
3.2.4 Limitation of flicker induced by the
PV generator . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 143
4 Energy Yields and Efficiencies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 143
4.1 Efficiency and Productivity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 143
4.2 Losses in Large-Scale PV Plants . . . . . . . . . . . . . 145
4.3 Software Simulation Tools . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 148
February 11, 2016 14:6 Solar Energy - 9in x 6in b2236-fm page x
x Contents
5 Commissioning. Operation & Maintenance . . . . . . . . . . 149

5.1 List of Procedures for the Commission of a Large
PV Plant . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 150
5.1.1 Visual inspection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 150
5.1.2 Testing and initial startup . . . . . . . . . . . . . 151
5.1.3 System documentation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 152
5.2 Operation and Maintenance of a PV Plant . . . . . . . 152
6 Promotion Policies — Planning and Regulation . . . . . . . 155
7 Economic Analysis: Financing and Due Diligence . . . . . . 158
7.1 Economic Parameters: Grid Parity, Life-Cycle Cost
(LCC) and Levelized Cost of Electricity (LCOE) . . . . 158
7.2 Financing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 162
7.3 Technical Due Diligence . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 162
8 The Future of Large-Scale PV Power Plants . . . . . . . . . 163
8.1 European Stand-by Future in Large-Scale PV Power
Plants . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 163
8.2 The Asia Pacific and Middle East and
North Africa (MENA) Countries Boosting
Future in Large PV Plants . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 164
8.3 North and South American Deployment
of PV Plants . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 165
8.4 Africa’s Increasing Development of Large PV
Plant Projects . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 165
Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 166
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 166
5. Biomass 171
Anthony Turhollow
1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 171
2 Biomass Products . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 172
2.1 Ethanol . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 172
2.1.1 Ethanol production in Brazil . . . . . . . . . . . 172
2.1.2 Ethanol production in the United States . . . . . 174
2.1.3 Second-generation Ethanol production . . . . . . 175
2.2 Biodiesel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 175
2.3 Electricity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 176
2.4 Biochemicals . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 177
2.4.1 Nitrogen fertilizer produced from biomass . . . . 178
2.5 Wood Pellets . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 178
February 11, 2016 14:6 Solar Energy - 9in x 6in b2236-fm page xi
Contents xi
3 Thermal Processes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 179

3.1 Pyrolysis and Hydropyrolysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 180
3.2 Gasification . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 182
3.3 Combustion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 182
4 Biological Processes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 183
4.1 Anaerobic Digestion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 183
4.2 Fermentation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 184
5 Dedicated Energy Crops . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 185
5.1 Switchgrass . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 186
5.2 Sorghum . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 187
5.3 Miscanthus . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 188
5.4 Sugarcane and Energy Cane . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 188
5.5 Hybrid Poplar . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 189
5.6 Willow . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 190
5.7 Eucalyptus . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 191
5.8 Oilseeds . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 191
5.9 Algae . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 193
6 Policies Affecting Biofuels . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 193
7 Conclusions and Outlook . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 195
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 196
6. Artificial Photosynthesis 205

Nathan Skillen and Peter K. J. Robertson
1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 205
2 Natural Photosynthesis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 207
2.1 Key Features . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 208
2.1.1 Energy absorption . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 208
2.1.2 Electron transfer and ATP generation . . . . . . 210
2.1.3 Carbon fixation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 211
3 Artificial Photosynthesis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 213
3.1 Light Harvesting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 213
3.1.1 Photosensitizers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 214
3.1.1.1 Dye sensitized solar cells . . . . . . . . . 214
3.1.1.2 Photocatalysts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 216
3.2 Electron Separation and Transfer . . . . . . . . . . . . 218
3.2.1 Single oxide photocatalysts . . . . . . . . . . . . 218
3.2.2 Z-scheme photocatalysts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 222
February 11, 2016 14:6 Solar Energy - 9in x 6in b2236-fm page xii
xii Contents
3.2.3 Nanobiocatalytic assemblies . . . . . . . . . . . 224

3.2.3.1 Mimicking PS I . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 224
3.2.3.2 Mimicking PS II . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 226
3.3 Carbon Fixation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 227
3.3.1 Heterogenous catalysts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 228
3.3.2 Homogenous catalysts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 232
4 Artificial Photosynthesis Institutes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 234
4.1 Swedish Consortium for Artificial Photosynthesis . . . 234
4.2 Joint Centre for Artificial Photosynthesis (JCAP) . . . 234
5 Future Outlook and Challenges . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 235
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 236
7. Small-Scale PV Applications in Home and Business 243

Estefanı́a Caamaño-Martı́n, Miguel Ángel Egido
and Jorge Solórzano
1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 243
1.1 PV Applications in the Built Environment . . . . . . . 244
1.2 Stand-Alone PV Applications . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 246
2 Solar Resource Availability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 247
2.1 Meteorological Resources and Modeling . . . . . . . . . 247
2.2 On the Positioning of PV Modules . . . . . . . . . . . . 249
2.3 Shading Losses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 252
3 Performance Assessment of Small-Scale PV Systems . . . . . 255
3.1 PV Systems Losses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 260
4 PVs in Buildings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 262
4.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 262
4.2 Types of PV Systems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 263
4.3 Design and Sizing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 266
4.3.1 PV generator . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 267
4.3.2 Inverter . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 268
4.3.3 Operation and maintenance . . . . . . . . . . . . 270
4.4 Business Models and International Experiences . . . . . 270
5 SAPVS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 274
5.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 274
5.2 Types of SAPVS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 274
5.3 Design and Sizing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 282
5.4 Operation and Management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 285
5.5 Business Models and International Experiences . . . . . 289
February 11, 2016 14:6 Solar Energy - 9in x 6in b2236-fm page xiii
Contents xiii
6 Safety and Protections . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 291

References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 294
8. Low Temperature Solar Thermal Applications 299

Brian Norton, Hans Martin Henning and Daniel Mugnier
1 Outline of the Chapter . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 299
2 Brief History of the Low Temperature Uses of Solar
Thermal Energy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 300
3 Solar Water Heating . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 302
4 Building Heating and Cooling with Solar Energy . . . . . . 307
5 Low Temperature Solar Heating in Industrial
Applications . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 314
6 Use of Solar Energy to Dry Crops . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 315
7 Solar Air Cooling Conditioning and Refrigeration . . . . . . 320
7.1 Passive Cooling of Building . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 320
7.2 Principles of Active Solar Cooling . . . . . . . . . . . . 322
7.3 Technical Maturity of SAC . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 326
7.4 Energy Performance of SAC . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 328
7.5 Economic Viability and Environmental Benefits
of SAC . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 330
7.6 Market Status of SAC . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 332
7.7 Technical Potentials of SAC . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 333
7.8 SAC Costs and Economics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 334
7.9 Market Opportunities for SAC . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 335
8 Economic and Policy Issues Related to Solar Heating and
Cooling Thermal Applications . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 337
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 338
9. Solar Thermochemical Processes 345

Roman Bader and Wojciech Lipiński
1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 345
1.1 Overview of Processes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 346
1.2 Thermodynamic Limits . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 349
2 Thermolysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 354
3 Thermochemical Cycles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 354
3.1 Two-Step Redox Cycles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 355
3.1.1 Zinc oxide cycle . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 357
February 11, 2016 14:6 Solar Energy - 9in x 6in b2236-fm page xiv
xiv Contents
3.1.2 Ferrite cycle . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 366

3.1.3 Ceria cycle . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 370
3.1.4 Perovskite cycle . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 377
3.2 Multi-Step Cycles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 378
4 Conversion of Carbonaceous Feedstocks . . . . . . . . . . . . 379
4.1 Gasification . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 379
4.2 Cracking and Reforming . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 382
5 Production of Lime and Cement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 385
6 CO2 Capture . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 386
7 Other Processes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 388
8 Summary and Conclusions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 389
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 389
Index 395
About the Contributors 405

February 11, 2016 14:6 Solar Energy - 9in x 6in b2236-fm page xv
Foreword to the World Scientific Series

on Current Energy Issues
Gerard M. Crawley
Sometime between four hundred thousand and a million years ago, an early
humanoid species developed the mastery of fire and changed the course of
our planet. Still, as recently as a few hundred years ago, the energy sources
available to the human race remained surprisingly limited. In fact, until
the early 19th century, the main energy sources for humanity were biomass
(from crops and trees), their domesticated animals and their own efforts.
Even after many millennia, the average per capita energy use in 1830
only reached about 20 Gigajoules (GJ) per year. By 2010, however, this
number had increased dramatically to 80 GJ per year.1 One reason for this
notable shift in energy use is that the number of possible energy sources
increased substantially during this period, starting with coal in about the
1850s and then successively adding oil and natural gas. By the middle of
the 20th century, hydropower and nuclear fission were added to the mix.
As we move into the 21st century, there has been a steady increase in other
forms of energy such as wind and solar, although presently they represent
a relatively small fraction of world energy use.
Despite the rise of a variety of energy sources, per capita energy use is
not uniform around the world. There are enormous differences from coun-
try to country, pointing to a large disparity in wealth and opportunity
(see Table 1). For example, in the United States the per capita energy use
xv
February 11, 2016 14:6 Solar Energy - 9in x 6in b2236-fm page xvi
xvi Foreword to the World Scientific Series on Current Energy Issues
Table 1: Primary Energy Use Per Capita in Million Btu (MMBtu).2
2007 2011 Percentage

Country (MMBtu) (MMBtu) change
Canada 416.1 393.7 −5.4

United States 336.9 312.8 −7.2
Brazil 52.7 60.2 14.2
France 175.7 165.9 −5.6
Germany 167.8 165.4 −1.4
Russia 204.0 213.4 4.6
Nigeria 6.1 5.0 −18.0
Egypt 36.4 41.6 14.3
China 57.1 77.5 35.7
India 17.0 19.7 15.9
World 72.2 74.9 3.7
per year in 2011 was 312.8 million Btua (MMBtu) and in Germany, 165.4
MMBtu. In China, however, per capita energy use was only 77.5 MMBtu,
despite its impressive economic and technological gains. India, weighs in
even lower at 19.7 MMBTU per person.2 The general trends over the last
decade suggest that countries with developed economies generally show
modest increases or even small decreases in energy use, but that developing
economies, particularly China and India, are experiencing rapidly increas-
ing energy consumption per capita.
These changes, both in the kind of resource used and the growth of
energy use in countries with developing economies, will have enormous
effects in the near future, both economically and politically, as greater num-
bers of people compete for limited energy resources at a viable price. A
growing demand for energy will have an impact on the distribution of other
limited resources such as food and fresh water as well. All this leads to the
conclusion that energy will be a pressing issue for the future of humanity.
Another important consideration is that all energy sources have disad-
vantages as well as advantages, risks as well as opportunities, both in the
production of the resource and in its distribution and ultimate use. Coal,
the oldest of the “new” energy sources, is still used extensively to produce
electricity, despite its potential environmental and safety concerns in min-
ing both underground and open cut mining. Burning coal releases sulphur
and nitrogen oxides which in turn can leads to acid rain and a cascade of
detrimental consequences. Coal production requires careful regulation and
a Note 1 GJ = 0.947 MMBtu

February 11, 2016 14:6 Solar Energy - 9in x 6in b2236-fm page xvii
Foreword to the World Scientific Series on Current Energy Issues xvii
oversight to allow it to be used safely and without damaging the environ-

ment. Even a resource like wind energy using large wind turbines has its
critics because of the potential for bird kill and noise pollution. Some critics
also find large wind turbines an unsightly addition to the landscape, par-
ticularly when the wind farms are erected in pristine environments. Energy
from nuclear fission, originally believed to be “too cheap to meter”3 has not
had the growth predicted because of the problem with long term storage
of the waste from nuclear reactors and because of the public perception
regarding the danger of catastrophic accidents such as happened at Cher-
nobyl in 1986 and at Fukushima in 2011.
Even more recently, the measured amount of carbon dioxide, a green-
house gas, in the global atmosphere has steadily increased and is now
greater than 400 parts per million (ppm).4 This has raised concern in
the scientific community and has led the majority of climate scientists to
conclude5 that this increase in CO2 will produce an increase in global tem-
peratures. We will see a rise in ocean temperature, acidity and sea level,
all of which will have a profound impact on human life and ecosystems
around the world. Relying primarily on fossil fuels far into the future may
therefore prove precarious, since burning coal, oil, and natural gas will nec-
essarily increase CO2 levels. Certainly for the long term future, adopting a
variety of alternative energy sources which do not produce CO2 seems to
be our best strategy.
The volumes in the World Scientific Series on Current Energy Issues
explore different energy resources and issues related to the use of energy.
The volumes are intended to be comprehensive, accurate, current, and
include an international perspective. The authors of the various chapters
are experts in their respective fields and provide reliable information that
can be useful to scientists and engineers, but also to policy makers and the
general public interested in learning about the essential concepts related to
energy. The volumes will deal with the technical aspects of energy ques-
tions but will also include relevant discussion about economic and policy
matters. The goal of the series is not polemical but rather is intended to
provide information that will allow the reader to reach conclusions based
on sound, scientific data.
The role of energy in our future is critical and will become increasingly
urgent as world population increases and the global demand for energy turns
ever upwards. Questions such as which energy sources to develop, how to
store energy, and how to manage the environmental impact of energy use
will take center stage in our future. The distribution and cost of energy
February 11, 2016 14:6 Solar Energy - 9in x 6in b2236-fm page xviii
xviii Foreword to the World Scientific Series on Current Energy Issues
will have powerful political and economic consequences and must also be
addressed. How the world deals with these questions will make a crucial
difference to the future of the earth and its inhabitants. Careful consider-
ation of our energy use today will have lasting effects for tomorrow. We
intend that the World Scientific Series on Current Energy Issues will make
a valuable contribution to this discussion.
References
1. Our Finite World (March 2012). World energy consumption since 1820
in charts. Available at: http://ourfiniteworld.com/2012/03/12/world-energy-
consumption-since-1820-in-charts/. Accessed February 2015.
2. US Energy Information Administration. Independent statistics and analysis.
Available at: http://www.eia.gov/cfapps/ipdbproject/iedindex3.cfm?tid=44&
pid=45&aid=2&cid=regions&syid=2005&eyid=2011&unit=MBTUPP. Acc-
essed March 2015.
3. The quote is from a speech by Lewis Strauss, then Chairman of the United
States Atomic Energy Commission, in 1954. There is some debate as to whether
Strauss actually meant energy from nuclear fission or not.
4. NOAA Earth System Research Laboratory. Trends in atmospheric carbon
dioxide. Available at: http://www.esrl.noaa.gov/gmd/ccgg/trends/. Accessed
March 2015.
5. IPCC, Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, Fifth Assessment report
(2014). Available at: http://www.ipcc.ch/. Accessed March 2015.
February 11, 2016 14:7 Solar Energy - 9in x 6in b2236-ch01 page 1
Chapter 1
Introduction to Solar Energy
R. Corkish,∗,† W. Lipiński‡ and R. J. Patterson∗

∗ Universityof New South Wales, Sydney 2052, Australia
† Australian Centre for Advanced Photovoltaics, Sydney 2052, Australia
‡ The Australian National University, Canberra 2601, Australia
This chapter introduces the sun as our planet’s principle and sustainable energy
source, noting its main relevant characteristics, and the history as well as pros
and cons of its energetic use. It gives a high-level overview of the various
solar energy capture and conversion technologies discussed in the book and
summarizes the economics and policy aspects.
1 What is Solar Energy?

The sun drives 99.98% of the world’s energy supply,1 including thermal,
photovoltaic, photochemical, photobiological and hybrid solar, hydro, wind,
wave, and biomass energy conversion. It originally grew the biomass that
we now access as fossil fuels. Other sources include tidal, geothermal and
nuclear.1 The sun’s energy comes from fusion reactions in its core. These
reactions have been “burning” for 4.5 billion years and are expected to
continue for another 6.5 billion years. The total power radiated out into
space by the sun is about 3.86 × 1026 W. Since the sun is approximately
1.5 × 1011 m from the earth, and because the earth is about 6.3 × 106 m in
radius, it intercepts only 0.000000045% of this power.2 This still amounts
to a massive 1.75 × 1017 W.
Most of this radiation is in the visible and infrared part of the electro-
magnetic spectrum, with less than 1% emitted in the radio, UV and X-ray
spectral bands.
The sun’s electromagnetic radiation approximates that of a black body
with a temperature around 5778 K, with its peak in the yellow range of the
visible spectrum. This is sometimes “rounded up” to 6000 K for simplicity.3
1
2 R. Corkish, W. Lipiński & R. J. Patterson
Fig. 1. The AM0 spectrum of solar radiation, as would be observed at the top of the
earth’s atmosphere. The spectral irradiance is shown as a function of photon wavelength
(left) and photon energy (right). The spectral regions are indicated. Image credit: Prof.
Pietro Altermatt.5
Figure 1 shows the spectrum of radiation from ultraviolet to infrared, as

seen outside the earth’s surface. This standard “AM0” spectrum4 is that
used to model and predict and qualify solar cells for use in space. The
“AM” in the name refers to the “air mass”, the thickness of terrestrial
atmosphere through which the radiation has passed before it is observed,
in this case zero.
The solar radiation that reaches the earth is reduced in intensity and
the spectrum is changed by absorption and scattering as it passes through
the atmosphere, and by reflection from the surface.6 Scattering means that
radiation reaches a receiver not only directly from the visible solar disk but
also from the rest of the sky. Standard spectra and models have been derived
for use in simulations and estimations.7 For example, tables presented in
ASTM Standard G1738 are commonly used to represent terrestrial solar
radiation in two forms (see Fig. 2):
1. AM1.5D: Direct Normal Incidence radiation is that received on earth

directly from the solar disk, as would be received by a concentrating col-
lector. The total integrated irradiances for the standard direct spectrum
is 900.1 Wm−2 ;
2. AM1.5G: Hemispherical on 37◦ Tilted Surface radiation adds the direct
radiation and the scattered diffuse radiation to yield the hemispher-
ical or global radiation, impinging on a sun-facing 37◦ -tilted surface,
useful for modeling flat plate (non-concentrating) collectors. The total
integrated irradiances for the standard hemispherical tilted spectrum is
1000.4 Wm−2 .
Introduction to Solar Energy 3
Fig. 2. AM1.5 global (AM1.5G) and direct normal (AM1.5D) standard terrestrial solar
and their relative difference as a function of wavelength. Image credit: Prof. Pietro
Altermatt.11
Note that there are many narrow and broad notches9 in these spec-
tra, resulting from absorption by particular atmospheric gas and vapor
molecules. The atmosphere is opaque to ultraviolet radiation with wave-
lengths less than approximately 300 nm due to absorption by molecules
such as H2 , O2 , and N2 . In the near-UV spectral range the main absorber
is ozone, which also impacts on the visible range (380–780 nm), as do NO2
and water vapor. Water vapor also introduces several broad absorption
bands in the infrared range and carbon dioxide and oxygen also have an
effect.10
The long-term average of the total solar irradiance at the average dis-
tance of the earth’s orbit, one Astronomical Unit of 1.4959787066 × 1011 m,
is called the solar constant, S. Its reference value12 is 1366.1 Wm−2 .
Actually, the “solar constant” is not constant but varies by ±3% due to
the earth’s elliptical orbit. There is an additional variation of about ±0.1%
in the solar constant which is due to a variation in the total luminosity of
the sun itself over the 11-year solar cycle. Researchers have tried to model
this variation over the last 400 years by correlation with recorded sunspot
numbers, suggesting that the sun may have varied in its power output by
up to 1%.2
When diurnal and seasonal variations are taken into account, approxi-
mately 342 W is available for every square meter of earth’s surface.13 This
equates to an annual energy input14 of 5.46 × 1024 J. About 29% is reflected
back to space by clouds, atmospheric particles or ground surfaces. About
23% of intercepted solar energy is absorbed in the atmosphere and 48%
passes through to be absorbed by the surface.15
The geographical distribution of solar radiation reaching the earth’s
surface is studied and monitored extensively and satellite-derived estimates
are available for the whole globe.16 Detailed mapping resources for USA
and Australia, for example, are provided by the National Renewable Energy
Laboratory17 and the Bureau of Meteorology.18 Free online maps for the
world and many of its regions are provided by SolarGIS.19
As might be expected, there tends to be less solar radiation towards
the poles and cloudiness around the equator reduces the radiation reaching
the ground there, leading to the regions of highest insolation being found
in the high tropical and low temperate latitudes.
Measurements of solar radiation are made at many sites globally20 with
calibrated pyrheliometers,21 the most sophisticated of which use shadow
bands to measure separately the diffuse and direct components. Histori-
cal data and long-term averages are available through various databases,
including the World Radiation Data Centre22 and the World Radiation
Monitoring Center (WRMC), which maintain the central archive of the
Baseline Surface Radiation Network (BSRN).23 The directly measured data
is of limited use to engineers to design solar energy collection systems and
it undergoes considerable processing to generate useful formats such as typ-
ical meteorological year (TMY) or monthly average daily global radiation
on a horizontal surface.24
Additionally, solar radiation is estimated from satellite-based instru-
ments.25,26 For example, the NASA Atmospheric Science Data Center16
provides long-term estimates of surface solar energy flux for 1◦ longitude
by 1◦ latitude grid covering the entire globe. The data is readily accessible
via the freely available RETScreen Clean Energy Management Software
system.27
2 Advantages and Disadvantages Associated

with Solar Energy Use
Solar energy has several major advantages when compared with other
sources. The resource is distributed, though unequally, to every location
on the globe. The resource is abundant, to the extent that many countries
February 11, 2016
14:7
Solar Energy - 9in x 6in
Introduction to Solar Energy
b2236-ch01
Fig. 3. Global solar radiation over the land surfaces of the world. Reprinted with permission from SolarGIS Global Horizontal Irradiation

c 2014 GeoModel Solar.
page 5
have far more than they need to supply their energy needs from solar alone.
It is effectively renewable on a human timescale, since the sun is expected to
maintain similar production of its essential radiation at about the current
rate for billions of years before eventually cooling to become a red giant.28
Arguably, untraded solar energy already dominates the global energy
supply as it grows our forests and crops that provide basic energy services to
a large fraction of the world’s population, warms our passive solar buildings,
evaporates seawater to produce our industrial salt supply and even dries
our crops, clothes and fuels outdoors.
Collection and conversion to various useful energy forms is generally
quiet and clean, with little or no local pollution from operation, including
greenhouse gas pollution. Solar energy generally offers very low risk to pub-
lic or operator safety and therefore, the location of solar energy plants can
be flexible. Its use at large industrial scales is believed to be environmentally
benign.
Where it is accessible through relatively clear skies, sunlight may be
concentrated up to a theoretical maximum of 46,300 times.29 This corre-
sponds to catching all the light leaving a unit area of the solar surface and
generating its optical image on the surface of a terrestrial absorber, which
would require a vast elliptical reflector with the sun and the earth at the
foci. Note that while this book is concerned with solar energy, ultimately
it is exergy, a measure of the useful work it is possible to extract from an
energy flow, that is of greater interest.29 Higher concentration of sunlight
permits lower exergy destruction in conversion stages so it allows more effi-
cient conversion of solar energy to useful forms such as mechanical work,
electricity, chemical fuels or high-temperature process heat. Conversion of
non- or low-concentrated solar radiation has less strict requirements for
dynamic alignment of the collectors towards the sun, as compared with
concentrating solar applications, and such types of photovoltaic or solar
thermal receivers are appropriate for urban installation. Many forms of
solar energy conversion are small in scale and modular, so there are low
barriers to incremental introduction.
On the other hand, solar energy also has disadvantages. It is much
more diffuse than, for example, fossil or nuclear fuels, so large surface areas
are required to collect large quantities of energy. At any given location on
earth, the intensity and spectrum of sunlight varies in both predictable
and less predictable ways, introducing intermittency of supply. The tilt of
the earth’s axis means seasonal changes in solar radiation availability, with
changes in the extent of daylight and the apparent elevation of the sun
in the sky. The elevation varies the thickness of “air mass” through which
the sunlight passes to reach the earth’s surface, affecting its intensity and
spectrum. Less predictably, clouds and atmospheric aerosols, such as dust
and smoke, reduce intensity and modify the spectrum. Technical responses
to intermittency30 include using solar energy as a “fuel saver” in fossil fueled
networks, hybridization of systems with multiple solar or other renewable or
non-renewable sources, coupled energy storage, the topic of another volume
in this series, and the proposed collection of solar energy from orbiting
power stations that then transmit to earth.31 Some forms of solar energy
collection and conversion, such as biomass and the domestic solar water
heater, are relatively easily coupled to storage but it can be expensive and
difficult for other forms.
Another disadvantage is geographic specificity. Economic introduction
of solar energy to existing energy distribution systems needs to conform
to existing infrastructure that was built around competing energy sources.
For example, the optimal location of large extra-urban solar power stations
requires access to existing electricity grid infrastructure with capacity to
accept the solar supply, collocated with available, un-conflicted and low-
cost land and high solar radiation.
Finally, there is a large array of solar energy conversion technologies,
some simple and some technically complex, that, while together competing
with established fossil and nuclear energy, also compete with each other.
Researchers in all areas offer promise of better, cheaper technologies. Some
investors are bewildered by the range choice and refrain altogether, awaiting
clarity to avoid “betting on the wrong horse” and for the promised future
technologies to become available. However, great attention is now being
paid to this and good quality advice is available.32,33 Some forms of solar
energy conversion have traditionally been much more expensive than fossil
fuel use, so long as economic externalities are excluded, but, at least for
non-concentrating photovoltaics, this is now changing.34 Funds are increas-
ing flowing out of the incumbent technologies and into solar.35 Large-scale
adoption of solar energy will necessarily require large amounts of de-risked
capital, requiring the solar energy industries to pay great attention to sys-
tems quality and performance prediction and monitoring.
3 History of Solar Energy Use

Solar energy has long supported humanity, with at least two forms, pas-
sive solar energy and biomass fuel use. Thus solar energy has been our
partner throughout the progress of mankind. The growth of agriculture

in the sunny “cradle of civilization” played a critical role in the develop-
ment of civilization.36 People have used the sun for drying crops, bricks,
etc. since prehistoric times. The first known crop drying installation has
been found in France and dates from around 8000 BC.37 There is evi-
dence from around the world of dryer development in many civilizations
and this relatively simple solar technology continues to change lives and
economies for the better, even today, in remote locations all over the
planet.38
The US Department of Energy timeline provides a series of important
historical milestones for solar energy.39 Butti and Perlin40 describe that his-
tory, beginning with ancient classical Greek and Roman over-consumption
of biomass and including the passive solar dwelling and city design. In the
case of the Roman Empire, the architect Vitruvius recommended different
passive solar building designs for different latitudes, outlining principles
that are still applied today. Solar access rights for buildings were included
in the Justinian Code of law in the sixth century AD. Both ancient Greek
and Chinese cultures developed concentrating solar reflectors to generate
high temperature ignition for religious, civil and military purposes. “Burn-
ing mirrors” have since then been designed and used by many cultures
through the centuries. Glazed heat traps in buildings were developed by
the Romans and the idea was revived much later in Europe as the conser-
vatory or greenhouse for horticulture of plants outside their natural ranges
or out of season.
The commercial availability of the Climax Solar Water Heater at the
end of the 19th century in the USA initiated the mass availability of afford-
able solar domestic heating of water that has continued to drive the devel-
opment of flat plate and evacuated tube heaters ever since. The harnessing
of the sun for mechanical power began at least as early as the 1st century
AD with solar water syphons built in Alexandria. The invention of the first
solar steam engine has been attributed to Augustin Mouchot in France in
1866. He went on to develop solar cooking ovens and solar thermoelectric
generators. The early 20th century saw an explosion of applications for
solar engines for water pumping and other remote energy applications in
the American west and elsewhere.40
Three main forms of concentrator have been developed to generate
either high temperatures in solar thermal collectors or high conversion effi-
ciencies in photovoltaic collectors: parabolic troughs that focus light onto a
line, parabolic dishes that focus light onto a point and arrays of heliostats
focusing onto a central receiver mounted on a tower. Concentrating solar
power has been developed significantly since the oil shocks of the 1970s,
principally in the US, Spain, Australia, and Israel. “Solar One”, a 10 MW
central-receiver demonstration project which opened in the US in 1982,
was the first of several large solar concentrators constructed in the modern
phase of growth to establish feasibility. It generated steam to drive a tur-
bine for electricity generation. Solar One was expanded and upgraded to
Solar Two in 1995, including molten salt thermal energy storage.
There are several good histories documenting the beginnings of photo-
voltaics, among them that by Crossley et al.41 The French scientist Edmond
Becquerel discovered the photovoltaic effect in an experimental photoelec-
trochemical setup in 1839.42 At that time it was not possible to distin-
guish between chemical and photoelectric effects and the explanation of
these experiments was originally in terms of chemistry. It was not until
1914 that Goldmann and Brodsky43 made a photoelectric interpretation.
In the 1870s, William Gryllis Adams and R.E. Day investigated “whether it
would be possible to start a current in the selenium merely by the action of
light ”. The result was positive, “clearly proving that by the action of light
alone we could start and maintain an electrical current in the selenium”.
They did not, however, understand the processes at work in their devices,
explaining the voltage as being due to extra light-induced crystallization
in the material. Charles Fritts44 foresaw great potential for solar power
from selenium photovoltaics. There were at least four American manufac-
turers of selenium photovoltaic cells by 1949. Copper–cuprous oxide cells
were also under investigation since 191745 and there was intense rivalry
between groups in Germany and USA through the 1920s, when copper-
based cells were commercialized. The photovoltaic effect was found in ger-
manium in 1944 in USA but all of these materials were eclipsed by the
success of silicon as a photovoltaic material. Russel Ohl of Bell Laborato-
ries filed patents in 1941 that were granted in 1946 and 1948 for the p–n
junction photovoltaic effect in silicon and markets gradually grew for terres-
trial and space applications. Silicon underpinned the development of serious
and significant application of photovoltaics but cells based on alternative
materials, cadmium–telluride, copper–indium–gallium–diselenide and III-V
semiconductors (i.e. compounds of elements from Groups III and V of the
Periodic Table), have also been developed and commercialized in the late
20th century.
4 Modern Applications of Solar Energy

Methods to collect solar energy and convert it to useful forms range from
the simple and traditional to modern and highly sophisticated. Outputs
include low grade heat, high temperature industrial process heat, hydrogen,
synthesis gas, synthetic hydrocarbons and other chemical energy carriers
such as ammonia and metals, and intermittent or dispatchable electricity.
These technologies are all at different developmental stages and associated
cost of energy. We introduce a range of them in this section before they are
treated in detail in the following chapters.
4.1 Photovoltaics for Large-Scale Electricity Production

Photovoltaics have undergone continual development in the decades since
1950s until silicon and cadmium telluride photovoltaics now present a cred-
ible challenge to fossil fuels and are one of the most promising methods
to continue to provide electrical services to society in a carbon-challenged
world. Government support programs for photovoltaics integration into
electricity grids, most importantly and effectively in Japan and then
Germany in the late 20th century, initiated the recent boom in demand
and consequent mass production. Research associated with those programs
solved the major safety concern about potential creation of live “islands”
in otherwise closed grids and power quality and utility scale photovoltaics
installations sprang up in many countries to compete with the incumbent
wholesale electricity generators (see Fig. 4). The output of these systems
is not associated with particular consumers. These systems are normally
24 ground-mounted and independent of nearby activities. The International
Energy Agency’s Photovoltaic Power Systems Programme (IEA PVPS)46
tracks the different categories of installations in its 24 member countries.
Such systems have been particularly popular in China and USA, where
their installed new capacity exceeds that for decentralized grid connected
systems. The main market for utility scale systems has shifted from Europe
to Asia in recent years.
Perhaps the most significant challenge to future growth of this mar-
ket segment is the growing resistance of electricity utilities and influential
incumbent generators. Costs of large systems are generally lower than for
small distributed systems but they also compete for a lower price product,
bulk, wholesale electricity. Concentrating photovoltaics technologies have
continued to struggle for a significant market share for a range of well-
known reasons.47 See Chapter 3 for an in-depth discussion of large-scale
photovoltaics.
Fig. 4. Part of a 9 MW utility scale photovoltaics installation at Stone Mills, Ontario

Canada.
Photo credit: R. Corkish.
4.2 Photovoltaics for Small Scale on Homes

and Commercial Buildings
Resistance from incumbent grid managers and electricity retailers is even
more evident for smaller scale distributed grid-connected systems. These
systems, commonly on building roofs, can connect on the customer side of
consumption meters and avoid the purchase of electricity from utilities and
threaten their traditional business models (Fig. 5). Costs of these systems
are generally higher than for utility scale systems due to their smaller scale
but they compete at the retail price level. In many markets, such systems
now need to be designed for self-consumption of their output, avoiding
export to the grid, to make them economical. This is generally easier and
more valuable for commercial than for domestic loads since they tend to
be predominantly daytime demand. These are the types of systems that
were facilitated by the Japanese and German support schemes and their
followers in other countries and the IEA PVPS records show that the grid-
connected market worldwide has evolved from dominance of distributed
systems to roughly half utility scale now. The situation is patchy across the
world though, with conditions in some countries favoring small systems.
Fig. 5. House with grid-connected photovoltaics and domestic solar water heater.
Photo credit: R. Corkish.
New market segments are opening rapidly with encouragement through

innovative schemes such a leasing of rooftop systems, especially in the USA.
The household rooftop market is perhaps larger than would be justified on
strict financial grounds because some householders buy or lease solar power
systems driven by other motivations, particularly its benign environmental
image. Note that such decisions are made easier by the rapidly declining
prices of these systems in recent years.
4.3 Photovoltaics for Small-Scale Off-grid Applications

Prior to the rapid increase in the number of grid-connected systems in the
late 20th century, the sustaining markets for the photovoltaics manufactur-
ing industry were in those locations where all energy services are expensive.
These locations are usually remote from grid electricity and other services,
such as islands and rural areas. The main applications for the smaller sys-
tems, up to 1 kW, were and are water pumps, lighting and remote homes
while those for larger installations were and are for commercial or indus-
trial applications such as telecommunications repeaters, pastoral or mining
power systems or cathodic protection of pipelines. In off-grid systems, pho-

tovoltaic modules are commonly connected through a charge controller to
a battery and backup generation is also often incorporated. Water pump-
ing systems commonly operate without batteries or backup. These markets
have not gone away but now attract less attention because of the great
increase in the mass grid-connected demand, which now dwarfs the earlier
markets.46
4.4 Concentrating Solar Thermal Electricity

The concentration of the incident solar flux, for either photovoltaics or
concentrating solar thermal (CST) technologies, is limited to regions with
consistently high, direct, solar irradiation. This implies a separation from
many of the areas where people have chosen to congregate in the world.
It also demands mechanical tracking of collectors to keep them pointed
at the sun, with consequent reliability concerns. CST technologies have
had a much more positive history than has concentrating photovoltaics
and several installations have been built in Spain and the USA.48 Other
countries including China, India, and Australia have also built CST plants
mainly on a test basis and the world has approximately 3800 MW capacity
in operation with more than double that in the pipeline. The economics are
currently not as attractive as those of flat plate photovoltaics but CST has
the distinct advantage of easy coupling to relatively inexpensive storage, as
sensible or latent heat or in thermochemical conversion (see next section).
Integrated storage offers “dispatchable” energy, available on demand.
One of the main uses for CST is the generation of high temper-
atures to drive turbines for electricity generation, in both stand-alone
solar power plants and as a fuel-saving adjunct to existing fossil-fueled
power stations. Others are to drive industrial processes directly, facili-
tate endothermic chemical reactions (see Chapter 9), and provide cooling
services. Higher concentrations are required for higher temperatures and
conversion efficiencies.
Linear parabolic trough reflectors or Fresnel lenses, dishes and power
towers are all used.49 Linear focusing collectors with single-axis solar track-
ing, in north-south rows, generate medium temperatures, around 400◦ C and
organic Rankine cycle turbines convert the energy to a rotating mechanical
form to spin a generator. Paraboloidal dishes and centralized power tow-
ers need dual axis tracking and commonly have higher concentration ratios
and, hence, higher temperatures. Some dish collectors incorporate a Stirling
cycle engine at the focus. In a central tower solar thermal power plant, an
array of heliostats reflect light onto a receiver at the top of a tower. The
working fluid transports the heat to a Rankine or Brayton cycle engine on
the ground.
Solar thermal generation of electricity currently remains expensive rel-
ative to photovoltaics and to some fossil fuel technologies so it would seem
that installations in the near term are likely to be restricted to clear-sky
situations in which a premium for storage is justified. However, it remains
to be seen whether costs will come down significantly with increasing expe-
rience and larger-scale production in China and India.
4.5 Solar Thermochemical Processes

Options to reduce the impact of intermittency on concentrating solar ther-
mal plants are to store sensible or latent heat or to use it to drive endother-
mic thermochemical processes.50 The product chemicals can be transported
over long distances or stored and delivered to reformer reactors in which
heat is released in exothermic reactions. Alternatively, solar heat may be
applied to change the chemical composition of a fossil fuel to increase its
calorific content or endothermic industrial chemical conversion processes
may be directly utilized. These processes are likely to be applied only at
very large scale, and are currently at a pre-commercial stage of develop-
ment.51 This storage option has the advantage over sensible and latent heat
storage since that storage is at ambient temperature. In the case of solar-
produced fuels, significant storage capacity may be afforded by the volume
of existing reticulation systems at low cost.51 A special class of processes
are those for production of commodities such as lime, cement, ammonia,
metals, which are not obtained for energy storage purposes. However, sub-
stitution of conventional fossil-based process heat with solar heat in the
highly-endothermic reactions allows for drastic reduction in fossil energy
use, and the associated greenhouse gas emissions. There are a large number
of outstanding technical issues to be solved for this complex technology,
including reversibility, material discovery, stability and durability, reliabil-
ity and efficiency of solar-driven reactors, and aspects associated with high-
temperatures and transients. These technologies are discussed in Chapter 9.
4.6 Solar Water Heating

Solar water heating, both domestic and commercial/industrial, is so com-
mon and mainstream in many regions of today’s world that it is sometimes
overlooked as a significant renewable energy technology.52 Like non-

concentrating photovoltaics, it is a technology that is easily incorporated
into urban infrastructure and displaces imported energy services. Two main
collector technologies are already in mass production: flat plate and evacu-
ated tube. In the former, the solar radiation heats a dark metal plate and
heat is transferred to either a heat transfer fluid or directly to the water
itself. Except for very low temperature applications such as swimming pool
heating, an air gap and glazing above the plate allows higher temperatures to
be generated by the greenhouse effect (visible light passes through the glaz-
ing to the plate while upwardly directed infrared radiation from the plate
is blocked by the glass). Performance may be further improved by the use
of spectrally “selective absorber” coatings on the plate that further limit
radiative losses. Circulation of the fluid in contact with the plate can be
driven by the thermosyphon effect or by a pump if the storage tank cannot
be mounted directly above the collector, as it is in the example in Fig. 5.
The other main technology uses a double walled glass evacuated tube
in which the gap between the walls is evacuated to block heat loss by
conduction and convection.53 A spectrally selective coating is applied to the
inner wall or to a long, narrow absorber plate which allows a circulating
working fluid to be heated to higher temperatures than with flat plates.
Research into improved collectors includes the potential use of nanofluids,
fluids with suspensions of nanoparticles, for direct absorption of sunlight
by the working fluid.
A third technology in widespread use is arguably defined as a solar
water heating technology. Domestic scale heat pump water heaters entered
the mass market with ground mounted water storage tanks and roof-
mounted and sun-exposed panels to evaporate the working refrigerant. How-
ever, customer resistance to the high installation cost, including the need for
licensed refrigeration tradesmen to install and certify the necessary refriger-
ant pipework, led to the packaging of the evaporator panel wrapped around
the tank, trading reduced performance for greater market acceptance. See
Chapter 8 for further information on solar water heating.
4.7 Passive Heating of Buildings and Solar Architecture

As has already been outlined in Sec. 3 of this Introduction, the deliberate
and designed-in use of solar radiation has an extremely long history. The
idea had a strong resurgence of interest and application following the two
oil price shocks in the 1970s and passive solar architecture was codified and
specialized for climate zones to a much greater extent than had previously
been done.54 The basic principles of Glass, thermal Mass and Insulation
(GMI) are simple and clear and essentially the same as in ancient times
but the necessary compromises in their application to different climate
regions and for seasonal and diurnal variations requires careful and sub-
tle engineering. Passive solar building design became less popular during
the 1990s with lower fossil fuel costs but the old ideas together with new
developments are experiencing resurgence. Various rating schemes55 exist
around the world and there are numerous regional schemes for mandating
or, at least encouraging, more efficient building design and operation. This
is discussed further in Chapter 8.
4.8 Evaporative Cooling

Like domestic solar water heating, evaporative cooling is a solar technology
that has achieved mass market acceptance and is sometimes overlooked as
a contribution of solar energy to human comfort and convenience. Evapora-
tive cooling is a ubiquitous air conditioning choice in many of the less humid
climate zones of the world. It works by using solar-heated ambient warmth
to extract heat from a fan-forced flow of air by the latent heat of evapora-
tion of water. Even more simply, passive forms rely on prevailing wind to
blow air across ponds. It is the technology that supports the cooling towers
prevalent in commercial/industrial air conditioning and industrial cooling
and in fossil fueled and nuclear generation of electricity so it may be seen
that evaporative cooling makes a huge contribution to human energy ser-
vices but is generally excluded from renewable energy statistics.
The state of the art of evaporative cooling is described in Chapter 8 of
this volume.
4.9 Biomass and Biofuels

Modern application of biomass and biofuels encompasses a wide range of
technologies from efficient cook stoves, mass-scale pelletization of wood and
waste materials, the capture and combustion for electricity generation of
methane from decaying municipal waste (landfill gas), to the highly techni-
cal production of liquid fuels from agricultural and forestry crops or wastes,
organic municipal waste, and cultivated algae for the subsequent extraction
of oil.
The use of liquid biomass fuels has entered the mass market in some
regions of the world, most notably in Brazil with sugar-derived ethanol
powering a large part of the car transport there. Competition for arable
land and water resources between energy production and food production is
highly controversial. Also controversial is the ongoing debate about whether
the optimal energy carrier for transportation is a liquid or gaseous biofuel or
solar generated electricity.56 Of particular interest here is the prospects for
future air travel that is independent or at least less dependent on fossil fuels.
The options in a carbon-constrained world, given the vast fertile land areas
that would be required to produce sufficient biofuels, seem to be limited.
In a very different arena, biofuels from wastes or from low-value crops such
as copra57 may help underpin energy self sufficiency in some remote but
fertile parts of the world, such as some Pacific Island Nations but, here too,
competition with food production will be relevant.
4.10 Artificial Photosynthesis

The solar-driven photocatalytic production of hydrogen or hydrocarbon
fuels by reduction of H2 O and CO2 into hydrocarbon fuels, is an extremely
attractive path for energy collection. These artificial processes simulate
natural photosynthesis in green plants and are therefore termed artificial
photosynthesis. This pairs CO2 fixation with water oxidation in a carbon-
neutral cycle, thereby diverting or removing problematic CO2 from the
atmosphere and generating a storable and transportable fuel.58 However,
no commercially viable system based on earth-abundant elements has yet
emerged, despite an intense research effort over decades and experimen-
tation with a very large range of materials and structures.58,59 Conversion
efficiencies are still low. Advances in all the areas of catalysis, semiconductor
physics and engineering, surface chemistry, photocatalysis, and nanotech-
nology are needed. Nevertheless, there remain promising avenues and the
desirability of “green” fuel production, absolutely necessary for some of
the services, including air transport, on which modern life depends and
the additional benefit of CO2 sequestration mean that research in this field
will continue to be critically important. Chapter 6 in this volume explores
this field in depth, outlining the challenges and the most likely paths
forward.
5 Economics of Solar Energy Use

We write at a time when some solar energy technologies, most spectac-
ularly photovoltaics, are fulfilling their long-term promise to reduce costs
and prices to the point of credible direct competition with fossil and nuclear
Fig. 6. Historic price reductions and the so-called “PV experience curve” for PV cells.61
fuelled electricity generation. For example, prices in the USA of residential

and commercial PV systems fell, on average, 6–7% per annum from 1998–
2013 and then rapidly, by 12–14% per year from 2012–2013. An additional
3–12% decrease is expected in 2014.48,60 The ranges account for different
market dynamics and cost structures for systems of different sizes. Much
of the historical cost decrease has resulted from cost reductions in cell and
module production, following a beneficial “experience curve” (Fig. 6),61
which may flatten in the near term as the industry recovers from overca-
pacity resulting from the global financial crisis. However, drops in balance
of system components and installation methods and soft costs62 (including
the non-hardware costs such as sales and marketing, financing, contracting,
permitting, grid connection inspection, installation and O&M) are likely
to allow the system price to continue falling. USA prices for installed pho-
tovoltaic systems have been reported to be more than twice the price in
Germany, for instance,60 suggesting the potential for significant reductions
in the USA.
To compare the economics of different electricity generation technolo-
gies it is necessary to estimate the cost of the energy produced. Lev-
elized cost of energy (LCOE), is defined as the long-run marginal cost
of electricity generation, based on capital, fixed and variable, operations
and maintenance, and fuel costs. Many studies have been carried out
to compare and rank energy generation technologies, particularly in the
form of electricity, in various regions.32,63,64 Many of these studies tend

to ignore the cost of delivering the energy to consumers so the advan-
tage for rooftop photovoltaics (and solar hot water) of siting directly at
the load is commonly neglected. LCOE values of electricity generated from
solar radiation also vary with intensity of sunlight, so they vary region-
ally. The best regarded photovoltaics industry roadmap61 projects a 41%
decrease in LCOE between 2013 and 2024, from a base, for large systems, of
0.056 USD/kWh (sunny regions) and 0.111 USD/kWh for places with half
as much solar radiation. An Australian study64 estimated (updated esti-
mates in 2013 for 2012) a large range of LCOE for fixed-tilt photovoltaics
from about 0.16 to 0.27 USD/kWh and 0.03 to 0.13 USD/kWh under dif-
ferent sets of assumptions. A report from a consultancy, Lazard, estimated
for the US ranges of 0.18–0.265 USD/kWh for rooftop residential installa-
tions, 0.126–0.177 USD/KWh for commercial and industrial systems and
0.072–0.086 USD/KWh for utility scale.32
Costs for concentrated solar thermal generated electricity are less well
defined since the market is still small and many projects are “proof of
concept” or experimental. This technology shares with concentrated solar
photovoltaics many barriers to reaching commercial markets, clearly out-
lined more than a decade ago including restriction to clear-sky regions
that, commonly are remote from human habitation (although the energy
transmission costs are at least partly balanced by low land cost), the lack
of markets for small-scale initial installations to build cash flow, incon-
sistent government policies, negative perceptions, competition from flat-
plate photovoltaics and direct competition from fossil fuel power plants.47
Nevertheless, estimates for LCOE from solar thermal electricity are still
reasonably attractive and projected to fall. The Australian study men-
tioned above found that LCOE for solar thermal electricity without storage
was in the range 0.21–0.35 USD/kWh and slightly higher for systems with
storage in 2012 (updated in 2013)63 and projected a very wide range on
0.05–0.26 USD/kWh in 2050. However, the same study found that coupling
solar thermal to existing fossil-fueled power plants as fuel savers offers much
more competitive prices.65 Another estimate, for the US, estimated LCOE
for concentrated thermal electricity with storage at 0.118–0.13 USD/kWh
currently.
Low temperature water heating has contributed massively to CO2 sav-
ings, particularly in China and Europe.66 The economics are complex,
depending on solar radiation, water usage patterns, local energy prices,
government support, type of solar water heater, etc. A comprehensive study
of domestic solar water heater performance in the contiguous states of the

USA67 found a wide range of break-even prices, varying by a factor of five.
The large variation is mainly due to varying incentives and electricity prices.
The study predicts energy savings of 1600–2600 kWh per year for typical
households, with annual electric bill savings of about 100 USD to more than
300 USD.
Solar energy technologies producing electricity must compete either
with systems supplying the grid, or, for systems at the location of the
consumer, with electricity produced by fossil fuels or nuclear fission. The
reports mentioned in Sec. 5.132,63 are examples of studies that compare
a wide range of energy generation technologies, assuming competition at
the wholesale level, for the conditions pertaining to a particular country.
Others have used a global approach.48 Since they tend to use different sets
of assumptions, care must be taken in comparing their results but internal
consistency appears to have been sought in each case.
The World Energy Council48 concluded that LCOE for electricity from
silicon-based photovoltaics varies widely across the world, with lower costs
in China and India relative to Western Europe, the US and Japan. This
study used LCOE data for actual projects collected quarterly from across
the globe. It noted that the cost of finance varies by technology and loca-
tion and this has a significant effect on LCOE, as do resource availabil-
ity and siting. These wide, extremely wide for some technologies, ranges
(Fig. 7) make it challenging to draw conclusions for the whole world since
there is a great deal of overlap in the ranges of LCOE for competing tech-
nologies. However, Fig. 7 also includes weighted averages, denoted “cen-
tral”. We can see that, on average and for the set of assumptions adopted,
photovoltaics for bulk power generation are not yet cheaper than coal or
combined cycle gas turbine, large hydro or nuclear electricity generation
but it can be in some cases. However, prices for photovoltaics are drop-
ping rapidly compared to the current incumbent generators34,60 and pho-
tovoltaics competes at retail, not wholesale, rates in rooftop systems. The
balance is likely to be further tipped against the fossil fuel technologies by
increasing divestment for financial and ethical motivations.35,68 Other solar
and renewable energy technologies, currently cheaper, will ally with photo-
voltaics to minimize intermittency and reduce carbon emissions: Examples
are small hydro, anaerobic biomass digestion and biomass combustion (see
Chapter 5 of this volume), landfill gas, geothermal and onshore wind. All
the concentrating solar thermal technologies tend to be more expensive at
present.
Fig. 7. Global levelized cost of energy (USD/MWh) for the second quarter of 2013
(Used by permission of the World Energy Council, London, www.worldenergy.org).
6 Social and Policy Aspects

Solar energy advancement in recent years has been underpinned by var-
ious forms of support from governments and, occasionally, utilities. The
policies have tended to be both variable between countries and in a contin-
uous state of uncertainty and change. Motivations for policies encouraging
solar energy use have included environmental concerns and the support of
fledgling industries likely to be important in the future and therefore to
generate local jobs. In the case of grid connected solar energy, utilities have
the duty to ensure electrical power quality and may see benefits or be man-
dated to facilitate the connection of distributed solar electricity generators.
Related regulations can be used to control, encourage or inhibit the grow-
ing penetration of solar technologies. Standards and accreditation schemes
generally enhance quality and performance but at some compliance cost.
IEA PVPS tracks photovoltaics policy changes across its member
nations each year and summarizes the situation in its trends report (Fig. 8).
The schemes used to support photovoltaics are similar to those for solar
energy generally.46,69 The most widespread support scheme is the feed-in
tariff (FiT),70 in which electricity produced from a photovoltaic system and
supplied to the grid is paid for at a predefined price and guaranteed during
a stated period. The most successful applications of FiT systems have been
in China, Germany, Italy (until 2013) and Japan. The cost can be sup-
ported from tax income or by a levy on all or most electricity consumers in
the network. Setting correct levels for FiT schemes or limiting the overall
financial value or otherwise regulating the market, especially in the con-
text of rapidly falling prices for photovoltaics, is critical. Too-generous FiT
rates caused unsustainable market booms in Spain in 2008, in the Czech
Republic in 2010, in Italy in 2011, and in many other jurisdictions.
FIT WITH TENDER, 4%

INCENTIVIZED
NET-METERING, 3%
SELF-CONSUMPION AND FEED IN
PURE COMPETIVE PV, 4% TARIFFS, 70%
DIRECT SUBSIDIES
AND TAX BREAKS, 16%
RPS AND SIMILAR

QUOTA-BASED
SCHEMES, 3%
Fig. 8. Market incentives and enablers in 2013 for photovoltaics, in terms of drivers of
market share. (Used with permission of International Energy Agency Photovoltaic Power
Systems Programme (IEA PVPS)).
Direct capital subsidies aimed at reducing the upfront investment rep-

resented around 16% of the incentives in 2013. These subsidies are derived
from taxation and may support grid or off-grid applications. They have
been used, among others, in Australia, Belgium, Sweden, Japan, the USA,
Italy, and China. Tax credits are a special form of direct subsidy. Tax cred-
its have been used in Canada, the USA, Belgium (until 2010), Switzerland,
France, Japan, the Netherlands, and other countries.
Renewable Portfolio Standard (RPS) and related approaches mandate
a share of electricity to be produced by specific sources that utilities must
use, either by producing it themselves or by buying certificates. These cer-
tificates allow renewable electricity producers to get a market-based remu-
neration for their output to the grid.
Sustainable building regulations are an important motivator for uptake
of photovoltaics, solar thermal water heating and passive solar construction.
These solar technologies may be included in a suite of options for reducing
the energy footprint of a new building or could be specifically mandated
for new buildings.
The declining cost of distributed generation has allowed it to com-
pete directly with retail electricity from the grid. Several jurisdictions have
permitted schemes allowing local consumption (self-consumption or net-
metering) of locally produced electricity. These allow reduction of imported
electricity and the related cost for the system owner, on site or even, occa-
sionally, between distant sites. Solar generated electricity can be consumed
by the PV system owner, reducing the electricity bill and any excess elec-
tricity can then be exported to the grid. This system was used, for exam-
ple, in Germany until 2012. Many regions encouraged self-consumption
by funding a bonus above the retail electricity price. Several methods are
used to price the excess electricity sent to the grid: injected electricity is
not paid; excess electricity is paid at the market price, with or without
a bonus; a FiT remunerates the excess electricity at a pre-defined price,
either lower or higher than the retail price of electricity; and net-metering,
sometimes with either incentives or taxes. Export to the grid is expressly
forbidden in some cases, with requirements for expensive equipment to
block it.
Since 2012 opposition from utilities and grid operators grew against
net-metering and FiT schemes. In situations where both improved energy
efficiency and increased solar energy penetration have reduced demand
for fossil-fueled electricity to the extent that incumbent generators fear
that their assets may be stranded, all forms of support for solar energy
integration are being questioned.71 In many cases, electricity companies

have been allowed to levy fees on connection of photovoltaic systems since
they need to have grid capacity available both to accept the photovoltaic
generation and to provide back-up. The estimation of a fair value for such
charges is highly controversial.72 Several regulators in Europe and elsewhere
are expected to introduce capacity-based tariffs rather than energy-based
tariffs for grid costs. This could discourage both solar energy production and
energy efficiency and delay solar energy’s competitiveness in some countries.
Support in many areas has recently been reduced or withdrawn altogether,
sometimes even retrospectively. These regulatory changes have motivated
both system designs to minimize generation at times with likely low load73
as well as the use local battery storage.74
Carbon taxes, introduced in various forms in several jurisdictions, have
tended to have a rather limited impact on solar energy production since
these incentives have operated directly at the wholesale energy market
level, where lower cost options are frequently available (see Fig. 7). While
the foregoing discussion has focused on grid-connected solar electricity gen-
eration, Zhang75 has assessed the impact of World Bank policies on the
encouragement of photovoltaics uptake in developing countries since the
1990s. The World Bank contributed USD790 million over the period 1992–
2009 to the promotion of small-scale solar home systems in 34 developing
countries. The results have been mixed and many barriers have been iden-
tified. The study found that using output-based producer subsidies and
relying on microfinance for consumers, have been effective in encouraging
the uptake of solar home systems. The World Bank experience suggests
that power grid development can be leapfrogged by solar home systems for
households with access to good microfinance services.
The rapid fall in prices for some forms of renewable energy generation
are beneficial but have raised some serious challenges for policy makers.76
These include:
• Rapidly falling costs have made it difficult to set public sector support
at optimal levels;
• Some support schemes have proven to be relatively expensive burdens
for consumers and/or tax-payers;
• Unanticipated competition between distributed and incumbent
generators;
• Growing levels of intermittent generation are providing technical chal-
lenges for grid operators.
The International Renewable Energy Agency has developed a set of

policy directions to address these issues in different contexts.
7 Summary/Conclusions
Solar energy is on the verge of a massive boom. Together with wind energy,
it directly challenges the incumbent dominant forms of traded energy, fos-
sil and nuclear. This chapter outlines the rapidly improving economics of
solar energy, particularly, flat-plate photovoltaics, in an inexorable march
towards dominant market share as global concern grows about the impact
of atmospheric carbon on climate change. We are already seeing the begin-
nings of divestment of fossil fuelled energy by influential investors, as fears
grow about stranded assets. The chapter also addresses the policy envi-
ronment that has encouraged the development of solar energy in recent
decades. However, some of these policies are under threat as energy com-
panies, especially in the areas of electricity transmission and distribution,
realize the challenge posed by solar to their traditional business models and
learn to adjust those models to include distributed generation.
This volume describes the recent advances and current status of a
wide range of approaches to capturing and exploiting solar energy to serve
humanity’s needs. It is a timely summary of the technologies becoming
mature and breaking into the current markets as well as those still in the
R&D realm. In spite of many challenges ahead, solar energy is likely to
dominate traded human energy soon, as it has always dominated untraded
energy.
References
1. K. Hubbert, Sci. Amer. 225 (1971), p. 61.
2. J. Kennewell and A. McDonald, The Solar Constant (2015). Available at:
http://www.ips.gov.au/Educational/2/1/12. Accessed 15 August 2015.
3. P. Altermatt, Comparison with Blackbody Radiation — Plancks Law, Alter-
matt Lecture: The Solar Spectrum (2012). Available at: www.pvlighthouse.
com.au/resources/courses/altermatt/The%20Solar%20Spectrum/Comparison
%20with%20blackbody%20radiation%20-%20Plancks%20law.aspx. Accessed
29 September 2014.
4. ASTM, 2000 ASTM Standard Extraterrestrial Spectrum Reference E-490-
00, Solar Spectra: Air Mass Zero, Renewable Resource Data Center (2000).
Available at: http://rredc.nrel.gov/solar/spectra/am0/. Accessed 29 Septem-
ber 2014.
5. P. Altermatt, The extraterrestrial (AM0) solar spectrum, Altermatt Lec-
ture: The Solar Spectrum (2012). Available at: www.pvlighthouse.com.au/
resources/courses/altermatt/The%20Solar%20Spectrum/The%20extraterres-
trial%20%28AM0%29%20solar%20spectrum.aspx. Accessed 29 September
2014.
6. P. Altermatt, The influences of Earth’s atmosphere on the solar spec-
trum, Altermatt Lecture: The Solar Spectrum (2012). Available at: www.pv-
lighthouse.com.au/resources/courses/altermatt/The%20Solar%20Spectrum/
The%20influences%20of%20Earths%20atmosphere%20on%20the%20solar%
20spectrum.aspx. Accessed 29 September 2014.
7. RReDC Solar spectra, Renewable Resource Data Center (RReDC) (2000).
Available at: http://rredc.nrel.gov/solar/spectra/. Accessed 29 September
2014.
8. ASTM, Standard tables for reference solar spectral irradiances: direct normal
and hemispherical on 37◦ tilted surface, ASTM International (2012). Avail-
able at: http://www.astm.org/Standards/G173.htm. Accessed 29 September
2014.
9. P. Altermatt, Two mechanisms for atmospheric absorption of sunlight, Alter-
matt Lecture: The Solar Spectrum (2012). Available at: www.pvlighthouse.
com.au/resources/courses/altermatt/The%20Solar%20Spectrum/Two%20
mechanisms%20for%20atmospheric%20absorption%20of%20sunlight.aspx.
Accessed 29 September 2014.
10. P. Altermatt, Atmospheric absorption — an overview, Altermatt Lec-
resources/courses/altermatt/The%20Solar%20Spectrum/Atmospheric%20ab-
sorption%20-%20an%20overview.aspx. Accessed 29 September 2014.
11. P. Altermatt, The global standard spectrum (AM1.5g), Altermatt Lec-
resources/courses/altermatt/The%20Solar%20Spectrum/The%20global%20
standard%20spectrum%20%28AM1-5g%29.aspx. Accessed 29 September 2014.
12. ASTM (2014). Standard Solar Constant and Zero Air Mass Solar Spectral
Irradiance Tables (ASTM International, 2014).
13. NASA, The balance of power in the earth–sun system, NASA Fact
Sheet FS-2005-9-074-GSFC (2005). Available at: http://www.nasa.gov/pdf/
135642main balance trifold21.pdf. Accessed 28 September 2014.
14. W. Shepherd and D. W. Shepherd, Energy Studies, 2nd edn. (Imperial College
Press, London, 2003).
15. NASA, Earth’s energy budget (2014). Available at: http://earthobservatory.
nasa.gov/Features/EnergyBalance/page4.php. Accessed 28 September 2014.
16. NASA, Surface meteorology and Solar Energy. A renewable energy resource
web site (release 6.0) (2014). Available at: https://eosweb.larc.nasa.gov/sse/.
17. NREL, Solar Maps (2013). Available at: http://www.nrel.gov/gis/solar.html.
18. BOM Daily solar exposure for Australia (2015). Available at: www.bom.gov.
au/jsp/awap/solar/index.jsp Accessed 15 August 2015.
19. SolarGIS, Free download of solar radiation maps: global horizontal irradia-
tion (GHI), SolarGIS (2013). Available at: http://solargis.info/doc/free-solar-
radiation-maps-GHI. Accessed 29 September 2014.
20. WRDC, The world radiometric network (1964–1993), WRDC Online Archive
(2014). Available at: http://wrdc-mgo.nrel.gov/html/mapap.html. Accessed
29 September 2014.
21. M. Iqbal, An Introduction to Solar Radiation (Academic, Toronto, 1983).
22. WRDC, WRDC online archive (2014). Available at: http://wrdc-mgo.nrel.
gov/. Accessed 29 September 2014.
23. WRMC, Baseline surface radiation network (2014). Available at: www.bsrn.
awi.de/. Accessed 11 November 2014.
24. Anon, Solar radiation data for Australian sites, EcoGeneration (2012).
Available at: http://ecogeneration.com.au/news/solar radiation data for
australian sites/076419/. Accessed 29 September 2014.
25. R. Perez, T. Cebecauer and M. Šúri, in Solar Energy Forecasting and Resource
Assessment, ed. J. Kleissl (Academic, Amsterdam, 2013), p. 21.
26. M. Šúri and T. Cebecauer, in ASES SOLAR 2014 Conference (San Francisco,
2014), p. 1.
27. RETScreen, RETScreen Software Suite Home page (2014). Available at:
http://www.retscreen.net/ang/home.php. Accessed 29 September 2014.
28. ASP, Biography of a star: Our suns birth, life, and death, astrosociety
(2014). Available at: http://www.astrosociety.org/edu/publications/tnl/39/
sun2.html. Accessed 29 September 2014.
29. A. De Vos, Endoreversible Thermodynamics of Solar Energy Conversion
(Oxford University Press, Oxford, 1992).
30. B. Sorensen, Energy Intermittency (CRC Press, Boca Raton, 2014).
31. J. C. Mankins, in The First International Assessment of Space Solar Power:
Opportunities, Issues and Potential Ways Forward (International Academy
of Astronautics, Stockholm, 2011).
32. Lazard, Lazard’s Levelized Cost of Energy Analysis — Version 8.0 (2014).
33. Bloomberg New Energy Finance, 2014 Sustainable Energy in America
Factbook (2014). Available at: http://bnef.com/InsightDownload/9271/pdf/.
34. M. W. Parker et al., Bernstein Energy and Power Blast: If Solar Wins
Who Loses? (2014). Available at: http://reneweconomy.com.au/wp-content/
uploads/2014/04/Bernstein-solar.pdf. Accessed 29 September 2014.
35. Rockefeller Brothers Fund, Fund announces plans to divest from fossil fuels
(2014). Available at: http://www.rbf.org/post/fund-announces-plans-divest-
fossil-fuels. Accessed 28 September 2014.
36. J. M. Diamond, Guns, Germs, and Steel: The Fates of Human Societies
(W. W. Norton, New York, 1999).
37. V. Belessiotisand E. Delyannis, Sol Energy 85 (2011), p. 1665.
38. Anon., South Pacific Nuts to conduct free extensive training for Vanuatu
farmers, Vanuatu Daily Post (2014), p. 25.
39. EERE, The History of Solar (2005). Available at: https://www1.eere.energy.
gov/solar/pdfs/solar timeline.pdf. Accessed 20 September 2014.
40. K. Butti and J. Perlin, A Golden Thread. 2500 Years of Solar Architecture
and Technology (Van Nostrand Reinhold, New York, 1980).
41. P. A. Crossley et al., Review and Evaluation of Past Solar-Cell Development
Efforts (RCA Astro-Electronics, Washington, 1968).
42. E. Becquerel, Compte rendus hebdomadaires des séances de l’Académie des

sciences 9 (1839), p. 145.
43. A. Goldmann and J. Brodsky, Ann. Phys. 44 (1914), p. 849.
44. C. E. Fritts, Proc. Am. Assoc. Adv. Sci. XXXIII (1884), p. 97.
45. E. H. Kennard and E. O. Dietrich, Phys. Rev. 9 (1917), p. 58.
46. IEA-PVPS, Trends 2014 in Photovoltaic Applications, International Energy
Agency Photovoltaic Power Systems Programme (2014). Available at: http://
www.iea-pvps.org/fileadmin/dam/public/report/ statistics/IEA PVPS Tre-
nds 2014 in PV Applications - lr.pdf. Accessed 29 September 2014.
47. R. M. Swanson, Prog. Photovolt.: Res. Appl. 8 (2000), p. 93.
48. World Energy Council, World Energy Perspective: Cost of Energy Technolo-
gies (World Energy Council, 2013). Available at: http://www.worldenergy.
org/publications/2013/world-energy-perspective-cost-of-energy-technologies/.
49. V. S. Reddy, S. C. Kaushik, K. R. Ranjan and S. K. Tyagi, Renew. Sust.
Energy Rev. 27 (2013), p. 258.
50. P. Pardo, A. Deydier, Z. Anxionnaz-Minyielle, S. Rouge, M. Cabassud and
P. Cognet, Renew. Sust. Energy Rev. 32 (2014), p. 591.
51. C. Agrafiotis, H. von Storch, M. Roeb and C. Sattler, Renew. Sust. Energy
Rev. 29 (2014), p. 656.
52. S. Sadhishkumar and T. Balusamy, Renew. Sust. Energy Rev. 37 (2014),
p. 191.
53. R. Shukla, K. Sumathy, P. Erickson and J. Gong, Renew. Sust. Energy Rev.
19 (2013), p. 173.
54. M. Parnell, and G. Cole. Australian Solar Houses (Second Back Row/Solar
Scope, Leura, 1983).
55. L. Perez-Lombard, J. Ortiz, R. Gonzalez and I. R. Maestre, Energy and Build-
ing 41 (2009), p. 272.
56. C. Podewils, Photon Int. 2007-04 (2007), pp. 106–113.
57. S. Fazio and L. Barbanti, Renew. Energy 69 (2014), p. 233.
58. W. G. Tu, Y. Zhou and Z. G. Zou, Adv. Mater. 26 (2014), p. 4607.
59. Z. J. Han and R. Eisenberg, Acc. Chem. Res. 47 (2014), p. 2537.
60. D. Feldman et al., Photovoltaic System Pricing Trends. Historical, Recent,
and Near-Term Projections (National Renewable Energy Laboratory, 2014).
61. H. Forstner, et al., International Technology Roadmap for Photovoltaic
(ITRPV) (2014).
62. DOE. “Soft Costs”, sunshot program (2014). Available at: http://energy.gov/
eere/sunshot/soft-costs. Accessed 29 September 2014.
63. Australian Energy Technology Assessment (AETA) 2013 Model, Bureau of
Resources and Energy Economics (2013). Available at: http://www.bree.
gov.au/publications/australian-energy-technology-assessments.
64. Australian Energy Technology Assessment (AETA) 2014 Model, Bureau of
Resources and Energy Economics (2014). Available at: http://www.bree.
gov.au / publications / australian-energy-technology-assessments. Accessed
29 September 2014.
65. Solar Augmentation Project at Liddell Power Station, EcoGeneration

Jan./Feb. (2013). Available at: http://ecogeneration.com.au/news/solar
augmentation project at liddell power station/079478/. Accessed 29 Septem-
ber 2014.
66. M. R. Islam, K. Sumathy and S. U. Khan, Renew. Sust. Energy Rev. 17
(2013), p. 1.
67. H. Cassard, P. Denholm and S. Ong, Renew. Sust. Energy Rev. 15 (2011),
p. 3789.
68. F. Jotzo, Outrage at ANU divestment shows the power of its idea, The Con-
versation (2014). Available at: http://theconversation.com/outrage-at-anu-
divestment-shows-the-power-of-its-idea-32736. Accessed 13 October 2014.
69. M. Miller and S. Cox, Overview of Variable Renewable Energy Regula-
tory Issues (National Renewable Energy Laboratory, 2014). Available at:
http://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy14osti/61350.pdf. Accessed 13 October 2014.
70. M. Mendoça, Feed-In Tariffs. Accelerating the Deployment of Renewable
Energy (Earthscan, London, 2007).
71. J. Massola, Ian Macfarlane defends proposed cut to renewable energy target,
Sydney Morning Herald (26 October 2014). Available at: http://www.smh.
com.au/federal-politics/political-news/ian-macfarlane-defends-proposed-cut-
to-renewable-energy-target-20141026-11bypd.html. Accessed 26 October
2014.
72. APVI, Impacts of PV, AC, and Other Technologies and Tariffs on Con-
sumer Costs, Australian Photovoltaics Institute (2014). Available at: http://
apvi.org.au/impacts-of-pv-ac-and-other-technologies-and-tariffs-on-consumer-
costs/. Accessed 26 October 2014.
73. A. Orioli and A. Di Gangi, Renew. Sust. Energy Rev. 21 (2013), p. 13.
74. G. Mulder, F. De Ridder and D. Six, Sol. Energy 84 (2010), p. 1284.
75. F. Zhang, Renew. Sust. Energy Rev. 38 (2014), p. 811.
76. S. Vinci, D. Nagpal, R. Ferroukhi, E. Zindler and A. Czajkowska, Adapt-
ing Renewable Energy Policies to Dynamic Market Conditions, International
Renewable Energy Agency (IRENA, 2014). Available at: http://www.irena.
org/DocumentDownloads/Publications/policy adaptation.pdf. Accessed 26
October 2014.
May 2, 2013 14:6 BC: 8831 - Probability and Statistical Theory PST˙ws
This page intentionally left blank

Chapter 2
Fundamentals of Photovoltaic Cells and Systems
Ignacio Rey-Stolle
Instituto de Energı́a Solar, Universidad Politécnica de Madrid
(Solar Energy Institute, Technical University of Madrid)
ETSI de Telecomunicación, Avda. Complutense 30, 28040 Madrid (Spain)
The present chapter summarizes the current state and perspectives of pho-
tovoltaic solar energy. The fundamentals of solar radiation and photovoltaic
(solar) cells are covered; the basic technology of photovoltaic modules and sys-
tems is briefly discussed; and a general outlook is provided for the uses, market
and environmental impact of photovoltaic solar energy.
1 Introduction
The Earth receives annually around 1.5 · 1018 kWh of solar energy, which
is by far the most abundant energy resource available for mankind so far.
If adequately harnessed, only a minuscule fraction of this energy (∼0.01%)
would suffice to supply the world’s primary energy demand, which in 2012
was about 1.55 · 1014 kWh.1 The primary energy is processed by the ener-
getic system into different types of readily usable energy, among which
electricity is considered the key technology for the next decades. Accord-
ingly, the direct generation of electricity — the preferred consumable form
of energy — from solar radiation — the richest resource — is a topic of
the highest relevance and is the essence of Photovoltaics (PV). From the
discovery of the PV effect in 1839 by French physicist Alexandre-Edmond
Becquerel to the first successful application of PV panels to power the Van-
guard I satellite launched in 1958 more than a century went by.2 Since
those pioneering works, many steps forward have been made and the PV
industry has evolved from the Watt-ranged applications of the early days
to the GW systems planned today. In the first one and a half decades of the
21st century, with more than 140 GW installed worldwide, PV technology
31
32 I. Rey-Stolle
has demonstrated the maturity to become a major source of power for the
world. That robust and continuous growth is expected to continue in the
decades ahead in order to turn PV into one of the key players in the pool
of technologies involved in generating electricity for the 21st century.
2 Solar Radiation
2.1 Fundamentals
Solar radiation is a general term that refers to the electromagnetic energy
flux emitted by the sun’s surface (i.e. the photosphere). This emission of
electromagnetic waves does not take place at a single wavelength but spans
a continuum of different wavelengths from X-rays to deep infrared photons.
Accordingly, the solar spectrum is the distribution of the electromagnetic
power emitted by the sun (per unit wavelength and unit area) as a function
of wavelength. The solar spectrum reaching the earth outside the atmo-
sphere may be well approximated by that of a blackbody at 5778 K,3 as
shown in Fig. 1.
The integral of the solar spectrum in Fig. 1 yields the solar power per
unit area reaching the outer surface of Earth’s atmosphere. This magnitude
is known as the solar constant (B0 ) and its most accepted average value is
1367 W/m2 . Throughout the year (and from year to year) the solar constant
varies slightly (∼7%) as a result of the change in the sun–earth distance
2.5
Spectral Irradiance [W·m−2·nm−1]
Extraterrestrial solar radiation

2
5778K Blackbody radiation
1.5
0.5
0
200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800 2000
Wavelength [nm]
Fig. 1. Extraterrestrial solar spectrum compared to the spectrum emitted by a black-

body at 5778 K.
Fundamentals of Photovoltaic Cells and Systems 33
along the Earth’s orbit and variations in the sun’s activity (solar cycles).
The actual value of B0 can be simply calculated just by multiplying the solar
constant by a correction factor (ε0 ) taking into account the eccentricity of
the Earth’s orbit as a function of the ordinal day in the year (dn ; for 1st
January dn = 1; while for 31st December dn = 365):
ε0 = 1 + 0.033 · cos(2π · dn /365). (1)
2.2 Basic PV Terminology and Notation

for Solar Radiation
The irradiance at a given surface is the total energy per unit area per
second (i.e. power per unit area) reaching that surface in the form of solar
radiation. Units used for irradiance are W/m2 and is typically noted using
the letter G. Of particular interest — due to the wealth of experimental
data available — is the Global Horizontal Irradiance (GHI ) which is
the amount of irradiance falling on a surface horizontal to the surface of
the Earth.
The irradiation at a given location is the total energy per unit area
reaching that location in the form of solar radiation in a certain period.
Typical units used for irradiation are Wh/m2 or J/m2 and is noted using
the symbol Gp , where the subscript p denotes the period over which the
irradiation is calculated as

Gp = G · dt. (2)
p
Typical periods for calculating irradiation are hours (Gh ), days (Gd ) or
months (Gm ). It is also common to use averages of daily or hourly irradia-
tion taken over different periods. In this case no uniform notation is found
in the literature but in general subscripts are added to indicate the period
for averaging (Gdm = average daily irradiation taken over a month).
2.3 Components of the Solar Radiation

When the sun’s radiation traverses the atmosphere it is partially reflected
by the clouds, partially absorbed and partially scattered by particles and
gases. Thereby the radiation reaching the Earth’s surface is largely attenu-
ated, filtered, and randomized in terms of direction. Accordingly, the irra-
diance reaching a surface on Earth may be expressed in terms of three main
components, namely, beam or direct irradiance (B), diffuse irradiance (D)
34 I. Rey-Stolle
and albedo or reflected irradiance (R):
G = B + D + R. (3)
The beam component refers to the irradiance coming directly from the
solar disc; whilst the diffuse component refers to the irradiance coming
from the rest of the sky. The albedo or reflected component accounts for
radiation that reaches the target surface after reflection from the ground,
buildings, snowy hills or any other reflecting surface. Figure 2(a) visually
depicts these three components.
Three variants of these components are especially relevant in PV as
a result of the wealth of experimental data coming from meteorological
databases. The Direct Normal Irradiance or DNI refers to the beam
irradiance impinging on a surface perpendicular to the rays (i.e. a surface
tracking the sun). The Diffuse Horizontal Irradiance or DHI represents
the diffuse irradiance reaching a horizontal surface. Analogously, the GHI
represents the amount of global radiation reaching a horizontal surface. A
common way to calculate GHI is as the sum of the DHI and the fraction
of DNI impinging on a horizontal surface:
GHI = DHI + DNI · cos(θZS ), (4)
where θZS is the solar zenith angle, which is a function of latitude, hour
of the day, and day of the year. Figure 2(b) illustrates the concept of solar
zenith angle.
On clear days, when attenuation is the main effect of the atmosphere,
the global irradiance on a horizontal plane on the Earth surface (i.e. GHI )
can be approximated with a very simple empirical expression:
GHI = B0 · ε0 · 0.74AM ×0.678 , (5)
where B0 and ε0 are the solar constant and eccentricity factor as defined
in Sec. 2.1; whilst AM is the air mass, which is defined as the ratio
of the length of the beam irradiance path through the atmosphere to the
vertical length of the atmosphere. Accordingly, in PV terminology AM0
refers to the extraterrestrial irradiance; AM1.5 to an irradiance traversing
an atmosphere length 1.5 times its vertical length, and analogous definitions
can be given for other AM values. AM varies through the day and season (as
apparent sun movement does) and depends on location (latitude). Simple
geometrical considerations lead to3 :
AM = 1/ cos θZS , (6)

Fig. 2. (a) Components of irradiance; (b) Optical paths corresponding to different AM

attenuations.
where θZS is the solar zenith angle, which is itself a function of latitude,
hour of the day, and day of the year. Figure 2(b) illustrates the concept
of AM.
Following Eq. (3), irradiation can also be expressed in terms of the
different components of irradiance integrated over a period (p) of time:

Gp = Bp + Dp = B · dt + D · dt, (7)
p p
where the albedo component has been neglected since it is site-dependent

and thus it is typically measured.
2.4 World Distribution of Solar Radiation

Among energy resources, solar radiation is the one more evenly distributed
on a world scale. Virtually any location with latitude below 55◦ , is suitable
for installing PV systems. Figure 3 visually summarizes the world availabil-
ity of the solar resource.
2.5 Solar Radiation Collected by PV Systems

In PV engineering the key question around solar radiation is how much
irradiance will reach the surface of a PV system installed at a given location,
this is, the so-called in-plane irradiance. Following Eq. (3) to calculate
the in-plane irradiance, it is necessary to model or to measure the beam
and diffuse irradiances (and albedo when applicable) on the target surface
for the desired location during the course of the day and throughout the
seasons in a year.
A starting point for this calculation is the so-called typical meteoro-
logical year (TMY). A TMY is a collection of selected solar irradiation
36 I. Rey-Stolle
2500 kWh/m2
2000
1500
1000
500
Yearly global irradiation on a horizontal surface: Gy(0)
Fig. 3. Yearly global irradiation [kWh/m2 ] on a horizontal surface.
data for a year and for a specific location, generated from a database much
longer than a year in duration. There is no standard establishing what a
TMY should contain but typically it includes hourly values of GHI, DNI,
wind speed and ambient temperature, among other meteorological vari-
ables. The TMY is not constructed by just simply averaging hourly values
in the database but by the concatenation of actual representative months.
In other words, the data for the month in the database that has the average
radiation most closely equal to the monthly average over the whole mea-
surement period is chosen as the TMY data for that month. The TMY is
then constructed by applying this method to all months.
Once the horizontal irradiance values are known for the location of
interest, many approaches exist for calculating the in-plane irradiance in PV
systems3–5 that provide the average irradiance and irradiation of arbitrarily
oriented surfaces for diverse periods of time (hours, days, months, year).
Another approach, which is seeing increasing use in PV engineering,
is to obtain these values from reference databases which integrate complex
solar radiation models with extensive data from ground stations or satel-
lites. Examples of these databases are PVGIS6 for Europe and Africa; and
the NREL US dynamic solar atlas.7
3 Solar Cells
3.1 Definition
A solar cell or PV cell is a device that directly transforms solar radi-
ation into electrical energy by means of the PV effect without any ther-
mal cycles, mechanical cycles or chemical reactions.8–10 Classical ways for
implementing solar cells are p/n semiconductor junctions11 in which light

produces the photogeneration of charge carriers (electrons and holes) that
are efficiently separated by the built-in voltage in the junction and flow to
the outer circuit providing electrical power.9,10
3.2 Basic Solar Cell Equations and Equivalent Circuits

3.2.1 Simple equivalent circuit for a solar cell and I–V characteristic
The simplest circuit model associated with a p/n junction solar cell is the
one shown in Fig. 4. This circuit consists in the parallel connection of (1)
a current source modeling the photogenerated current (IL ); (2) a diode
modeling the dark current through the p/n junction (ID ); (3) a parallel
resistor (RP ) modeling possible shunts across the junction; and these three
elements are connected in series with an additional resistor (RS ) modeling
ohmic losses in elements adjacent to the junction (contacts, substrate, . . . ).
According to this equivalent circuit, the I–V curve of a solar cell has
the following expression:

V + I · RS V + I · RS
I = IL − I0 exp −1 − , (8)
n · Vt RP
where IL is the photogenerated current in Amperes; I0 is the diode dark

current in Amperes; n is the diode ideality factor; RS is the series resistance
in Ohms; RP is the parallel or shunt resistance in Ohms; and Vt is the
thermal Voltage in Volts given by the well-known expression:
kT
Vt = ⇒ Vt ∼
= 0.026 V for T = 300 K, (9)
q
Fig. 4. Equivalent circuit of a solar cell with a single diode.

38 I. Rey-Stolle
where k is the Boltzmann constant (k = 1.3806 · 10−23 J/K); q is the ele-

mentary charge (q = 1.6022 · 10−19 C); and T is the absolute temperature
in Kelvin.
3.2.2 General equivalent circuit for a solar cell

and I–V characteristic
For some solar cells a single conduction mechanism across the p/n junction
is not enough to model the dark losses.8–10 In this case, a circuit with
multiple diodes in parallel is considered, where each diode accounts for
a different mechanism (recombination in neutral regions, recombination at
the space charge region, recombination at the junction perimeter, tunneling,
. . . ). In such case, the new expression for the I–V curve is:

n
V + I · RS V + I · RS
I = IL − I0i exp −1 − , (10)
n i · Vt RP
i=1
where I0i is the diode dark current for conduction mechanism i in Amperes;
and ni is the diode ideality factor for the ith conduction mechanism.
3.3 The I–V Curve of a Solar Cell

3.3.1 General look and key parameters
The I–V curve of a solar cell under illumination is schematically depicted
in Fig. 5. This curve has three characteristic points which are: (1) the short
circuit current (I SC ) which is the current produced by the solar cell at
zero voltage; (2) the open circuit voltage (VOC ) which is the voltage
produced by the solar cell at zero current; and (3) the maximum power
point or MPP (Vm , Im ) which is the point at which the power delivered
by the solar cell is maximum (i.e. the product V · I reaches its maximum).
ISC
Pmax = Im·Vm
Im
Current
Vm VOC
Voltage
Fig. 5. Solar cell I–V curve.

Based on the curve in Fig. 5, it is possible to define a key figure of merit

for a PV cell known as the fill factor (FF ) where:
Im · Vm
FF = . (11)
ISC · VOC
The efficiency of a solar cell is given by the ratio of the maximum power
delivered to the load over the optical power received on the cell surface:
Im · Vm F F · ISC · VOC
η= = , (12)
G·A G·A
where G is the irradiance on the solar cell in W/m2 ; and A is the area of
the solar cell in m2 .
Table 1 summarizes the key parameters of a solar cell including symbols
and units.
3.3.2 Effect of variations in series and parallel resistance

on the I–V curve
The effect of decreasing the magnitude of the parallel resistance or increas-
ing the magnitude of the series resistance can be seen in Figs. 6(a) and 6(b),
respectively. When the parallel resistance decreases, the solar cell becomes
effectively shunted, and VOC and FF of the cell decrease and the slope
of the I–V curve changes markedly in the vicinity of ISC , which remains
unchanged. When the series resistance increases, the internal load in the
solar cell increases, and thus the ISC and FF of the cell decrease and the
slope of the I–V curve changes markedly in the vicinity of VOC , which
remains unchanged.
Table 1: Key parameters of a solar cell with symbol

and units.
Parameter Symbol Units
Short circuit current ISC A

Open circuit voltage VOC V
Current at maximum power point Im A
Voltage at maximum power point Vm V
Fill factor FF %
Efficiency η %
40 I. Rey-Stolle
÷1 ×1
×10
÷10
×50
÷30
×100
Current
Current
÷100
RS
RP
Voltage Voltage
(a) (b)
Fig. 6. (a) Effect of decreasing the parallel resistance and (b) increasing the series
resistance on a solar cell I–V curve.
×4
×3
×2
Current
×1
G
Voltage
Fig. 7. Effect of increasing the irradiance on a solar cell I–V curve.
3.3.3 Effect of variations in irradiance on the I–V curve

The effect of changing the irradiance impinging on a PV cell can be visu-
alized as a vertical shift of the I–V curve (Fig. 7).
Let GSTC be a reference irradiance and G any other irradiance value.
We can then define the concentration factor (X) (sometimes referred to
simply as concentration) as the ratio between G and GSTC :
X = G/GSTC . (13)
The evolution of ISC and VOC of a solar cell with the concentration factor
(i.e. with irradiance) are rather simple:
ISC (G) = ISC (GSTC ) · X, (14a)

VOC (G) = VOC (GSTC ) + Vt · ln X. (14b)
On the other hand, the variation of FF (and thus maximum power point
and efficiency) with irradiance is more complicated. At moderate irradiance
levels, when the effects of series resistance are negligible, the fill factor
increases with irradiance, while at high irradiance levels series resistance
losses counterbalance this effect and the fill factor starts to decrease with
concentration.
3.3.4 Effect of variations in temperature

When the operating temperature of a solar cell increases (Fig. 8) ISC
increases slightly, VOC decreases more significantly and Pmax also decreases.
All these variations are quantified using three linear coefficients associated
with ISC , VOC , and Pmax .
For silicon solar cells the ISC temperature coefficient (α) is around α =
0.1%/◦ C; the VOC temperature coefficient (β) is around β = −2 mV/◦ C;
and the Pmax temperature coefficient (γ) is around γ = −0.5%/◦ C.
3.3.5 Standard test conditions for solar cells

In order to be able to compare the performance of different solar cells
(and PV modules) in a consistent manner, efficiencies are reported using
standard test conditions (STC). These conditions are a device tempera-
ture of 25◦ C and an irradiance set to the value and spectral distribution as
defined in reference spectra, included in ASTM standard G173-03.12 The
most frequently spectra used in PV are AM0 for space solar cells AM1.5
global for conventional non-concentrating solar cells and AM1.5 direct
for concentrator solar cells.
30 K
T
Current
420 K
T
Voltage
Fig. 8. Effect of changing the operating temperature on a solar cell I–V curve.
42 I. Rey-Stolle
Table 2: Overview laboratory and commercial results for different solar cell
technologies.
Technology Silicon Thin film CPV

Material Mono-c Multi-c a-Si:H a-Si/ µc:Si CdTe CIGS III–V
Record cell 25.6% 20.4% 10.4% 13.2% 21.0% 21.7 45.6%

efficiency
Commercial cell 16–22% 14–18% 4–8% 7–9% 10–12% 7–12% 38–42%
efficiency
Commercial 14–20% 11–15% 27–32%
module
efficiency
Module area ∼7 m2 ∼8 m2 ∼15 m2 ∼12 m2 ∼10 m2 ∼10 m2
needed per
kWp∗
∗ For a definition of this unit (Wp = Watt peak) see Sec. 4.3.1.
3.4 Overview of Solar Cell Technologies

The core of any solar cell is a light absorbing material, where the photons are
absorbed and generate charge carriers (free electrons and holes) via the PV
effect.8–10 In the history of PV, many materials have been investigated —
most of them crystalline semiconductors — in the quest for an optimum
low-cost high-performance solution. Today, the portfolio of materials used
in PV is dominated by crystalline silicon, either mono-crystalline or multi-
crystalline, though the so-called thin film materials, which include hydro-
genated amorphous silicon (a-Si:H), cadmium telluride (CdTe) and copper
indium gallium diselenide (CIGS), are starting to gather momentum.13–15
III–V crystalline semiconductors are today limited to space applications
though they might be a key player in concentrator photovoltaics (CPV).16
Other PV materials, which are today limited to laboratory research or
marginal production, include dye-sensitized,17 organic polymers18 and per-
ovskites.19,20 Table 2 gives an overview of laboratory and commercial results
for different solar cell technologies.21–23
4 PV Modules
4.1 Fundamentals
4.1.1 Concept and mission
A PV module or solar panel is an interconnected assembly of solar cells
packaged in a robust, weather-proof casing. Solar cells are brittle devices
and provide voltage and current levels inadequate for almost any electrical
load. Thereby, the role of a solar panel is (1) to provide adequate levels
for electrical current and voltage; (2) to preserve solar cells from ambient
degradation and mechanical damage; (3) to maintain electrical insulation;
and (4) to facilitate the convenient handling of solar cells and their mount-
ing outdoors.
4.1.2 Construction
Figure 9 schematically shows the construction of PV modules made of
wafer-based silicon solar cells. These are constructed as a laminate where
the assembly of solar cells is embedded into a transparent encapsulant
(EVA); which is then sandwiched between a highly transparent (low iron)
tempered glass and a tedlar backsheet. The laminate is then framed with
anodized aluminum inserting a sealant to prevent moisture penetration.
Electrical terminals are made accessible in a plastic weather-proof (IP65)
connection box fixed at the rear of the module.
Figure 10 shows a schematic representation of a solar panel based on
thin film technology. In this case, the module is not based on the con-
nection of discrete solar cells previously fabricated. On the contrary, in
(+)
Tempered glass
Solar cell
EVA
Interconnect
Tedlar backsheet
Seal
Terminal
Aluminum frame
(-)
(a) (b)
Fig. 9. (a) Schematic representation of the front-view of a solar panel based on silicon
solar cells. (b) Cross-section of the panel at approximately the location marked as a
dashed line.
44 I. Rey-Stolle
(-)
Tempered glass
Solar cell Seal
Interconnect
Glass backplate TCO

Back contact
Scribed trench
Terminal
(+)
(a) (b)
Fig. 10. (a) Schematic representation of the front-view of a solar panel based on thin
film technology. (b) Cross-section of the panel at approximately the location marked as
a dashed line.
this technology the solar cell material is deposited on the module back-
sheet (glass, metal, plastic) or superstrate (glass). Individual cells are man-
ufactured by scribing the solar cell material (either with a laser beam or
mechanically) and the cell interconnections are made during the deposition.
Typically, each single solar cell is in the form of a long narrow strip and is
connected in series with the adjacent strip (i.e. cell). Accordingly, being a
series connection of solar cells, the current of the module is determined by
the area of each strip and the voltage by the total number of strips (cells).
This connection scheme minimizes the inter-cell area giving the module a
very uniform appearance, which is even enhanced by the fact that thin film
modules are typically frameless — just insulated with edge seal. The aes-
thetic impact of these two factors has allowed a great penetration of thin
film technology in the building integration market.
4.2 Characteristic Equation and I–V Curve

4.2.1 I–V characteristic of a PV module
Figure 11(a) sketches a generic configuration of a module with an arbitrary
number (NP ) of cell strings in parallel, each string consisting of NS cells
in series. Considering that the solar cells in the module are identical and
that they operate at the same conditions (irradiance and temperature),
(a) (b)
Fig. 11. (a) Generic electrical configuration of a PV module with NP branches in par-
allel and NS cells in series per branch. (b) Electrical symbol for a PV module.
the I–V characteristic of such a connection can be deduced from the I–V
characteristic of the individual solar cells presented in Sec. 3:

V + IRS NS V + IRS NS
I = NP IL − NP I0 exp −1 − , (15)
NS · nVt NS RP
where IL is the photogenerated current per each individual cell in Amperes;

I0 is the diode dark current of each cell in Amperes; n is the diode ideality
factor of each cell; RS is the series resistance of each cell in Ohms; RP is
the parallel or shunt resistance of each cell in Ohms; and Vt is the thermal
voltage in Volts. Equation (15) can be presented in a more compact solar-
cell-like form as:

V + IRSm V + IRSm
I = ILm − I0m exp −1 − , (16)
nm Vt RP m
where all parameters used are analogous as those of the cell as defined in
Table 1.
Accordingly, the equivalent circuit of Fig. 2 can also be used for modules
with the parameters calculated as in Table 3.
As can be deduced from Eq. (16), the I–V curve of a solar panel under
illumination (Fig. 12) has the same shape as that of the individual cells,
except that it is scaled according to the relations expressed in Table 3. If
the parallel resistance is high enough to be neglected, the characteristic
equation of a solar panel can be also expressed in terms of the parameters
46 I. Rey-Stolle
Table 3: Relation between cell and module I–V parameters.
Symbols Parameters Eqs.
ILm Module short circuit current ILm = NP · IL

I0m Module equivalent dark current I0m = NP · I0
nm Module equivalent ideality factor nm = NS· n
RSm Module equivalent series resistance RSm = NS· RS
Rpm Module equivalent parallel resistance RP m = NP · RP
ISCm = NP·ISC Pmax m = NS·NP·Pmax

Current
VOCm = NS·VOC
Voltage
Fig. 12. I–V curve of the PV module of Fig. 10(a).
of the I–V curve as:

V − VOCm + IRSm
I = ISCm 1 − exp . (17)
nm Vt
4.3 Electrical Performance

4.3.1 Standard test conditions
As in solar cells, the electrical performance of PV modules is generally rated
under a set of predefined conditions referred to as Standard Test Con-
ditions (STC). These conditions are: irradiance of 1.000 W/m2 impinging
perpendicularly on the tested module, a solar spectrum of AM 1.5g and
module temperature at 25◦ C. The maximum electrical power supplied by
the module at STC is called the peak power and is given in Watts peak
(Wp ). As STC are very favorable, the peak power of a solar panel may be
considered as the maximum electrical power it would deliver in real opera-
tion rather than its typical or average output power. STC are very difficult
to achieve outdoors in virtually any location so solar simulators are used
to rate PV modules under these conditions.
4.3.2 Factors affecting the electrical power of solar panels

under real operation
The operating conditions in the field deviate considerably from STC (nega-
tively), so any solar panel operating outdoors will typically exhibit a lower
power output than its peak power at STC. The main factors affecting solar
panel power output are:
• Irradiance: As shown in Sec. 3.3.3 for solar cells, low irradiance levels
degrade the open circuit voltage and make the effects of the shunt resis-
tance more important.
• Angle of incidence of light: For solar modules mounted on fixed structures
the angle of incidence of the beam radiation (and thus the reflection
losses) depends on the position of the sun; in addition, diffuse radiation
reaches the solar panels from all angles.
• Spectrum of light: It never reproduces exactly the AM1.5 standard since
it varies annually with the season, daily with the AM value and locally
with altitude, weather and pollution.
• Module temperature: As shown in Sec. 3.3.4, an increase in temperature
degrades the open circuit voltage.
• Soiling: Dust, dirt, debris or other soiling hinder the absorption of light
by solar cells causing an effective drop of irradiance.
• Ageing: As for any other industrial product, PV modules show signs of
wear with time. Typically, manufacturers warrant that the power output
will degrade less than 10% during the first 10 years of operation and less
that 20% during the first 25 years.
To avoid the deleterious effects that partial shadowing might have on mod-
ule performance or integrity (i.e. hot spots24 ) sometimes bypass diodes are
connected in parallel but with opposite polarity to solar cells in a module.
The mission of these diodes is to short-circuit shadowed cells. The number
of bypass diodes per module varies from one per module up to three or four.
4.3.3 Modeling the equilibrium cell temperature

in a PV module
The first step of most models describing the performance of photovoltaic
modules not operating under STC is modeling the equivalent cell tempera-
ture. The most common method used for this purpose is based on an empir-
ical parameter (supplied by the manufacturer) named nominal operating
cell temperature (NOCT ). The NOCT is defined as the cell temperature
48 I. Rey-Stolle
when the ambient temperature is 20◦ C and the irradiance on the module
is 800W/m2. Typical values of NOCT are around 45◦ C. Using the NOCT,
the cell temperature (Tcell ) for any irradiance and ambient temperature
(Tamb ) can be calculated as:
G
Tcell = Tamb + (N OCT − 20◦ C). (18)
800W/m2
4.3.4 Electrical power of solar panels at any irradiance

and temperature
Given certain operating conditions (in-plane irradiance and cell tempera-
ture), the most precise way to calculate the electrical output power from a
PV module is to calculate its I–V curve for those conditions (Secs. 3.3.3,
3.3.4 and 4.2.1), and then determine its maximum power point.4,9
Despite being quite accurate, this model is costly in terms of calcula-
tions. Therefore, simpler approaches are often used, that implement first
order (linear) corrections to the rated module power (PM ) as a function of
cell temperature (Tcell ) and in-plane irradiance (G)25 :
PM = PM,ST C G/GSTC [1 + γ(Tcell − TSTC )], (19)
where PM,ST C is the module power rating at STC in Wp ; and GSTC is

the irradiance at STC (=1000 W/m2 ); TSTC is the temperature at STC
(=25◦ C); γ is a parameter that defines the relative change in module effi-
ciency per ◦ C (γ is typically negative, so power decreases as temperature
increases).
4.3.5 Electrical Energy from a PV module

Once the instant power from a PV module is known, its electrical energy
output (EM,p ) over a given period of time (p) can be calculated just by
integrating:

EM,p = PM (G, Tcell )dt. (20)
p
Typically, the continuous evolution of the irradiance and cell temperature

over the period p will be not known. On the other hand, a most likely
situation is to take a set of discrete values (or averages) of G and Tcell at
regular intervals (∆t) along period p. Thus, a more convenient formulation

of Eq. (20) is:

EM,p = PM (< G >i , < Tcell >i )∆t, (21)
i
where < G >i is the average for the irradiance over interval i in kW/m2 ;
and < Tcell >i is the mean value for the cell temperature over interval
i in ◦ C.
5 PV Arrays and Systems

5.1 Basic Definitions
A PV array is the combination of a certain number of PV modules
which constitute an electrical power generator providing a desired electrical
output.
A PV system is a system including a PV array and ancillary elements
designed to provide electrical power having the desired performance, safety
and reliability.
In PV terminology, all the elements in a PV system other than the PV
array are altogether referred to as the balance of system or BOS. The
BOS may include diverse elements such as mounting structures, wiring,
fuses, maximum power point trackers, charge controllers, batteries, invert-
ers, electrical safety elements, and meters.
5.2 Balance of System Components of PV Systems

5.2.1 Power conditioning
Solar panels produce DC electricity while most electrical applications
demand AC electricity. The inverter is the equipment that transforms
the DC electricity from the solar array into AC electricity to power AC-
loads or inject to the grid. In addition to DC-to-AC electronics, mod-
ern inverters typically integrate circuits intended to force the solar array
to operate at optimum conditions by interfacing them with the adequate
impedance: these are the so-called maximum power point trackers (or
MPP trackers for short). Other ancillary functions also performed by
modern inverters are synchronization with the grid, monitoring, and log-
ging the production of the PV system, and implementing some protections
(anti-island operation,. . . ).
50 I. Rey-Stolle
5.2.2 Storage
In PV systems, as in any other system based on a renewable resource,
energy storage is needed to marry production with demand. In stand-alone
(i.e. off-grid) systems, the adequate dimensioning of this storage system is
indispensable to attain a given quality of service. In grid connected applica-
tions, storage is infrequent since the grid provides access to an alternative
source of energy when the solar resource is unavailable or insufficient. In
PV, the energy reservoir typically consists of a set of batteries. When using
electrochemical energy storage, special care has to be taken to preserve the
life and adequate operation of the batteries. Therefore, dedicated electron-
ics, namely charge controllers, are inserted between the solar array, the
load and the batteries to avoid overcharging or over-discharging these ele-
ments. Many different battery technologies are available today, though the
classic lead-acid electrochemical cell remains the dominant choice in the
PV market.
5.2.3 Electric components

PV installations are typically constituted by many elements and may cover
large areas and therefore need many meters of wiring and a large num-
ber of connectors. Weatherproof cables of the correct cross-section have
to be used to ensure safety, reliability and to minimize risks, voltage drops
and energy losses. To preserve critical elements (batteries, inverters,. . . )
fuses and circuit breakers are used. Since electricity generation in a
PV array cannot be suppressed as long as there is sunshine, extra insula-
tion switches are included in several parts of the system. Finally, in grid-
connected systems meters are used to record PV electricity production.
5.2.4 Mounting structures

PV arrays have to be firmly and securely mounted on rigid structures guar-
anteeing the maximum exposure to sunlight, as well as ease of installation,
access to connectors, ventilation, durability and cleaning. Depending on the
location (roof, wall, pole, ground,. . . ) a variety of fixtures exist. For some
applications (PV power plants, PV pumping, satellites,. . . ) sometimes solar
arrays are mounted on solar trackers. These are moving structures that
follow the sun during the day, maintaining the angle of incidence between
the incoming light and a PV array close to the normal at all times and thus
minimizing reflection losses and providing around 30–40% more power than
a fixed array.
5.3 Types of PV Systems

Depending on their final use, PV systems combine the elements mentioned
in the latter section in different topologies. Figures 13–16 show schematic
representations of PV systems for grid-connected operation with (Fig. 13)
and without storage (Fig. 14), an off-grid system with only DC output
(Fig. 15) and an off-grid hybrid system with both DC and AC supply and
a backup generator (Fig. 16). For the sake of simplicity, fuses, insulation
switches and circuit breakers have not been included in the figures.
DC
= AC
∼
power power
M
∼
PV array Inverter Meter AC grid
Fig. 13. Grid-connected PV system without storage.
Charge
controller
DC
= AC
power power
M ∼
∼
PV array Inverter Meter AC grid
Batteries
Fig. 14. Grid-connected PV system with storage.
Charge
controller
DC
power
To DC loads
PV array
Batteries
Fig. 15. Off-grid DC PV system.

52 I. Rey-Stolle
Charge
controller To DC loads
DC DC
power power
= AC
power
To AC loads
PV array ∼
Inverter
G
∼
Batteries Backup generator
Fig. 16. Off-grid DC/AC hybrid PV system.
5.4 Designing a PV System

5.4.1 Location
The location, with a certain latitude and climate, determines the available
solar resource and thus is a first-order impact factor on the performance of
PV systems. The availability of long-term records of meteorological data is
a key factor in assessing the suitability of a given location for PV use. PV
systems should be located far from obstacles that might produce shading,
mostly in the central hours of the day and throughout the year. Snow, dirt
or other soiling are location dependent and are also sources of shading.
Shading small parts of a PV array may cause severe losses in its energy
output. If shading is unavoidable, a good design including adequate mod-
ule interconnection, protective elements such as bypass diodes and special
inverters, may minimize the losses.
In many situations, there is little flexibility in choosing the location of a
PV array. The system should be close to the demand in off-grid applications,
mounted on the available structures in building integrated PV, or near a
high-voltage transmission line for power plants. In all these cases, a careful
design is the tool to overcome restrictions associated with the location.
5.4.2 Orientation and tilt

The orientation of a PV array, also referred to as azimuth angle (α), is
defined as the angle measured clockwise between true south (or sometimes
due north depending on the definition used) and the array plane. The tilt
of a PV array, also referred to as elevation angle (β), is defined as the
angle formed by the array plane and the horizontal. Figure 17 illustrates
azimuth and elevation angles.
W E
α
S
Fig. 17. Orientation or azimuth (α) and tilt or elevation (β) of a PV array.
The optimum orientation of a PV array in the northern hemisphere is

true south (α = 0), whilst on the southern hemisphere it is due north. For
moderate latitudes (Φ < 30), it is generally accepted that the tilt angle
that maximizes the annual energy collection is approximately equal to the
latitude (β = Φ). In higher latitudes, the tilt angles used are approximately
equal to the latitude minus 10◦ (β = Φ − 10◦ ).
In some applications, it is important to maximize the energy collection
during the worst conditions (i.e. in the worst month in terms of irradiation
and not annually). This is the case in off-grid systems, where the PV instal-
lation has to meet the user’s needs through the year, including the months
with less isolation. To maximize the collection in winter the tilt angles used
are approximately equal to the latitude plus 10◦ (β = Φ + 10◦ ).
Figure 18 visually illustrates losses resulting from non-optimum orien-
tation and tilt. In this figure, the accessible solar resource has been quanti-
fied in a polar chart as a function of azimuth (α) and tilt (β) for a location
with latitude Φ = 41◦ in the northern hemisphere. It can be seen that for
PV arrays with tilt roughly equal to the latitude, even deviations in ori-
entation as high as 30◦ from the optimum azimuth only cause minor losses
(below 10%) in the irradiation collected. Accordingly, installing cumber-
some structures to modify the orientation of a preexisting support (roof,
façade, wall,. . . ) is not justified in most cases.
5.4.3 Sizing
In the most general case, sizing a PV system essentially implies deter-
mining the PV array size and configuration (number of modules and
54 I. Rey-Stolle
–
–
–
W E –
–
–
–
–
Tilt (β)
S
Azimuth (α)
Fig. 18. Polar chart quantifying accessible solar resource as a function of azimuth (α)
and tilt (β) for a location with latitude Φ = 41◦ in the northern hemisphere.
interconnection), the inverter size (if needed) and the battery bank size
(if needed) as a function of location (available resource and statistical vari-
ability), load distribution and target loss-of-load probability of the sys-
tem (the latter being the probability that the power demand will exceed
the generating capacity of a system during a certain period). The problem
of sizing acquires a critical engineering dimension in stand-alone (off-grid)
PV systems, since a failure of the system to meet the desired operation
may cause an interruption in the electric supply. Accordingly, many sizing
methods exist for stand-alone systems.26–29 Conversely, the design of grid-
connected systems is often an exercise more determined by economics (cal-
culating return of investment, as a function of feed-in-tariffs, tax rebates,
green certificates and interest rates) than by PV engineering itself.
5.5 PV System Performance

5.5.1 Output power of PV systems
The maximum output power of an array formed by the connection of an
arbitrary number (NM ) of identical PV modules can be calculated as:
PA = NM × PM (G, TCell ) × ηA , (22)
where PM is the actual power supplied by each module as calculated using

Eq. (17) and ηA is a correction factor that accounts for mismatch losses
between the modules in the array and additional losses in the cables and
wiring of the system. The array power is sometimes referred to as the DC
power of the PV system.
Most PV systems, as shown in Figs. 12–15, will include ancillary ele-
ments that may drain some of the energy produced before it is transmitted
to the load (i.e. inverters, storage, charge controllers,. . . ). Such losses should
be accounted for depending on the configuration of the system including
as many efficiencies or correction factors as needed. For instance, in a grid-
connected system without storage (Fig. 12) the overall system output power
(PS ) would be:
PS = PA × ηi (PA ), (23)
where ηi is the efficiency of the inverter which is typically a function of
the input DC power. In systems with inverters, the overall system output
power is sometimes referred to as the AC power of the PV system.
5.5.2 Energy rating of PV systems

Analogously as described for PV modules in Sec. 4.3.5, the electrical energy
output of a PV system (Ep ) over a given period of time (p) can be calcu-
lated as:

Ep = PS,i × ∆t, (24)
i
where PS,i is the average system output power during the ith interval in p.
5.5.3 Alternative (simpler) energy rating of PV systems

The use of Eq. (24) needs the determination of the average in-plane irradi-
ance and mean array temperature for each time interval i, as well as many
efficiencies and correction factors for other elements in the PV system.
These data are not always available or, simply, such a detailed modeling of
the system is not needed. For these situations, IEC standard 6172430 defines
a series of parameters for a much simpler determination of the energy out-
put of a PV system. Their definition is as follows:
The PV system final yield (Yf ) is defined as the net energy output
of the system over a given period of time (Ep ) — typically over a year —
divided by the nominal power (PA,ST C ) of the PV array:
Ep
Yf = . (25)
PA,ST C
56 I. Rey-Stolle
PV system final yield is measured in kWh/kWp or simply “hours” and

thus it is sometimes referred to as the “equivalent hours” of the system
since it represents the number of hours that the PV array would need to
operate at STC to provide the same energy. Typical values for the (yearly)
final yield vary from location to location being Yf = 700 h for Germany
and the Netherlands, Yf = 830 h for Switzerland, Yf = 1400 h for Spain or
California and up to Yf = 1600 h for Israel.
The PV system reference yield (Yr ) is a magnitude associated with
the solar resource available at the system location and is defined as total in-
plane irradiation on the system (Gp ) over a certain period of time (typically
a year) divided by the reference irradiance at STC (GSTC = 1000 W/m2 ):
Gp
Yr = . (26)
GSTC
PV system reference yield is measured in hours and represents the number

of equivalent hours at the reference irradiance. Sometimes the reference
yield is also referred to as the Peak Solar Hours of the system.
The performance ratio (PR) of a PV system is defined as the system
final yield (Yf ) divided by the system reference yield (Yr ). In other words,
the PR is the ratio of the actual and theoretically possible energy outputs
of a PV system.
Yf
PR = . (27)
Yr
Accordingly, PR accounts for the overall effect of losses in the system com-
pared to the rated (nominal) output power. In addition to the factors affect-
ing the efficiency of PV modules (discussed in Sec. 4.3.2), in a complete PV
system the PR may be affected by mismatch between the modules forming
the PV array, inverter inefficiency, losses in the wiring or connections and
other BOS component failures. Accordingly, the PR is an excellent metric
to characterize the performance of a PV system, which, in addition, can be
experimentally determined in a quite straight forward way by monitoring
the energy output of such given PV system. PR values can be calculated
on a daily, weekly, monthly or yearly basis, the latter being the most fre-
quent case. For most systems yearly PR values span a range from 0.6 to 0.8.
Because losses in a PV system may change during the year (temperature,
soilings, shadows,. . . ), PR values fluctuate in a 10–20% range, being greater
in the winter than in the summer.31
Combining Eqs. (25)–(27), it is straight forward to obtain a reasonably

accurate estimate of the annual energy output of a PV system as a function
of its performance ratio, nominal power and irradiation data:
Ep = PA,ST C × Yr × P R. (28)
6 Uses and World Market of PV Solar Energy

6.1 Overview on the Uses of PV Energy
Over its first decades of development, PV technology encountered many
niche applications where the conventional electric grid did not exist or
access to it was uneconomical, impractical or even impossible. Therefore,
the initial uses of PV systems were off-grid applications (supplying electri-
cal power to professional equipment, rural electrification or consumer prod-
ucts). In the first decade of the 21st century, this situation has changed and
now grid-connected applications (including utility owned or de-centralized
rooftop-mounted power plants) account for more than 80% of new systems
installed in the field.33 The driving force for this change has been the imple-
mentation of various incentives (in the form of special feed-in-tariffs, tax
rebates, green certificates,. . . ) in many countries to encourage the penetra-
tion of PV technology into the electric market. Figure 19 summarizes the
main application areas and uses of PV systems.
6.2 World PV Market

6.2.1 Size and historic evolution of the world PV market
Figure 20 shows the recent historic evolution of the global PV installed
capacity per world region.32–34 As of end of 2013, the world cumulated
Off-grid applications Grid-connected applications
Consumer products Professional Rural electrification Centralized Distributed

- Calculators - Satellites - Solar home systems - Power plants - Roof systems
- Watches - Telecommunication - Village grid - Sound barriers - Building integration
- Mobile phones - Navigation - Water supply - ... - ...
- Battery chargers - Remote monitoring - Irrigation
- Lights - Traffic signs - Street lighting
- Car ventilation - Parking meters - Medical cooling
- ... - ... - ...
Fig. 19. Application areas and uses of PV systems.

58 I. Rey-Stolle
139.8 GW
140
99.8 GW
Total PV Installed Capacity [GW]
Data for 2013 [GW]

120
EU 81,5
70.5 GW
100 Japan 13,6
USA 12,6
80
China 19,7
36.9 GW
22.9 GW
60 RoW 12,4
15.7 GW
9.6 GW
7.0 GW
5.4 GW
40
1.4 GW
1.8 GW
2.2 GW
2.8 GW
3.9 GW
20
0
2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
RoW China USA Japan EU
Fig. 20. Evolution of the global PV installed capacity worldwide.
Table 4: Top 5 countries in PV

installations by region as of Decem-
ber 2013.
Installed Capacity
Country [MW] [%]
1 Germany 35.765 26
2 China 19.720 14
3 Italy 18.074 13
4 Japan 13.599 10
5 USA 12.079 9
Total 99.237 71
PV installed capacity almost reached 140 GW, with 60% of such capacity
installed in the European Union.
In terms of the distribution of PV installations by country, Table 4
lists the top five countries as of the end of 2013, which constitute more
than 70% of the worldwide PV capacity.33 On the production side, Table 5
summarizes the PV cell production by country, also as of the end of 2013.33
Tables 4 and 5 show that while market concentration is in Europe, produc-
tion is in Asia (mostly in China).
Table 5: PV cell production

as of December 2013.
Region [MW] [%]
1 China 23.124 58
2 Taiwan 7.176 18
3 Japan 3.189 8
4 Malaysia 2.791 7
5 Germany 1.196 3
Total 37.476 94
100
90
Share of the PV market [%]
80
70
Data for 2010
60 c-Si 80%
50 a-Si 2%
40 CdTe 16%
30 CIGS 2%
20 CPV 0%
10
0
1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020
CPV CIGS CdTe a-Si c-Si

Fig. 21. Historic evolution of the share of solar cell production per technology and
expected trends until 2020. c-Si includes mono and multicrystalline silicon; CPV stands
for concentrator PV.
6.2.2 PV cell production by technology

Figure 21 shows the evolution and prediction of solar cell production by
technology from 1980 to 2020.
6.2.3 Evolution of costs of PV modules and PV electricity

Over the past decades, the PV industry has achieved remarkable price
decreases. The price of crystalline silicon PV modules has decreased by
around 20% each time the cumulative installed capacity has doubled (see
Fig. 22).35 This trend seems to be even more marked for CdTe where price
reductions close to 30% for each doubling of production have been observed.
60 I. Rey-Stolle
Fig. 22. PV module price experience curve for crystalline silicon and CdTe technology.
2010
2020
2030
Fig. 23. Evolution of the levelized cost of electricity for PV systems.
Figure 23 shows current and future Levelized Cost of Electricity

(LCOE), i.e. electricity generation costs, for large ground-mounted PV sys-
tems with PR = 85%. The data is based on the price reductions summarized
in Fig. 19 and forecasts that costs of PV per kWh will be below $0.20 for
almost any sunny place by 2020.34
Solar Operation &

Ingots Wafers Cells Modules Systems Installation Decommission Recycling
silicon maintenance
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
(a)
Materials
Operation &
(a-Si, CIGS, Modules Systems Installation Decommission Recycling
maintenance
CdTe)
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
(b)
Fig. 24. (a) Value chain for wafer-based PV technology; (b) value chain for thin-film
PV technology.
7 Material Usage and Environmental Impact

of PV Solar Energy
7.1 The Value Chain of PV Technology
Different PV technologies include different processes and services in mov-
ing from raw materials to turn-key systems, as shown by Fig. 24. These
differences are greatest at the first stages of the manufacturing process. For
wafer-based technology (either mono or multi-crystalline silicon) modules
are manufactured as assemblies of discrete solar cells, which have been pre-
viously fabricated. In thin-film technology, the whole solar cell material in a
module is deposited at one time on a substrate and subsequently separated
into cells as described in Sec. 4.1.2.
7.2 Material Usage of PV Technology

While the solar cell is the essence of a PV system, in terms of weight it
accounts for only a small fraction of the total materials required to produce
a solar panel. As shown in Table 6, the largest share of the total mass of a
PV module is glass followed by the aluminum frame.36–38
Some materials used in thin film PV technology are rare (In, Cd, Se,
Mo, Te) and this could become an important problem for its large scale
deployment.39 Table 7 summarizes some of the key characteristics, in rela-
tion to their scarcity, of these elements.40
7.3 Energy Payback Time of PV Systems

The energy payback time (EPBT) of a PV system is the time needed for
the system to produce the energy invested in its manufacturing and instal-
lation.41–44 Accordingly, when calculating the EPBT all energy invested in
the value chain (Fig. 24) up to the system level has to be accounted for. A
62 I. Rey-Stolle
Table 6: Material inventory for different PV technologies.
Material inventory (kg/m2 and %)

Category
Ribbon-Si Multi-Si Mono-Si CdTe
Cell material 0.9 (6% ) 1.6 (10% ) 1.5 (10% ) 0.065 (0% )
Glass 9.1 (58% ) 9.1 (55% ) 9.1 (55% ) 19.2 (88% )
EVA 1.0 (6% ) 1.0 (6% ) 1.0 (6% ) 0.6 (3% )
Frame 3.0 (18% ) 3.0 (18% ) 3.0 (18% ) 0.0 (0% )
Connections 1.8 (12% ) 1.8 (11% ) 1.8 (11% ) 2.0 (9% )
and packaging
Total 15.8 (100% ) 16.5 (100% ) 16.4 (100% ) 21.8 (100% )
Table 7: Some characteristics of rare metals used in PV.

2009 Max. spot 2010 World 2010
Scarcity spot price primary World
(relative price 2000–2010 production reserves
Material to Si) ($/Kg) ($/Kg) (in Tons) (in Tons) Origin
Cadmium 10−7 4 12 22.000 6, 6 · 105 Zn mining

Indium 5 · 10−8 350 900 574 ? Zn mining
Molybdenum 10−6 65 70 234.000 9, 8 · 106 Porphyry
Selenium 5 · 10−8 75 100 2.260 8, 8 · 104 Cu and
Ni mining
Tellurium 4 · 10−9 200 220 <200 2, 2 · 104 Cu mining
breakdown of these costs for silicon and thin-film PV technology is included

in Table 8.
Obviously, the energy output of a PV system depends on a variety of
factors (location, orientation, tilt, design decisions,. . . ) and thus all those
issues will yield different energy payback times for the same PV technology.
As shown by Fig. 25 EPBT of 0.8–2.1 years are found for South-European
or South US locations (irradiation around 1700 kWh/m2 /yr).
7.4 Greenhouse (GHG) Gas Emissions of PV Systems

During operation PV systems do not produce GHG emissions. It is only at
the manufacturing, installation and recycling stages of PV systems when
GHG are produced and are mostly (90%) caused by energy use.45 Figure 26
summarizes the GHG emissions for several PV technologies42,46 : As shown
in Fig. 26, lifecycle GHG emissions are in the 21–54 g/kWh range.
Table 8: Breakdown of the energy cost for manufacturing a multi-crystalline

silicon module and an amorphous silicon module using state-of-the-art technology.
Embedded energy (MJ/m2 )

Process Silicon Thin-film
Cell material 3200 50

Cell/module processing 300 400
Module encapsulation material 200 350
Overhead operations and equipment manufacture 500 400
Total frameless module 4200 1200
Aluminum module frame 400 400
Total framed module 4600 1600
4.0
BoS
3.5
Energy Payback Time (Yr)
3.0 Frame
2.5
Module
2.0
1.5
1.0
0.5
0.0
High Low High Low High Low High Low
Irr. Irr. Irr. Irr. Irr. Irr. Irr. Irr.
Ribbon Si Multi-Si Mono -Si CdTe
(11%) (13.5%) (14%) (9%)
Fig. 25. Energy payback time for different PV technologies installed at two different
locations (high irradiation: 1700 kWh/m2 /year; low irradiation: 1000 kWh/m2 /year).
7.5 Operational Hazards of PV Systems

PV systems (as any power station) have the obvious hazards associated
with electricity. However, under normal operation, PV systems neither pro-
duce any emissions nor is it possible to be exposed to the small amount
of toxic substances (some semiconductors or solder pastes) embedded into
them.47 The only possible exposure route is via inhalation if the modules
are consumed in the event of a fire,48,49 which would be itself a much more
severe hazard.
64 I. Rey-Stolle
60
BoS
grams of CO2 eq. per kWh
50
Frame
40
Module
30
20
10
0
EU USA EU USA EU USA EU USA
Ribbon Si Multi-Si Mono-Si CdTe
(11%) (13.5%) (14%) (9%)
Fig. 26. GHG emissions for several PV technologies for a ground-mounted system,
receiving an irradiation of 1700 kWh/m2 /year, with a PR = 0.8, and lifetime of 30
years. Two electrical grids are considered, the European (UCTE) grid mixture and the
US grid mixture.
7.6 PV Module Decommissioning and Recycling

After their useful life — estimated to be in the 20–30 year range — PV mod-
ules will need decommissioning and recycling to both ensure that potentially
harmful materials are not released into the environment and to reduce the
need for new raw materials. Recent studies show that recycling the useful
materials (typically glass and metals) is technically and economically fea-
sible50,51 and will help to preserve the environmentally friendly nature of
PV technology. Accordingly, PV manufacturers are implementing voluntary
take-back and recycling programs for end-of-life PV modules.38,52
References
1. International Energy Agency, Key World Energy Statistics 2014 (IEA Press,
Paris, 2014).
2. J. Perlin, From Space to Earth: The Story of Solar Electricity (AATEC Pub-
lications, Ann Arbor, 1999).
3. M. Iqbal, An Introduction to Solar Radiation (Academic Press, New York,
1983).
4. E. Lorenzo, Energy collected and delivered by PV modules, in Handbook of
Photovoltaic Science and Engineering, eds. A. Luque and S. Hegedus (Wiley,
Chichester, 2011).
5. J. Page, The role of solar radiation climatology in the design of PV systems,

in Practical Handbook of Photovoltaics, eds. T. Markvart and L. Castañer
(Elsevier, Oxford, 2003).
6. http://re.jrc.ec.europa.eu/pvgis/.
7. http://www.nrel.gov/gis/solar.html.
8. S. J. Fonash, Solar Cell Device Physics (Academic Press, Oxford, 2009).
9. M. A. Green, Solar Cells: Operating Principles, Technology and System Appli-
cation (Prentice-Hall, New Jersey, 1982).
10. J. Nelson, The Physics of Solar Cells (Imperial College Press, London, 2003).
11. S. M. Sze and K. K. Ng, Physics of Semiconductor Devices (Wiley, New York,
2006).
12. ASTM G173-03, Standard tables for reference solar spectral irradiances:
Direct normal and hemispherical on 37◦ tilted surface (2008).
13. R. H. Bube, Photovoltaic Materials (Imperial College Press, London, 1998).
14. R. W. Miles, K. M. Hynes and I. Forbe, Photovoltaic solar cells: An overview
of state-of-the-art cell development and environmental issues, Prog. Cryst.
Growth Ch. 51 (2005), pp. 1–42.
15. V. Avrutin, N. Izyumskaya and H. Morkoç, Semiconductor solar cells:
Recent progress in terrestrial applications, Superlattice. Microst. 49 (2011),
pp. 337–364.
16. D. J. Friedman, J. M. Olson and S. Kurtz, High efficiency III–V multijunction
solar cells, Handbook of Photovoltaic Science and Engineering, eds. A. Luque
and S. Hegedus (Wiley, Chichester, 2011).
17. M. K. Nazeeruddin, E. Baranoff and M. Graetzel, Dye-sensitized solar cells:
A brief overview, Solar Energy 85(6) (2011), pp. 1172–1178.
18. H. Hoppe and N. S. Sariciftci, Organic solar cells: An overview, J. Mater.
Res. 19(7) (2004), pp. 1924–1945.
19. M. Liu, M. B. Johnston and H. J. Snaith, Efficient planar heterojunction
perovskite solar cells by vapour deposition, Nature 501 (2013), pp. 395–398.
20. M. Grätzel, The light and shade of perovskite solar cells, Nat. Mater. 13
(2014), pp. 838–842.
21. M. A. Green, K. Emery, Y. Hishikawa, W. Warta and E. Dunlop, Solar cell
efficiency tables (version 44), Prog. Photovoltaics 22 (2014), pp. 701–710.
22. NREL Chart on record solar cell efficiencies. Available at: http://www.nrel.
gov/ncpv/images/efficiency chart.jpg. Accessed on 14 August 2015.
23. Solar Generation VI. A report by the European Photovoltaic Industry Asso-
ciation and Greenpeace, Brussels-Amsterdam (2011).
24. W. Herrmann, W. Wiesner and W. Vaaßen, Hot spot investigations on PV
modules — new concepts for a test standard and consequences for module
design with respect To bypass diodes, 26th IEEE PV Specialist Conference,
Anaheim, pp. 1129–1132 (1997).
25. C. R. Osterwald, Translation of device performance measurements to refer-
ence conditions, Solar Cells 18 (1986), pp. 269–279.
26. S. Silvestre, Review of system design and sizing tools, Practical Handbook of
Photovoltaics, eds. T. Markvart and L. Castañer (Elsevier, Oxford, 2003).
66 I. Rey-Stolle
27. J. M. Gordon, Optimal sizing of stand-alone photovoltaic solar power systems,

Solar Cells 20(4) (1987), pp. 295–313.
28. M. A. Egido and E. Lorenzo, The sizing of stand-alone PV-systems. A review
and a proposed new method, Solar Energy Materials and Solar Cells 26
(1992), pp. 51–69.
29. T. Markvart, A. Fragaki and J. N. Ross, PV system sizing using observed
time series of solar radiation, Solar Energy 80(1) (2006), pp. 46–50.
30. Photovoltaic system performance monitoring — guidelines for measurement,
data exchange, and analysis, IEC Standard 61724 (1998).
31. J. A. del Cueto, Comparison of energy production and performance from flat-
plate photovoltaic module technologies deployed at fixed tilt, 29th IEEE PV
Specialists Conference, New Orleans (2002).
32. Global Market Outlook for Photovoltaics 2014–2018, European Photovoltaic
Industry Association — EPIA, Brussels (2010).
33. Trends 2014 in Photovoltaic Applications: Survey report of selected IEA coun-
tries between 1992 and 2013, International Energy Association, Paris (2014).
34. US Solar Market Insight. 2013 Year in Review. Solar Energy Industries Asso-
ciation (SEIA), Washington DC (2014).
35. Photovoltaics Report, Fraunhofer Institute for Solar Energy Systems ISE,
Freiburg (Germany). October (2014).
36. Mariska de Wild-Scholten and Erik A. Alsema (2005). Environmental Life
Cycle Inventory of Crystalline Silicon Photovoltaic Module Production. MRS
Proceedings, 895, 0895-G03-04 doi:10.1557/PROC-0895-G03-04.
37. V. M. Fthenakis and H. C. Kim, Energy use and greenhouse gas emissions
in the life cycle of CdTe photovoltaics, Presented at MRS Fall 2005 Meeting,
Boston (2005).
38. K. Sander, Study on the development of a take back and recovery system for
photovoltaic products, PV Cycle (2007). Available at: http://www.pvcycle.
org/fileadmin/pvcycle docs/documents/publications/Report PVCycle Down-
load En.pdf. Accessed on November 2011.
39. V. M. Fthenakis, W. Wanga and H. C. Kima, Life cycle inventory analysis
of the production of metals used in photovoltaics, Renew. Sus. Ener. Rev.
13(3) (2009), pp. 493–517.
40. Mineral Commodity Summaries 2001. United States Geological Survey —
USGS, Reston (2011).
41. W. Palz and H. Zibetta, Energy pay-Back time of photovoltaic modules, Int.
J. Solar Energy 10(3–4) (1991), pp. 211–216.
42. E. Alsema, Energy payback time and CO2 emissions of PV systems, in Prac-
tical Handbook of Photovoltaics, eds. T. Markvart and L. Castañer (Elsevier,
Oxford, 2003).
43. V. M. Fthenakis and E. Alsema, Photovoltaics energy payback times, green-
house gas emissions and external costs: 2004-early 2005 Status, Prog. Photo-
volt: Res. Appl. 14 (2006), pp. 275–280.
44. E. Alsema, M. J. De Wild and V. M. Fthenakis, Environmental impacts of
PV electricity generation: A critical comparison of energy supply options,
21st European PV Energy Conference, Dresden (2006).
45. R. Dones and R. Frischknecht, Life cycle assessment of photovoltaic systems:

Results of swiss studies on energy chains, Prog. Photovoltaics 6(2) (1998),
pp. 117–125.
46. V. M. Fthenakis, H. C. Kim and E. Alsema, Emissions from photovoltaic life
cycles, Environ. Sci. Technol. 42 (2008), pp. 2168–2174.
47. V. M. Fthenakis, Overview of potential hazards, in Practical Handbook of
Photovoltaics, eds. T. Markvart and L. Castañer in (Elsevier, Oxford, 2003).
48. P. D. Moskowitz and V. M. Fthenakis, Toxic materials released from photo-
voltaic modules during fires: Health risks, Solar Cells 29 (1990), pp. 63–71.
49. V. M. Fthenakis, M. Fuhrmann, J. Heiser, A. Lanzirotti, J. Fitts and W.
Wang, Emissions and redistribution of elements in CdTe PV modules during
fires, Prog. Photovoltaics 13 (2005), pp. 713–723.
50. V. M. Fthenakis, End-of-life management and recycling of PV modules,
Energ. Policy 28 (2000), pp. 1051–1058.
51. J. K. Choi and V. M. Fthenakis, Design and optimization of photovoltaics
recycling infrastructure, Environ. Sci. Technol. 44(22) (2010), pp. 8678–8683.
52. http://www.pvcycle.org/.

Chapter 3
Large-Scale Solar Thermal Plants (CSP)
Manfred Becker
Solarberatung,
53797 Lohmar, Germany
[email protected]
Robert Pitz-Paal
DLR, Institute for Solar Research
Linder Hoehe, 51147 Koeln, Germany
[email protected]
Wes Stein
Division of Energy Technology, CSIRO
P.O. Box 330, Newcastle, Australia
[email protected]
By concentrating solar radiation a source of heat is provided to generate a

hot fluid for a downstream energy conversion process. This can be used to
produce electricity, solar fuels or directly use process heat for industry or for
chemical applications. The fundamental part of the technology is the solar col-
lector, the most common types being parabolic trough, linear Fresnel, central
receiver and paraboloidal dishes. With approximately 4,000 MW of solar ther-
mal power plants are presently operating commercially, and 8,000 MW of plants
are presently at various stages of planning and approval (Status, 2014). The
majority of existing plants are parabolic troughs using oil to generate steam
for steam turbines. Presently, however, there is a strong emerging interest in
central receivers (power towers) due to their ability to produce much higher
temperatures at higher efficiency power cycles, and ultimately lower cost. The
key for concentrating solar power lies in its ability to incorporate thermal
storage and thus provide dispatchable solar power, which will also benefit the
penetration of other renewables such as photovoltaic and wind. It is likely that
the future for concentrating solar power will involve more high efficiency power
cycles and high temperature storage for electricity generation, and solar fuels
for transport and industry.
69
70 M. Becker, R. Pitz-Paal & W. Stein
1 Introduction
More than 80% of the world’s electricity is derived from fuel sources that
drive thermal processes (Fig. 1). The single largest source is coal/peat, used
for generating steam for steam turbines; nuclear power uses heat from the
fission of uranium to generate steam for steam turbines; natural gas is used
both for steam generation for steam turbines and as combustion fuel for
gas turbines; and oil is used for steam raising and direct combustion in gas
turbines and engines.
Concentrating solar power (CSP) provides a solar alternative for gener-
ating hot fluids needed to power these cycles. This has the attraction that
much of the significant wealth of knowledge, experience and technology
in the power industry today is also directly beneficial and transferable to
CSP. Indeed, the advances that continue to be made in gas and steam turbo
machinery and power technology generally will also be beneficial to CSP.
Solar energy arrives at the surface of the earth as a relatively diffuse
source of energy. For example, the solar energy falling on one square meter
of land over an average day is similar to the energy contained in 1 kg of
coal. Concentrating the solar radiation provides a useful source of heat
for use in energy applications based on thermal energy. This is known as
concentrating solar power (CSP).
This chapter will provide a background to methods of concentrating
solar radiation, to basic relationships of concentrating optics and energy
collection, to typical applications by thermodynamic cycles for CSP, and
Fig. 1. Fuel use for world electricity supply in 2011.1

Note: Other includes geothermal, solar, wind, biofuels and waste, and heat.
Large-Scale Solar Thermal Plants (CSP) 71
giving an overview on the current status as well as future projections for

the CSP industry.
2 Solar Radiation and Concentration

The solar irradiance at the outer edge of earth’s atmosphere has a value of
1367 W/m2 , known as the solar constant, G. This radiation is scattered and
absorbed by atmospheric constituents prior to reaching earth’s surface, and
arrives as a combination of diffuse and direct radiation. The direct radiation
is that from the disk of the sun, whereas diffuse radiation arrives from all
angles. For concentrating radiation from the sun, only the direct radiation
portion is useful.
The sun itself is a disk of finite size with a half angle of 0.267◦ (4.653
mrad). All but the very highest concentrators can also accept circumsolar
radiation, or light from a narrow area outside of the solar disk. The finite
size of the disk means that when concentrating the radiation from the sun,
it cannot be assumed that the radiation consists of parallel rays.
Figure 2 shows the principle of concentration.
Assuming that radiant flux is conserved as it passes through the concen-
trator, then it can be shown2 that the concentration ratio (CR) is given as:
CR = A/A’ = sin θ / sin θ, (linear focus) (1)

2 2
CR = A/A’ = sin θ / sin θ, (point focus) (2)
assuming the entrance and exit media have a similar refractive index.
With θ = 0.267◦ (corresponding to the half-angle subtended by the
solar disk), the maximum concentration ratios of point and linear focus
Solar radia on Solar radia on out

into concentrator θ θ' of concentrator
A A'
θ θ'
Fig. 2. Geometric quantities of a solar concentrator, where the outlet area A’ (with
angular spread θ ) is less than the inlet area A (which has angular spread θ). An outcome
of the second law of thermodynamics is that radiation can only be concentrated by
increasing its angular spread.2
concentrators can be found by setting θ to 90◦ , giving:
— Linear concentrator: CRmax = 215;

— Point focus concentrators: CRmax = 46, 200.
In practice, most concentrator concepts use imaging optics to concentrate

the solar disk. Imaging optics are limited in their ability to concentrate
sunlight by optical aberration effects. Typically one can only concentrate
rays of a single incident angle (e.g. parallel to the optical axis). Therefore,
rays from the finite sized solar disk, which are not perfectly parallel, cannot
be concentrated to the thermodynamic limit. However, other concepts of
non-imaging concentrators exist that can overcome such constraints and
approach the limit at the expense of a more complex design.
3 Receiving and Absorbing Solar Radiation

At the focus of the concentrator is the receiver located. This is the device
which absorbs the incoming concentrated solar radiation, and transferred it
as heat into the fluid. Once the radiation has entered the receiver aperture,
the aim is to maximize thermal absorption and minimize thermal losses
back to the colder environment.
3.1 Energy Balance

The performance of a receiver is determined by the net energy balance
of solar radiation entering (gain) against thermal energy leaving (loss).
Thermal losses stem primarily from re-radiation and convection (due to
wind and natural circulation) and some losses also due to conduction.
The re-radiation loss is particularly important in high temperature sys-
tems due to the effect of this component increasing in proportion to
{Treceiver
4
− Tsurrounds
4
}. Note that in some receiver designs the radiation
entering the receiver will tend to be attenuated if a glass cover is used in
order to reduce convective loss.
Figure 3 shows that the receiver’s thermal efficiency increases with con-
centration ratio, but decreases with temperature. The concentration ratio
has a clear effect because thermal losses are proportional to the surface
area, meaning a system with higher concentration has less area from which
losses emanate. Higher temperatures reduce efficiencies because they result
in greater re-radiation of energy to the environment.
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
ηthermal
50%
40%
30%
20%
10% C = 10 C = 100 C = 500 C = 1000 C = 5000
0%
300 800 1300 1800 2300 2800
Receiver temperature, K
Fig. 3. Receiver thermal efficiency as a function of temperature and concentration ratio

(assuming solar irradiance = 900 W/m2 , Tambient = 300 K, F · α = 0.8, F · ε = 0.8, and
zero convective losses.3
In high concentration systems it is important to absorb as much energy

as possible. A selective surface (Sec. 3.2) can greatly improve the perfor-
mance of lower concentration systems such as linear troughs but has less
relative effect in a point focus system where the concentration ratio is, in
practice, 1 to 2 orders of magnitude higher.
3.2 Selective Surface Theory

A selective surface is a coating which minimizes thermal losses by exploiting
the fact that the spectrum of incoming solar radiation is different from that
of thermally re-radiated energy.
The performance of a selective surface material depends on its absorp-
tivity and emissivity properties at the operating temperature. A surface
can be characterized by Kirchhoff’s Law for opaque materials, which states
that for a body in thermodynamic equilibrium the absorptivity α is equal
to the emissivity ε at a given wavelength and angle of incidence,
α(λ, θ) = ε(λ, θ). (3)
In addition, reflectance ρ is related via
α(λ, θ) = 1 − ρ(λ, θ). (4)

Fig. 4. Spectra for solar irradiance, a blackbody at 450◦ C and an “ideal” solar selective
surface.4 The solar spectrum can be approximated by application of Planck’s spectral
distribution corresponding to a blackbody temperature at 5777 K.
The majority of the energy of solar radiation for collector purposes arrives
within a wavelength range of approximately 0.3 to 3 µm. The absorbing
surface, however, can be treated as a blackbody emitter at its surface tem-
perature which generally results in longer wavelengths for the re-radiated
energy. Application of a selective surface treatment to the absorber allows it
to have low reflectance and hence high absorptivity (Eq. (4)) at wavelengths
less than a critical value — thus allowing maximum absorption of incoming
solar radiation — while having high reflectance and hence low absorptiv-
ity and emissivity (Eq. (3)) for wavelengths greater than this value, hence
minimizing re-radiation. An ideal selective surface would exhibit a vertical
crossover as shown in Fig. 4.
This figure shows that at low absorber temperatures there is little over-
lap between the solar and the blackbody spectra. As the blackbody tem-
perature of the absorbing surface increases, the blackbody curve moves
to the left. This increases the degree of overlap with the solar spectrum
and the spectrally-weighted ratio of α/ε approaches 1, such that the effec-
tiveness of a selective surface eventually becomes negligible. Selective sur-
faces therefore offer more significant performance improvement potential
for lower-temperature concentrating solar thermal systems than those at
higher temperature.
4 Types of Solar Collectors for Power and Fuels

The term solar collector refers to a device that collects solar radiation into a
fluid in the form of heat. This chapter will generally deal with concentrating
solar applications, where the solar collector system is a combination of the
solar concentrator (the mirrors) and the receiver (the device that absorbs
the solar radiation and converts it to heat). Refractive concentrators such
as lenses are not covered — they have application for concentrating PV sys-
tems but generally might become too large and unwieldy for larger capacity
thermal systems.
This chapter will start with two types of solar technologies without
concentration (C = 1), namely the solar pond in Sec. 4.1 and the solar
chimney in Sec. 4.2. These technologies are included here due to the fact
that they have been used for solar thermal power generation.
The real concentrating technologies will be outlined in the following.
They are:
Line focusing displays the low concentrating technology of a parabolic

trough in Sec. 4.3. This technology, with concentrations up to C = 100, is
one which is simple, economic and has actually been used very successfully.
An even simpler concept is that with a linear Fresnel-type arrangement of
the reflector, discussed in Sec. 4.4.
The central receiver or power tower technology, described in Sec. 4.5,
utilizes medium concentrations between C = 100 to almost C = 1000, result-
ing in temperatures greater than 1000◦C.
The highest point concentration is delivered by a paraboloid, the three
dimensional dish construction, shown in Sec. 4.6. It can ideally reach con-
centrations definitely more than C = 1000 and temperatures higher than
1000◦ C.
The following Fig. 5 describes the four concepts schematically.
4.1 Solar Pond

The most common form of solar pond is based on salt water. It is rela-
tively shallow — usually no more than a few meters deep — and has a
salt density gradient that increases with depth. At the bottom, the salinity
is near-saturation, and it is here in this 1–2 m thick zone that maximum
temperatures are reached. The solar radiation penetrates through the upper
zones to the bottom, while the salinity gradient prevents natural convection
Fig. 5. Concentration Arrangements.3

Source: DLR.
upwards. Because the salt tends to naturally diffuse upwards over time, the
salt gradient needs regular maintenance or refreshing.
One of the major requirements for a salt pond is in fact fresh or low
salinity water for the upper levels due to evaporation. The salt can be com-
mon salt (NaCl), able to provide salt water densities of up to 1200 kg/m3 ,
or other salts such as magnesium chloride which can achieve higher densi-
ties (over 1300 kg/m3 ) and better performance. The maintenance cost of a
salt pond is a critical issue, with salinity gradient, excursion events, clarity,
and chemical balance all requiring careful control.
Temperatures above 90◦ C have been demonstrated in solar ponds,
though the potential thermal to electric efficiency is very low — less than
5% in practice. Their application may be most useful for low temperature
thermal processes in salinity-affected areas such as desalination or produc-
tion of some chemicals. An additional attraction of the salt pond is that it
provides thermal storage.
A number of small plants have been demonstrated for the produc-
tion of electricity, including at the Dead Sea, Israel (5 MW); Alice Springs,
Australia (15 kW); El Paso, USA (120 kW), and Pyramid Hill, Australia
(60 kW)5 in the last century. No commercial off-take has happened yet.
The main hurdle is the limitation to low temperature heat which results in
a low cycle efficiency and the need for a special engine design.
4.2 Solar Chimney

The solar chimney, also referred to as the up-draught solar tower, works on
the principle that a large ‘greenhouse’ solar collector heats air such that its
density is less than the surrounding ambient air outside the chimney. The
resulting pressure difference causes air to move inside and up the chimney,
passing through one or more wind turbines installed at the base of the
chimney and generating electricity.
The power generated is a balance between the driving force provided
by the pressure drop in the chimney (including frictional effects) and the
pressure drop across the turbine. It can be shown that electrical power is
optimized when the pressure difference across the turbine is two-thirds of
the total available, not considering the transient coupling effects between
collector and chimney, allowing maximum power to be estimated for a sys-
tem with collector efficiency ηcollector, chimney height Hchimney and collector
area Acollector , for given conditions solar irradiance I, ambient temperature
T0 and specific heat capacity of air c6p :
Pmax = 2/3 ηcollector [g/(cp T0 )]Hchimney · Acollector · I. (5)
A typical large-scale solar chimney may have air temperature at the base
of the chimney about 18◦ C above ambient, air velocity through the turbine
of approximately 11 m/s, collector thermal efficiency based on global hori-
zontal radiation in the range 40–60% and overall solar to electric efficiency
of the order of 1–2% depending on tower height.6
An experimental solar chimney (Fig. 6) was constructed and operated
successfully from 1982–1988 at Manzanares, Spain.7 It had a 50 kW rating,
195 m high chimney, 46000 m2 collector area, 10.2 m chimney internal diam-
eter (at base) and 10 m turbine rotor diameter. The plant was constructed
with an intended lifespan of just three years, but ended up operating for
eight. The tower collapsed in a storm in 1989 due to a corroded guy wire,
though the structure was beyond its design life.
The technology has been developed and advanced largely through the
German engineering firm Schlaich, Bergermann and Partner. Commercial
projects from 30–200 MW have been proposed for Jordan, India, Australia
Fig. 6. Illustration of a 5 MW solar chimney.

Source: Schlaich, Bergermann and Partner.
and the southwest USA. A 200 MW plant would typically require a 1 km

high chimney (with 120 m diameter at the base) and a 7 km diameter col-
lector. With annual solar radiation of 2300 kWh/m2 /yr, such a plant could
generate 680GWh/yr of electricity.7 Very large solar fields with a tower
height clearly exceeding 500 m are necessary to allow for a reasonable effi-
ciency and electricity costs. No commercial off-take of this technology has
happened yet, mainly due to the perceived risk to the investors who are
reluctant to invest several $100 million in a very tall tower project without
reasonable scaling steps.
The attraction of the technology is its simplicity, with capital costs
able to be minimized in countries with low labor costs. However, operation
and maintenance is likely to be an area of concern. If plastic is used as the
collector, the lifetime will likely be considerably less than for glass; for either
plastic membrane or glass, the cleaning cost could be significant given the
essentially flat arrangement.
4.3 Parabolic Trough

4.3.1 Trough technology
Parabolic trough technology, often referred to simply as a solar trough, uses
linear parabolic reflectors to concentrate solar radiation to a focal line.
A fluid flows through a receiver tube positioned along the focus and is
heated for use in a downstream process.
The concentration ratio of a parabolic trough collector (PTC) is given
by the ratio of collector aperture area (planar) and the circumferential area
of the absorber tube, with typical values ranging from C = 10 to 100.8
Parabolic troughs generally have a single axis of rotation that is aligned
in either an east–west or north–south orientation. A north–south axis pro-
vides greater annual solar energy collection because the angle of incidence of
the sun’s rays to the normal of the trough aperture (θ) is less on an annual
average basis’ leading to cos θ being closer to the ideal value of one. Addi-
tionally, during the summer months when some three to four times more
solar energy falls in than in winter (depending on latitude and seasonal
climate), the average daily incidence angle is lowest, meaning collection is
greater. An east–west system, by contrast, provides a lower seasonal varia-
tion in energy delivery.
For a solar trough at latitude φ on day of year n and at time of day t
(0 ≤ t < 24), the angle of incidence between the incoming beam and the
normal of the aperture of the reflector, θ, can be found by the following
relationships.
For a parabolic trough with east–west horizontal continuous tracking,
cos θew.hor = (1 − cos2 δ · sin2 ϕ)1/2 (6)
and for north–south horizontal continuous tracking,
cos θns.hor = [(sin φ · sin δ + cos φ · cos δ · cos ϕ)2 + cos2 δ · sin2 ϕ]1/2 , (7)
where the quantities δ and ϕ are defined by
sin δ = − sin(23.45◦ ) · cos[360◦ (n + 10)/365.25] (8)
and
ϕ = 360◦ · (t − 12)/24. (9)
Polar axis continuous tracking
Cos θns.polar = cos δ. (10)
For comparison, a dish concentrator with ideal two axis tracking gives
Cos θtwo axis = 1.
In large PTCs for solar power stations, a number of trough modules are
connected in series such that the overall length might be up to 150 m with
apertures over 6 m wide. In these cases, the collector unit is rotated by

hydraulic motors. Due to the large forces exerted, careful position control
and high precision is required.
The reflectors of parabolic trough collectors are usually made from rear-
silvered low iron glass (92–94% spectral reflectance) which has been ther-
mally sagged to give the correct shape. Alternative reflectors currently use
polished aluminum sandwich construction sheets and polymer film reflec-
tors on a substrate. It is noted, however, that rear-silvered glass reflectors
have now been in operation in a variety of applications and environments
for over 20 years, and have also been subjected to accelerated life tests that
indicate negligible drop in reflective performance with time.
The heart of the PTC is the receiver tube. In PTC power stations,
these tubes comprise a steel pipe (to contain the fluid pressure) with an
annular glass cover. To minimize convection losses, the space between the
glass and the steel pipe is evacuated, requiring a metal bellows and special
glass-to-metal weld to seal the glass to the metal pipe and allow for differ-
ential expansion. The vacuum is maintained through the use of ‘getters’ —
chemical sponges that maintain and indicate vacuum status. The evacuated
tube is especially valuable when operation temperatures are above 250◦C,
where the reduction in thermal losses outweighs the extra cost.
The other mechanism for reducing thermal loss is the selective surface,
which has been discussed in Sec. 3.2.
Because the receiver tube rotates with the trough reflector, a suitable
means of transporting the fluid to the ground is required. Both flexible hoses
and ball joints have been used, with ball joints being used more commonly
in modern troughs that use oil as the heat transfer fluid (HTF) due to lower
maintenance requirements and reduced pressure drop.
Table 1 provides characteristics of the nine SEGS (Solar Energy Gen-
erating System) parabolic trough plants built by LUZ that have been in
commercial operation for more than 20 years. Figure 7 shows a typical
parabolic trough plant layout.
The LS-1, LS-2, and LS-3 collector family was developed by LUZ simul-
taneously with the implementation of the first large scale solar thermal
power plants (SEGS I–SEGS IX, Table 1) in California that have been in
commercial operation for more than 20 years. The collector has a mod-
ular design based on steel structures with parabolic pre-shaped, silvered
glass mirrors and improved efficiency by implementation of evacuated tube
receivers. For the first time this series of commercial projects justified the
investment into series production facilities for key components like the
Table 1: Characteristics of the SEGS IIX plants.9
Solar
field Solar
1st year Net outlet field Solar Fossil Annual
SEGS of output temp. area turbine turbine output
plant operation MWe (C◦ /◦ F) (m2 ) eff. (%) eff. (%) (MWh)
I 1985 13.8 307/585 82,960 31.5 — 30,100

II 1986 30 316/601 190,338 29.4 37.3 80,500
III & IV 1987 30 349/660 230,300 30.6 37.4 92,780
V 1988 30 349/660 250,500 30.6 37.4 91,820
VI 1989 30 390/734 188,000 37.5 39.5 90,850
VII 1989 30 390/734 194,280 37.5 39.5 92,646
VIII 1990 80 390/734 464,340 37.6 37.6 252,750
IX 1991 80 390/734 483,960 37.6 37.6 256,125
Fig. 7. Typical layout of an 80 MW parabolic trough power plant, no storage, showing

a density of mirror aperture to ground covered of approximately 30% and approximately
0.5 MW/ha.9
curved mirrors and the evacuated absorber tube, establishing their dimen-
sions as a de-facto standard for subsequent developments.
Consequently, the EuroTrough designed by a European consortium in
the late-1990s was based on the LS-3 concentrator geometry with a focal
length of 1.71 m and an aperture width of 5.77 m, but offered advantages
in stiffness and costs.10 Increasing competition in the emerging market
started by the attractive feed-in tariff in Spain and led to further devel-
opments of individual variants by the different companies of the former
consortium for the SKAL-ET collector that was used in the first commer-
cial parabolic trough plant in Spain. Recent developments show a continuing
trend towards larger aperture sizes as for the Heliotrough, Senertrough2 and
Ultimate Trough (Table 2). These constructions have thick glass/silvered
reflector and a steel torque tube or box in common (Table 2).
4.3.2 Heat transfer field

The fluid used in the heat transfer field of parabolic trough collector power
plants being installed today is most commonly a thermal oil, in particular
VP-1, an eutectic mixture of 73.5% diphenyl oxide and 26.5% diphenyl.
This oil is attractive because it can reach reasonably high temperatures of
395◦ C before decomposition becomes significant. However it has a relatively
high melting point (12◦ C) requiring auxiliary heating, and at atmospheric
pressure it boils at 257◦C requiring an inert gas blanket.
Other heat transfer oils are available that extend this operating tem-
perature range slightly, but are expensive. Other heat transfer fluids are
under active investigation and demonstration, viz. steam (known as direct
steam generation — DSG), molten salt, carbon dioxide and radiation on a
drizzling particle curtain.
The attraction of steam based on demineralized water is that it can be
used directly in the Rankine cycle with no need for an intermediate heat
exchanger. Also, it is cheaper than oil, the environmental hazards are less
and higher temperatures are possible. The difficulties are that the pressure
associated with useful steam temperatures becomes high, and thus collec-
tor field piping and flexible joint fittings increase costs. In addition, the
two-phase flow in the evaporation portion of the receiver field can create
hydrodynamic flow instabilities and temperature control over long distances
is needed under transient solar radiation. Research has been carried out in
the USA on DSG since the 1980s. LUZ built an LS4 DSG prototype in
Israel to follow their successful LS2 and LS3 PTC’s which used oil as the
February 11, 2016
14:7
Large-Scale Solar Thermal Plants (CSP)

Table 2: Characteristics of different parabolic trough collectors.10–14
Helio-trough Sener- Sener- Ultimate

LS-1 LS-2 LS-3 Euro-trough SKAL-ET trough 1 trough 2 Trough
Start of development 1984 1985 1989 1998 2005 2005 2006 2009
Aperture width in m 2550 5000 5.77 5.77 6.78 5.77 6.87 7.51
Length per Module/SCE in m 6.3 8 12 12 19 12.27 13.23 24
SCA length in m 50.2 47.1 99 147.8 191 158.8 242.2
Focal length in m 0.68 1.40 1.71 1.71 1.71 1.71 2
Torsion force carried by Torque Torque V-truss Torque Torque Torque Torque Torque
tube tube Frame-work box tube tube tube box
b2236-ch03
83
page 83
heat transfer medium. A considerable research program was conducted by

CIEMAT, DLR, ZSW and Siemens in the 1990s. A European R&D project
named DISS (Direct Integrated Solar Steam) test facility was built at the
PSA in Spain in 1998 and had been extended and used for considerable
testing since then.15 The current configuration is a single row of length
750 m and 3,822 m2 aperture area, providing a nominal 1.8 MWth with
1 kg/s of superheated steam at 400◦ C and 10 MPa pressure. The experimen-
tal results concluded that no additional heat transfer enhancement devices
are required to keep within allowable temperature gradients. The preferred
arrangement to ensure reliable control is recirculation rather than once-
through, or two-phase stratification in the evaporator section prevented (or
minimized) by water injectors and mass flux control (Fig. 8).
Molten salts already have a long history as heat transfer fluids in solar
tower power plants including the French Themis Power Plant (1983),16 the
US Molten Salt Electric Experiment (1983)17 and in the Solar Two plant
(1996).18 In the last few years, investigations of liquid salts in parabolic
trough systems have also emerged. Liquid salts promise to overcome draw-
backs of the classic heat transfer medium diphenyl/diphenyl ether. Salts
are chosen due to their suitable thermophysical properties; they comprise
high boiling/decomposition points, low vapor pressure, large specific heat
capacity, large thermal conductivity and high densities at low pressures.19 A
higher process temperature leads to a significant rise in the thermodynamic
Fig. 8. EU project “direct integrated solar steam (DISS)” on the PSA, Spain.
Source: DLR.
conversion cycle efficiency. The large capability to store energy in small vol-
umes has two advantages. Solar field parasitics can be significantly lowered
due to the very low flow velocity of salt and also the amount of storage mass
is drastically lowered. Furthermore, typical salt mixtures are significantly
cheaper than synthetic oils. Heat can therefore be absorbed by the salt in
the irradiated receiver tubes and directly stored in big flat-bottom storage
tanks. The solar field and power block are fully decoupled; such a system
is beneficial for satisfying the demands of full dispatchable power plants.
The current main candidates are nitrate salts. Sodium (60 wt.%)
and potassium (40 wt.%) nitrate is being used in the 5 MW-Archimede
plant.20 The upper allowed temperature is above 550◦ C21 ; first crystalliza-
tion of the non-eutectic melt occurs at 238◦ C. Adding further substances
to the salt allows lower crystallization and freezing temperatures. Very
promising future nitrate salts are calcium/sodium/potassium nitrate and
lithium/sodium/potassium nitrate; the eutectic mixtures achieve solidifica-
tion temperatures of 133◦ C and 120◦C, respectively,19 while still maintain-
ing high maximal temperatures of >480◦C and 550◦ C, respectively.22 The
overall group of currently investigated salt candidates varies widely.23,24
Nevertheless, there are also concerns about molten-salt-based parabolic
trough plants. Due to the high solidification temperature the process setup
needs to be adapted. Thus, the solar plant must be fully equipped with
impedance and trace heating systems in order to secure non-freezing of the
salt. Salt melts at high temperatures are highly corrosive, but the latest
research and process experience with demonstration plants shows that this
can be handled with the right choice of stainless steel.25 Both of these main
issues and their handling lead to higher investment costs. In current research
projects22,26,27 it has been demonstrated that the increase in total plant
efficiency and lower storage and HTF costs outweigh the higher investment
in solar field and piping and therefore lead to a decrease in the electricity
costs from solar thermal power plants.
Gaseous heat transfer media like air or CO2 are also proposed to be
used in parabolic trough systems to reach operation temperatures up to
600◦ C. The Swiss company Airlight has specifically developed a receiver for
non-pressurized air with secondary optics for re-concentration and spillage
minimization, based on coiled cavity heat exchangers and low thermal iner-
tia radiative shields insulation. The receiver implements a cross-flow design
and has inlet and outlet on the same side, which minimizes piping. This solu-
tion is considered inexpensive and environmentally friendly. It also makes
it possible to use a packed bed storage concept that uses a closed container
filled with stone gravel. A 3 MW demonstration plant built close to Agadir

(Morocco) is starting up in 2014. Another approach has been proposed by
CIEMAT and leads to a test loop that has been erected at the PSA,28 with
the aim of working with CO2 and other gases at temperatures and pressures
up to 525◦ C and 100 bar, respectively. High pressure leads to low pumping
power requirements so that a conventional tube design is feasible. CO2 has
been selected as more advantageous than helium or nitrogen, mainly due
to the fact that CO2 has higher density at the same values of pressure and
temperature. Coupling such system directly to closed gas-turbine cycles
(Joule–Brayton) has been proposed.
4.4 Linear Fresnel

Large reflectors broken down into multiple Fresnel sub-elements can help
to improve the manageability of moving components. The concept was first
advanced by Baum29 in 1956 and later important development work in
linear Fresnel systems was undertaken in 1962 by the Italian patent No.
6788664 of Francia, described by an Italian group for the history of solar
energy by Silvi,30 and also containing tower concepts. Essentially, the linear
focusing Fresnel system is a still simpler variation of the parabolic trough,
whilst the central receiver (a quasi point area focus system) could be con-
sidered split into many almost planar dishes with various focal lengths.
The linear focusing Fresnel concept was revived for its potential com-
mercial application in 2000.31 Among the attractions of this technology is
that the moving structural components are at ground level with reduced
wind loading and cost compared to a trough, and the receiver is an inverted
cavity fixed in space. A fixed receiver can be designed without the limita-
tion of flexible joints, making direct steam generation quite feasible, as well
as allowing the possibility of very long lengths, thus reducing end losses.
Some receiver designs have proposed a simple boiler tube arrangement, and
others are using evacuated tubes from trough technology with a secondary
reflector.
The disadvantage of the linear Fresnel system is that annual optical
efficiency is around 43% (depending on latitude) compared to a parabolic
trough field of approximately 57%. The aperture-specific investment cost
of a linear Fresnel field in order to break even with a parabolic trough field
has been calculated to between 29% and 78% of the parabolic trough costs,
depending on optical and thermal performance assumptions, the definition
of the aperture, as well as operation and maintenance (O&M) costs.32
Fig. 9. Illustration of a compact linear Fresnel reflector in which reflectors can target
one or another receiver depending on time of day and solar incidence angle.33
Over the last 10 years, there has been a rapid rise in linear Fresnel
demonstrations and projects (Fig. 9). In Australia, a 1.3 MW demonstra-
tion loop was integrated with the Liddell coal-fired power station by Solar
Heat and Power (now AREVA) in 2005, and is presently being upgraded
to a 9 MW system by Transfield and Novatec Solar.34 Further, north in
Queensland, AREVA are building a 44 MW linear Fresnel as a solar boost to
the dry-cooled supercritical Kogan Creek coal-fired power station.35 More
recently, an AU$1.2 billion, 250 MW linear Fresnel and natural gas hybrid
project called “Solar Dawn” has been announced for Australia.36
Other linear Fresnel projects include the AUSRA’s 5 MW Kimberlina
demonstration project in California,37 the Man Ferrostaal 1 MW loop in
Spain (2007), and the plants PE1 (1.4 MW, Fig. 10) and PE2 (30 MW)
built by Novatec Solar in Murcia, Spain.38
4.5 Central Receiver (Power Tower)

Central receiver systems39,40 comprise many ground-mounted reflecting
panels (heliostats) that individually track the sun in two axes and reflect it
to a receiver mounted on a tower (Fig. 11).
4.5.1 Heliostats and field layout

Heliostats are typically based on rear-silvered glass, though some stretched
membrane designs have been tried. Sizes range from 1 m2 to 150 m2 each,
and prototypes of up to 200 m2 have also been developed. They are driven
around each axis by either a motor and gearbox, linear actuators or a
Fig. 10. Novatecs Solar PE1: A 1.4 MW demonstration plant at Murcia, Spain. PE2
(30 MW) is presently under commissioning on an adjacent site.
Source: Novatec Solar.
hydraulic system. Control is most often accomplished with open loop con-
trollers using well-known algorithms for the solar position. However, closed
loop heliostat positioning systems are also used in some designs.
The function of the control and actuation system is primarily to main-
tain the normal of the reflective surface such that it bisects the angle
between the sun, heliostat and receiver, with refined systems enabling
target-alignment strategies on the receiver. The most common actuation
mechanism in use involves rotation about the azimuth axis with adjustment
for the altitude angle (e.g. elevation). However, others such as pitch/roll and
target-aligned also offer particular benefits.
(a)
(b)
Fig. 11. Illustration of the central receiver concepts3 using multiple heliostats to reflect
solar radiation to a central fixed receiver. (a) with medium temperature steam cycle;
(b) with high temperature gas cycle.
Source: DLR.
4.5.2 Receivers
There are generally three types of central receivers in use.
In external receivers, the radiation directly heats the tubes that contain
the heat transfer fluid with tubes exposed to the atmosphere. They are most
often used for medium temperature applications such as steam generation.
Cavity receivers use a tube bank as the absorber surface within a cavity,
but the aperture where the concentrated radiation enters is much smaller
than the absorbing surface and is useful for minimizing re-radiation and
convection losses in higher temperature applications. Note that partial cav-
ities are possible.
Although point focus concentrators are capable of delivering very high
concentration ratios to the receiver, the ability to absorb the energy is
dependent on the heat transfer characteristics of the interface between sur-
face and fluid. Thus, in many cases, the peak allowable flux on the receiver
is heat transfer limited rather than being limited by the solar concentra-
tor. For example, in-tube pressurized air or superheated steam in a tubular
receiver might need to be limited to an irradiance of under 200 kW/m2
because of the poor heat transfer properties of a gas. In contrast, the
evaporator section of a solar boiler might handle radiation of the order of
500 kW/m2 , molten salts up to 1000 kW/m2 (Fig. 12) or more in the case
of volumetric receivers (as outlined in the following), and particle receivers
even higher.
Volumetric receivers are those where, instead of using tubes to con-
tain the fluid (which may fatigue under a high number of high temperature
cycles and which limits the allowable incident flux due to heat transfer lim-
itations), the receiver comprises a porous arrangement of metal honeycomb
or ceramic foam material to absorb a very high concentration of flux. This
provides a small surface area for high heat transfer to the fluid. Volumet-
ric receivers may be at atmospheric pressure or, if pressurized, require a
transparent window (with the absorber in a cavity behind). Both volumet-
ric receiver techniques have been developed by DLR, tested in the solar
furnace and operated on the towers of the PSA.47,48
Figure 13 describes the potential of the open cycle concept, especially
considering the fact that air as a heat transfer medium is always available,
free and without any danger. Conduction and convection losses are minimal;
exit temperatures range at the very “downstream” end of the material layer
at maximum. And even better: the gas exit temperatures nearly equal the
material temperatures at the downstream end.
Fig. 12. Solar Two in California — a 10 MW demonstration of a receiver using molten-

salt as the heat transfer fluid. Operating from 1996 to 1999, it provided the technology
basis for new commercial projects currently operating or under development that promise
cost-effective long term thermal storage.
Source: SANDIA.
The details of the DLR Jülich pilot power plant with open cycle volu-
metric receiver are shown in Fig. 14. The closed cycle solution is given in
Fig. 15.
4.6 Dish Concentrators

From an optical perspective, the ideal solar concentrator is the paraboloidal
dish. It tracks the sun continuously around two axes, and because the
receiver moves with the dish it is always collinear with the sun resulting in
no cosine losses. The dish provides the highest levels of concentration and
is useful for applications requiring high solar flux.
As with heliostats, a wide range of solar dish sizes have been developed.
Some very small applications (under 1 kW) have been proposed, but gen-
erally sizes have ranged from approximately 40 m2 up to the largest ones
built of nearly 500 m2 (Fig. 16).
Dish systems have been classified as distributed or centralized. Dis-
tributed dish systems have generally been based around the Stirling
engine, though micro turbines (based on the Brayton cycle) are also
under investigation. In each case, electricity is generated directly from the
Fig. 13. Principle of heat transfer and temperature distribution, comparing the concepts
of “in-tube receiver” with “volumetric receiver”.
Source: DLR.
Fig. 14. Open air volumetric receiver at the DLR Juelich Power Tower.60
Source: DLR.
Fig. 15. Closed cycle volumetric receiver arrangement.48

Source: DLR.
engine/generator which is mounted at the focus of the dish. This allows

relatively simple collection of energy from many point sources.
In centralized dish systems, an array of dishes is used to generate a
high temperature fluid. This provides high solar to thermal efficiency at the
Fig. 16. Left: One of the largest solar dishes in the world at the Australian National
University, Canberra, shown here with a steam receiver. It has a 494 m2 aperture, 13.4 m
focal length, 50.1◦ rim angle and total mass of 19.1 tons. The reflector uses square panels
with 1 mm rear-silvered glass adhered to a pre-formed sandwich substrate. Right: 10 kW
dish Stirling units installed at PSA, Spain.
Source: Left: ANU. Right: DLR.
receiver but requires the aggregation of fluid from multiple point sources to
the central facility. Each dish also requires flexible joints to allow the fluid
to travel from the moving receiver to the ground.
The largest centralized dish demonstration to date was the Solarplant
1 system built in Southern California by the Lajet consortium in 1983/84.
It comprised 700 dishes with a total collecting area of 30590 m2 . The dishes
generated steam in their cavity receivers, with 600 of the dishes producing
saturated steam and others taking the saturated steam and superheating
it to 460◦ C. The project experienced problems with the reflective film used
on the dish facets and long start-up times.40
More recently, Wizard Power have proposed a project based on large
dish technology generating high temperature steam for a 40 MW steam tur-
bine41 using dish collector technology developed at the Australian National
University.42
A variety of dish reflector concepts have been developed. Some early
designs used a fiberglass mold to which reflective tiles were glued. An inter-
esting stretched membrane concept was used for a number of the dish Stir-
ling demonstration units. In this design, the dish is shaped into a parabola
by plastically yielding the membrane using a combination of uniform and
non-uniform loading, with mirrored tiles or reflective film providing the
reflection. Membranes for the Schlaich, Bergermann and Partner dish Stir-
ling units in Spain (44.2 m2 , 9 kW) were made from 0.23 mm thick stainless
steel sheet. Shape is maintained in practice by drawing a slight vacuum
behind the membrane. If a temperature excursion occurred at the receiver,

the vacuum could be released quickly to disrupt the flux.
Up to now no real commercial system has been built using a dish Stir-
ling system. On the one hand, this is due to the fact that the effort in
operation and maintenance of single units is still significant at the current
stage of development. On the other hand, the integration of thermal storage
is more complicated than in trough, Fresnel or tower concepts due to the
small size of the individual collector-receiver unit. Thus, competition with
PV systems is very challenging.
However, in the field of process heat supply, in particular for cooking, a
specific dish application has been very successful. W. Scheffler43 has devel-
oped a fixed focus concentrator which not only provides simple and precise
automatic tracking but also a fixed focus away from the path of the incident
radiation. This design also provides an opportunity to shift the receiver for
indoor applications. The versatile reflector rotates along an axis parallel to
a polar axis with an angular velocity of one revolution per day from east to
west to counterbalance the effect of earth rotation. Therefore, the relative
position of the Scheffler reflector with respect to the sun remains stationary
and provides a fixed focus on the line of the axis of rotation. The reflec-
tor not only provides daily tracking but also a seasonal tracking device
to ensure that the focus remains at the same fixed point with changing
solar declination. Nevertheless, there is little compromise on the aperture
area as compared with the conventional paraboloid concentrator. Scheffler
reflectors are used today in different sizes from 2 m2 to 60 m2 capable of
delivering temperatures in the range of 300◦C. They are used for cooking
purposes e.g. by providing steam to large community kitchens and hospitals
in India and elsewhere, with several thousand systems in operation today.
The use of solar energy for the generation of steam is now an economically
attractive possibility since the payback period of such a system lies between
1.5 and 2 years.
5 Thermal Storage
Solar and wind power are generally disadvantaged by the intermittent
nature of the source. Not only does this lead to uncertainty for the grid
operator, but also invested capital such as the turbine and the balance of
plant equipment remains unused for much of the year. For CSP, the solar
field requires about one-third to one half of the total capital cost, and of
course this cannot be used when the sun is not shining. However, if thermal
Fig. 17. Schematic of the basic principle of storage in a CSP system. The solar field,
storage and turbine may be sized for any desired outcome — from simply charging the
storage during solar hours for later turbine operation, through to simultaneously running
the turbine and charging the storage during solar hours with the turbine then continuing
to operate into the night.
Source: IEA CSP Technology Roadmap, 2011.
storage is employed, the balance of plant equipment, comprising the elec-

tricity generating equipment such as the turbine, can be used to continue
generating electricity regardless of solar conditions.
The basic concept is that solar energy during the day is used to charge
a thermal store. Then, on demand, that stored heat is used to generate
steam for a steam turbine or otherwise heat a working fluid or feedstock in
a controlled manner for a downstream energy conversion process (Fig. 17).
The US Department of Energy has established a target cost for thermal
storage of under $15/kWh based on round trip efficiency.44
5.1 Two-Tank Molten Salt

The thermal storage technology of choice in today’s commercial CSP sys-
tems is the two-tank molten salt system. A number of 50 MW trough
projects (Fig. 22), with oil as the heat transfer fluid in the PTC field
interfacing with a salt storage loop, are now operating with this approach,
though this limits temperatures to that of the heat transfer oil. A new PTC
receiver tube designed for molten salt is under early test operation.
A 20 MW tower developed by Gemasolar in Spain (Fig. 24) began oper-
ation in 2011 using molten salt as both the receiver heat transfer fluid and
storage medium. Based on the pilot scale concept originally developed at
Solar Two45 in California, it uses salt as the HTF in the receiver (565◦ C)
and a two-tank storage system. Designed for 15 hours storage (6500 hours
Table 3: Data for the Andasol parabolic trough power plant near Guadix.54
Turbine Capacity (gross) 50 MWe

Turbine Efficiency (Full Power) 37%
Storage Thermal Rating 1010 MWh, 7.4 hrs
Storage Tank Size, H × D 2 tanks, 14 m × 38.5 m each
Storage Fluid Solar salt (60% NaNO3 , 40% KNO3 )
Storage Heat Exchanger 16,000 m2
Solar Collector Field Aperture Area 510,000 m2
Solar Collector Assembly, W × L 5.77 m × 148 m
Solar Collector Row Spacing 16.2 m
Solar Collector Fluid (HTF) Therminol VP-1
annually), it has demonstrated 24 hour operation on solar energy. Many new

CSP projects are incorporating two-tank molten salt storage, and several
large projects, both tower and PTC, are under construction.
5.2 Single Tank Molten Salt

One way to reduce storage costs may be to use a single tank system with
a thermocline, where the hot and cold molten salt is contained in a single
vessel, separated vertically by a small high-temperature gradient region.
The single tank system has a much lower volume than the total volume
of a two-tank system. The two isothermal regions remain vertically strat-
ified through thermal buoyancy forces. A low cost filler material (such as
quartzite rock) with high specific heat and low void fraction (<0.25) is used
in the tank to further reduce the inventory of the relatively expensive molten
salt. Comparative studies have shown that the thermocline approach may
offer a 35% cost reduction over the two-tank system.46 The issues that have
been raised are thermal ratcheting (when a filler material is used) and also
the risk related to disturbance of the stratified regions when charging or
discharging and the consequent loss of temperature difference. This latter
effect is managed through well-placed inlet and outlet points, distributor
regions and suitable flow rates.
5.3 Alternative Thermal Storage Options

Molten salt offers a number of attractions such as relatively low cost, and
good specific heat and density, but poses problems both at the low tem-
perature end (due to elevated freezing temperatures) and the upper end
(due to instability at temperatures that would be even more attractive
for thermal power cycles). Given that point focus solar collectors can reach
temperatures in excess of salt upper temperatures, alternative materials are

constantly under development to enable thermal storage at temperatures
well in excess of the present ≈600◦ C.
Solids such as graphite, silicon carbide, alumina, high temperature con-
crete and fluidized sand have been investigated as storage media. Generally,
the weight of these materials for any significant storage capacity precludes
them being located at the receiver in the case of central receivers or dishes,
although they may be useful for overcoming operational transients. Thus, a
high temperature heat transfer medium is usually needed to move the heat
from the receiver into the solid material. Heat transfer fluids considered
above, include supercritical fluids such as steam and CO2 , lower pressure
gases such as helium and air, and even solid particles used in a “falling cur-
tain” arrangement in the receiver. Given the solid material will not have
freezing point issues and will generally have a much higher upper tempera-
ture limit than today’s solar salt formulations, the HTF/bulk solid material
combination may be a cost effective form of storage particularly for higher
temperature CSP applications.
The Jülich Solar Tower project has reported results for temperatures up
to 680◦ C with success, using alumina porcelain as the packed bed material
in a regenerative design.47 High temperature concrete has been investigated
and has shown long-term stability for temperatures up to approximately
500◦ C, suitable for parabolic trough power plants.49 As an indication of
thermal capacity, approximately 50000 m3 of concrete would be needed for
a 50 MW plant with design storage capacity of 1,100 MWh plant similar to
that shown in Fig. 22.
The above thermal storage options rely on sensible heat, and thus, as
heat is drawn from the storage media, the temperature begins to drop.
Phase change materials provide a constant discharge temperature over
much of the inventory by operating within the latent heat region. This is
particularly valuable for the evaporation section of steam generators. How-
ever, this requires the development of phase change materials (PCMs) for
the desired operating temperature. Many PCMs have been formulated for
low temperatures; however there are few low-cost synthetic options avail-
able for CSP at present. The phase change temperature of KNO3 (333◦ C)
and NaNO3 (308◦ C) may be suitable for low temperature application, and
NaCl (802◦ C), Na2 CO3 (851◦ C) and K2 CO3 (891◦ C) for high temperature
application but present management difficulties such as corrosion. Liquid
metals are a form of PCM though they are relatively expensive. PCMs
often exhibit poor thermal conductivity — one option is to encapsulate the
PCM material within a matrix of higher thermal conductivity to improve

the surface area available for heat transfer.
5.4 Thermochemical Storage

An alternative to sensible heat storage is to store the solar energy through
a thermochemical process. A closed loop thermochemical cycle provides
storage only, whereas an open loop thermochemical cycle provides a means
to store solar energy prior to using it as a fuel. The principle of closed-loop
thermochemical storage is that solar energy is used to drive, at constant
temperature, a dissociation or reforming reaction which is preferably highly
endothermic. The products are then stored, and later recombined in an
exothermic reaction as and when the heat is needed. This reverses the
endothermic reaction and closes the loop. Detailed information is given in
Chapter 9 of the present publication.
5.5 Cost Reduction of Thermal Storage Through Higher

Temperatures
One method of significantly reducing thermal storage cost is simply uti-
lizing higher temperature storage. Modern parabolic trough plants use oil
as the HTF, which limits the maximum salt storage temperature to about
385◦ C even though conventional nitrate salt formulations are capable of
working up to 560◦ C. In this low temperature configuration for PTCs, the
temperature difference is low (∆T ≈ 100◦ C). This is because cold storage
is kept at approximately 290◦ C in order to keep conditions well away from
the salt melting point of 220◦C. This low temperature difference results in
a much larger storage volume (and hence salt and tank cost) being required
for a given storage capacity. A PTC has recently been demonstrated with
a receiver tube that uses salt as the HTF, as noted before.
Central receivers can reach the upper operating temperature of today’s
salt formulations with relative ease, providing a working temperature dif-
ference that is two to three times higher than possible with PTC’s using oil
as the HTF (though the ∆T that is thermodynamically useful will depend
on the cycle). Thus, the inventory of salt and the size of tanks required is
less, though the temperatures are higher. This is expected to lead to lower
costs of thermal storage.
A number of research programs are under way to develop salt formu-
lations that both decrease the melting point (Sandia have demonstrated
a salt with a melting temperature below 100◦ C) and increase the upper
operating temperature to make full use of the capabilities of point focus

concentrators.
6 CSP Systems
According to the principles of thermodynamics, power cycles convert heat
to mechanical energy more efficiently at higher temperatures. However, the
collector efficiency drops with higher absorber temperature due to greater
heat losses. Consequently, for any given concentration factor there is an
optimum operating temperature at which the highest conversion efficiency
is achieved. With increasing concentration factors, higher optimum efficien-
cies are achievable. Figure 18 illustrates this effect assuming an ideal solar
concentrator combined with a perfect (Carnot) power cycle. If the spectral
absorption characteristics of the absorber are perfectly tailored to maxi-
mize absorption in the solar spectrum but avoid thermal radiation losses in
the infrared part of the spectrum (selective absorber), additional efficiency
gains can be expected, in particular, at lower concentration factors.
In practice, the optimum operation temperatures will be lower than
these theoretical graphs, because power cycles with Carnot performance and
ideal absorbers do not exist. Furthermore, the impact of frequent operation
under part-load conditions throughout the year on the efficiency of the
system has to be considered.
Fig. 18. Efficiencies versus temperature with increasing concentrations.

Source: DLR.
A CSP power plant is an optimization of the type of collector, its oper-

ating parameters, and the thermodynamic cycle employed. In theory, the
heat engine is the defining component as concentrating solar collectors can
provide heated fluids for most temperatures. For commercial systems, the
cycles of choice are Rankine, Brayton, and Stirling cycles. Each presents
specific features such as preferred fluids, temperatures, efficiencies and,
importantly, part load response curves.
An important point is that each of these cycles is able to operate inde-
pendently of a solar input which affords the ability for CSP to be hybridized
with fossil fuel in such a way as to improve performance and reduce the
cost of the solar energy delivered.
6.1 Rankine Cycle Based

All of the large-scale commercial CSP projects in the world at present are
based on the Rankine cycle, the most common form of which is the steam
turbine (though it should be noted that a 1 MW parabolic trough power
plant using an organic Rankine cycle has been built in Arizona, USA). The
majority use the PTC with oil as the HTF. The only real variations are that
different developers have applied different trough structures. The majority
use receiver tubes available commercially from a small number of suppliers.
The parabolic trough power plants typically operate with steam tem-
peratures of about 380◦ C at subcritical pressures and steam cycle efficien-
cies of around 37–38% (gross). Even lower temperature operation has been
considered for linear Fresnel systems using saturated steam turbine designs
from the nuclear industry. However, at present most interest is in higher
temperature turbines (due to higher efficiency) and thus the development
of receiver tubes using molten salt or direct steam generation.
Central receivers can easily achieve the temperatures of steam turbines
used in many coal-fired power stations today (≈540◦ C), and even the con-
ditions needed for supercritical steam turbines of around 25 MPa and over
600◦ C, where cycle efficiencies could increase to greater than 40%.
One way in which CSP may be introduced most readily to the market
is through solar steam supplementation of existing or new coal or gas-fired
steam plants. This allows the solar steam to benefit from the higher efficien-
cies of larger steam turbines and utilizes existing power block capital; the
downside is that the solar plant is then constrained to the solar irradiance of
that site and the solar contribution is generally low. Overall, however such
an option provides excellent transitional opportunities for CSP. In addition
to integration with a conventional coal or gas-fired Rankine cycle, the solar

steam can also be integrated with the steam cycle (bottoming cycle) of a
combined cycle plant.
Such plants are called “Integrated Solar Combined Cycle Systems
(ISCCS)”. They are combined cycle power plants using additional solar
heat generated by parabolic troughs in the bottom cycle. Three ISCCS
plants are in operation: Kuraymat, Egypt, Hassi R’Mel, Algeria, and Ain
Beni Mathar, Morocco. These plants produce saturated steam in the solar
steam generator to be fed into the HRSG. The electricity generated from
the solar part is in all cases less than 17% at the design point. The annual
solar fractions are even lower because the solar field delivers less than the
design point heat for a large portion of the year.
Two additional plants viz. Archimede, Italy, and Martin, Next Gener-
ation Solar, Florida can also be included in this category.
Table 4 presents for the ISCCS plants an overview of the total design
output and of the solar share. Figure 19 gives an outline of the fossil-solar
integrated power station at Kuraymat, Egypt.50
6.2 Brayton Cycle

Central receivers and dishes can be used to provide hot air for Brayton
cycles, i.e. gas turbines. In the industrial context, gas turbines have hun-
dreds of megawatts capacity and operate with turbine inlet temperatures
exceeding 1300◦C. Point focus collectors have demonstrated that they can
reach these temperatures, though the materials and fluid handling for such
temperatures needs to be carefully considered. Transporting such high tem-
perature gas streams to a turbine at ground level incurs either a high tem-
perature loss or expensive insulation; alternatively mounting a large gas
Table 4: ISCCS power plants50 (Status: June 2014).
Plant Design
design output
output from
ISCCS-Plant (MW) solar (MW) HTF
Kuraymat, Egypt 140 20 Diphenyl-oxide/biphenyl

HassiR’Mel, Algeria 150 25 Diphenyl-oxide/biphenyl
Ain Beni Mathar, Morocco 470 20 Diphenyl-oxide/biphenyl
Archimede, Italy 130 5 Molten salt
FPL Martin Next Generation 3780 75 Diphenyl-oxide/biphenyl
Solar, Florida
Fig. 19. The cycle arrangement for the integrated solar combined cycle system
(ISCCS)50 at Kuraymat, Egypt.
Source: Fichtner Solar GMBH.
turbine next to the receiver (on the tower top) can be structurally expen-
sive. It is noted that at present, the allowable gas turbine combustor inlet
temperature is generally much lower than the solar receiver can generate. If
solar/gas hybrid operation is desired, some significant gas turbine redesign
is required or the solar air temperature would need to be reduced which
would yield a low solar contribution. Though an open cycle gas turbine
requires no water for cooling, it is often less efficient than a large steam
turbine. Thus the advantage for the Brayton cycle lies in the modular-
ity and lower cost of gas turbines for small capacity systems, or in the
very high efficiency (≈60%) of a gas turbine combined cycles at larger
capacities (see Fig. 20). A number of research and demonstration programs
for the solar tower Brayton cycle are under way or have been previously
undertaken.51,52
A difficulty with such high temperature cycles is the ability to inte-
grate competitive thermal storage. Whilst electrochemical storage is possi-
ble after the generator (as with wind and PV) this prevents the use of the
inherent advantages of thermal storage of lower cost and ‘spinning reserve’.
A cycle under development for CSP is the closed loop Brayton cycle using
supercritical CO 2 as the working fluid. The particular properties of this
Fig. 20. Plot of comparative Brayton cycle efficiencies versus capacity.

Source: N. Siegel.
fluid mean that the power used to drive the compressor is significantly less
than in the conventional air Brayton cycle. In an optimized configuration,
this yields very high cycle efficiencies of over 50% even with dry cooling
at high ambient temperature. A bottoming cycle can improve this further.
Most importantly, as shown in Fig. 20, this efficiency can be achieved at
temperatures of the order of 650–700◦C which is a relatively comfortable
operating range for central receivers, and within the range of thermal stor-
age developments.
6.3 Stirling Cycle

The Stirling cycle offers one of the highest efficiencies of the thermal cycles,
and has been under development and demonstration for many years. It is a
compact device, and a solar dish can provide ideal concentrator character-
istics. It is based on a combination of constant temperature and adiabatic
processes, with the receiver being externally heated. The working fluid is
usually hydrogen or helium. Demonstrated capacities have been in the range
of tens of kilowatts, and solar-to-electric efficiencies of approximately 30%
have been reliably reproduced — one of the highest demonstrated by solar
energy in the field to date.53
7 New Commercial Power Stations

The early commercial success of the SEGS plants in the 1990s in the United
States was interrupted by a break of around 20 years due to the unfavorable
market conditions that ensued. However, after the turn of the century, a new
commercial dawn began, starting in Spain and with some delay, also in the
US, mainly driven by the concerns about climate change. This was followed
by the initiative of several other countries in the sunbelt that have identified
CSP as a technology option that fit well with their plans to decrease climate
change, provide energy security and create local employment. Table 5 gives
an overview on the worldwide installed capacities of parabolic trough power
plants in operation, under construction, under development or in an early
planning stage.
7.1 Parabolic Troughs

Meanwhile after 2007, the development of more efficient 150 m long
parabolic trough arrangements, including highly efficient receiver tubes,
enabled a successful build up of a large number of units with 50 MW peak
performances in Spain. The first 3 × 50 MW plants were erected as a block
with Andasol I, II, and III54 which can be seen in Fig. 21 and with details
in Fig. 22. Technical data is given in Table 3.
Based on this concept, up to now 22 plants have been installed in Spain,
each with a normal output of 50 MW capacity and 550000 m2 of solar field.
In addition, 24 systems of the same nominal output without storage are
now operating so that presently about 2.4 GW of capacity is available in
Spain. However, the economic crisis forced the Spanish Government to stop
the incentivizing of solar thermal technology and it has even reduced the
revenues for the existing plants so that no further installations are expected
in the near future.
In the United States, some trough plants have been put into operation.
Among them are the large systems Solana with 280 MW in Arizona and
Genesis with 250 MW in California.
In the Middle East North Africa (MENA) region, in South Africa and
in China are a few plants under construction.
The first large solar thermal power plant in the Arabian region is the
parabolic trough facility Shams I.55 The construction commenced in 2010
and was set to go online in 2013. The installed capacity amounts, with a
field of 768 collectors, to a performance of 100 MW. This plant is located at
Madinat Zayet, 120 km away from Abu Dhabi and is shown in Fig. 23. The
Table 5: Capacities of parabolic trough power plants in MW of various countries and

in various stages of implementation (Status: June 2014).
Operational Under construction Development Planned Total
— Parabolic 3,108 1,391 980 1,065 6,543

trough
Argentina 20 20
Brazi 1 50 51
Chile 360 360
China 0.18 101.5 100 150 35168
Egypt 100 100
India 51 345 10 406
Iran 0.25 0.25
Israel 120 180 300
Italy 0.35 30 230 260.35
Japan
Kuwait 50 50
Mexico
Morocco 163 200 363
Oman
Papua New
Guinea
South Africa 250 100 350
Spain 2,250 2, 250
Thailand 5 5
Tunisia 50 50
UAE 100 100
US 701 500 325 1, 526
— Parabolic 23 23
trough —
Biomass
Spain 22.5 22.5
— Parabolic 145 107 60 100 412
trough —
ISCC
Algeria 25 25
Canada 1 1
China 92 92
Egypt 20 20
Italy 5 5
Kuwait 60 60
Mexico 14 14
Morocco 20 20
US 75 100 175
Fig. 21. Areal view of the parabolic trough power plant complex of Andasol I, II, and III
near Guadix at the feet of the Sierra Nevada, Spain.54
goal of this operation is to reduce the emission of CO2 into the atmosphere
by 175,000 tons annually.
7.2 Central Receivers (Power Towers)

After the mothballing of the 10 MW tower stations Solar 1 and 2 at Barstow,
California, after 1998 no attempt has been made to build new tower power
facilities in the USA.
Then, the Spanish company Abengoa built two power tower plants: PS
10 with a rated 11 MW power output which started operations in 2007, and
PS 20 with 20 MW output which started in 2009 near Sevilla.56
The concentrated solar radiation heats metallic tubes and produces
steam at 40 bars and 250◦C to drive the turbine. A pressurized water tank
is used to provide auxiliary storage for 30 minutes. The 20 MW plant is
based on the same technology, but with 1 h of storage available.
Fig. 22. In the upper part: A 50 MW unit of an Andasol power plant near Guadix,
Spain with two storage containers in the middle of the parabolic trough field.
In the lower part: Schematics of the Andasol plants.54
Fig. 23. 100 MW SHAMS I — Masdar Clean Energy parabolic trough plant near Abu
Dhabi.55
More recently, the 20 MW GEMASOLAR tower power plant57 was

erected near Ecija, Spain and went into operation in 2011. The plant uses
molten salt as the heat transfer and storage medium. During solar opera-
tion, the molten salt is pumped from the cold storage tank (at about 290◦ C)
to the receiver where it is heated to about 565◦ C. The hot salt is then piped
to the hot storage tank. For power generation, the hot salt is pumped to
the steam generator where superheated steam at 540◦C is generated to
drive the turbine and the generator. The cooled-down salt (290◦ C) is then
pumped back to the cold storage tank. This plant concept allows decoupling
of solar energy collection and electricity production. The circular heliostat
field consists of 2,650 heliostats, each with a reflective area of 115 m2 . The
concrete tower has a height of 140 m. With its 15 h storage system the plant
can operate in summer for 24 h; the annual capacity factor reaches 75%.
GEMASOLAR is the first solar facility which enables non-stop electricity
production under summer conditions. Figure 24 gives a panoramic view of
the plant with the tower in the middle of the heliostat field and the power
block at the outside. A schematic of the plant is shown in Fig. 25.
The Sierra SunTower demonstration system58 built by eSolar is
installed near Lancaster, California. It is a modular system with two identi-
cal tower units. In the receivers, superheated steam is generated and piped
to a common steam turbine for power production. The steam cycle has a
Fig. 24. GEMASOLAR solar thermal plant, owned by Torresol Energy.57

c SENER.
Fig. 25. GEMASOLAR tower system schematics.57

power level of 5 MW. Larger power levels can be achieved by combining mul-
tiple modular tower units, all with identical layout of heliostat field, tower
and receiver.59 Mainly, the power cycle must be adapted to the changing
power level. Since the heliostat sub-fields are relatively small, prefabricated
and easily handled, high solar collection efficiencies can be achieved.
The DLR solar tower at Jülich, Germany60 is a pre-commercial solar
tower demonstration plant with a power level of 1.5 MW (see Fig. 14). Air
at near-ambient pressure is used as the heat transfer medium. The air is
heated with solar energy in an open volumetric receiver to about 700◦C.
The hot air can be used directly in a heat recovery steam generator (HRSG)
to produce power in the steam cycle. Alternatively, in charge mode, hot air
is directed to the regenerator type storage system. In discharge mode, the
flow direction in the regenerator is reversed to heat the entering air which
is then used in the HRSG for power generation. The heliostat field contains
over 2,000 heliostats with a total mirror area of about 18,000 m2 .
The above-mentioned solar tower plants are all significantly below eco-
nomic power levels. But very recently a new large solar tower plant was
erected and put into operation in 2014. This is the Ivanpah61 Bright Source
Energy tower power station, representing a total power output of 390 MW,
the largest CSP facility worldwide. The plant consists of three independent
solar tower units, each with its own power block. The receivers are used
to generate superheated steam to drive a steam cycle for electricity power
production. In total, 173,500 heliostats are installed, each with a relatively
small area of 15 m2 . To cope with the arid area, dry cooling with air-cooled
condensers guarantees extremely low water consumption, only 5% in com-
parison to wet cooling. The plant is shown in Fig. 26.
At the end of 2014, the Crescent Dunes tower power project (Solar-
Reserve) is expected to go online. This solar tower plant is under con-
struction near Tonopah, Nevada (USA) and has an output power level of
110 MW. Molten salt is used as the heat transfer fluid and storage medium.
The storage is designed for about 4,500 full load operation hours of the
power block annually (capacity factor >50%).
A number of other solar tower plants are in different phases of project
development. Abengoa has started construction of a 50 MW solar tower
plant in South Africa. SolarReserve is developing two additional projects,
one in Spain (50 MW) and one in California (150 MW). Bright Source plans
to erect another plant in California with a total power output of 500 MW.
Several other tower projects are in preparation.
Fig. 26. Ivanpah61 solar thermal central receiver power stations of Bright Source
Energy, San Bernardino, California. The towers are 140 m high.
8 Economy and Cost Reductions

8.1 CSP in the Market
The first commercial CSP plants were those built by LUZ in California
from 1985–1991 (see Table 1). Over 2,000,000 m2 of trough collectors were
installed in 9 projects providing 354 MW of power in total, which are still
in commercial operation today.
There was little commercial activity until 2006. Since then there has
been a strong growth in deployment of commercial CSP plants (see Fig. 27).
These plants have been supported financially through various mechanisms,
such as up-front grants and loans, through feed-in-tariffs or mandatory
targets, reducing over time.
In Spain, CSP industry momentum has been fostered largely through
the incentives offered under the Royal Decree. In addition, growth is again
underway in the United States, and a range of other countries and regions
are now accelerating their own programs — the Middle East and North
Africa, South Africa, Australia, Israel, China, India, Brazil, Mexico, and
14000
12000
Plants under construction or announced till
2014, then continuation of present growth rate
Cumulative installed MW
10000 Operational plants based on present status
8000
6000
4000
2000
0
1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020
Fig. 27. Installed global CSP capacity as of 2011, plants under construction, and pre-
dicted to 2020.
Chile. An exciting concept known as Desertec aims to deploy plants in

the sunbelt region of North Africa and export much of the electricity
to Europe.
However, since 2010, the deployment of solar thermal electricity from
CSP plants has been slower than expected. After the initial deployment
of the first commercial plants in California in the 1980s, the renaissance in
Spain was limited to 2.3 GW under governmental decisions in the context of
the financial and economic crisis. Deployment in the US has been slow due
to long lead times and competition from both cheap unconventional natural
gas and the rapidly-decreasing cost of PV energy. Deployment in other
places was even slower as projects took significant time to be conceived,
financed, built and finally connected to the grid.
In Spain, legislation was such that plants needed to be restricted to
50 MW, with the aim of fostering competition and preventing monopo-
lization. This strategy has borne fruit with numerous companies entering
the market through both ‘bottom up’ growth and technology acquisition.
Many of these companies now have a global presence. Now, around the rest
of the world, plants are typically sized at over 100 MW, with a number
between 250 and 300 MW. Thermal storage of several hours is now regu-
larly incorporated to improve grid access and the financial rate of return.
In 2014, approximately 4000 MW of CSP plants is in commercial operation,
Table 6: World wide capacity of CSP technology in MW in various stages of construc-

tion (Status: June 2014).
Operational Under construction Development Planned Total
Algeria 25 7 32
Argentina 20 20
Australia 9.5 44 73 126.5
Brazil 1 50 51
Canada 1 1
Chile 110 370 410 890
China 2.18 307.5 100 150 559.68
Cyprus 50.76 25 75.76
Egypt 20 100 250 370
France 0.25 12 9 21.25
Germany 1.5 1.5
Greece 125 125
India 53.5 445 111 609.5
Iran 0.25 0.25
Israel 6.1 241 181 428.1
Italy 5.35 30 50 230 315.35
Japan
Jordan 225 225
Kuwait 60 50 110
Mexico 14 14
Morocco 20 163 301 484
Oman
Papua
New Guinea
South Africa 0.23 300 100 230 630.23
South Korea 0.2 0.2
Spain 2361.6 50 2411.6
Thailand 5 5
Tunisia 2000 55 2055
UAE 100.1 100.1
US 1,192 611.5 1,155 1,120 4078.5
Total 3,803 2,039 4,719 3,180 13,741
2000 MW under construction and some 7000 MW at various stages of plan-

ning and approval as shown in Table 6.
For the CSP industry, there are presently several strategic issues in
play, including the consideration of placing power stations close to available
grid capacity, the move toward dry cooling (which is well understood by
the power industry), and the possibility of large ‘solar zones’ to centralize
infrastructure or, conversely, the development of more modular/compact
CSP technologies to expand the range of sites. However, the single most
important issue is cost reduction, discussed in Sec. 8.2.
The structure of a commercial CSP project is very similar to other

large power plant projects and typically involves several players. An “Engi-
neering, Procurement and Construction (EPC)” contractor and its sup-
pliers provide and warrant the technology to the owner, who finances it
through equity investors, banks and eventually public grants. The owner
gains revenues from the electricity off-taker (typically the electricity system
operator) based on long-term power purchase agreements needed to pay off
the debt and operation costs, and to generate a profit. An operation and
maintenance company provides services to the owner to operate the plant.
This approach results in a complex contractual arrangement to distribute
and manage the overall project risk, as the overall project cost of several
hundred million Euro typically cannot be backed by a single entity. The
perception and distribution of risks, as well as local and regional factors,
strongly affect the cost. There is therefore no single figure for the costs
of electricity from CSP, nor for similar reasons, for other generating tech-
nologies to which it needs to be compared. One approach that is often
used to compare costs of electricity generation is to calculate the “levelized
electricity cost” (LEC or LCOE for levelized costs of electricity). This also
relates average annual capital and operating costs of the plant to the annual
electricity production. Recognizing the limitations of this approach, partic-
ularly when comparing fossil-fired and renewable technologies where it does
not capture differences in value to the customer, it nonetheless gives a useful
“first cut” view of comparative costs. For comparisons between fossil-fired
plants and CSP plants with storage and/or supplementary firing, the limi-
tations of this approach are less significant as the technologies offer similar
services.
Revenues for CSP started with the feed in tariff in Spain of more than
30 cents/kWh. In 2014, offered revenues for new projects are approaching
15 cents/kWh. This demonstrates a significant cost reduction over the
last seven years.
8.2 Cost Developments and Cost Reductions

The US Department of Energy Sunshot initiative (Fig. 28) and various CSP
roadmaps have identified the technology key areas that most effectively
impact cost, and have established targets that would lead to CSP being a
low cost source of dispatchable solar electricity. These generally relate to
higher temperature receivers for associated advanced cycles (particularly
supercritical cycles), lower cost collectors and higher temperature storage.
22.0 Insurance & Prop. Tax
20.0 O&M
18.0 Indirect Costs

LCOE, c/kWh (real 2009$, No ITC)
Thermal Storage
16.0
HTF System or Tower/Recvr
14.0
Power Plant
12.0 Solar Field
10.0 Site Preparation
8.0
6.0
4.0
2.0
-
2010 Trough 2015 Trough 2015 Tower 2020 Trough 2020 Tower SunShot Case
Fig. 28. The targets established by the US DoE Sunshot initiative and corresponding
roadmaps.62
8.2.1 Cost reduction

Three main drivers for cost reduction are scaling up, volume production
and technology innovations. As an example, one of the first comprehensive
studies of the potential for cost reduction of CSP was undertaken in the
framework of the European ‘ECOSTAR’ project.63 The study proposed the
potential relative reduction of the levelized electricity cost (LEC or LCOE)
of trough plants of up to 60%. Half of this potential can be obtained by tech-
nical innovations, the other half by scaling-up and mass production effects.
Further details of the cost breakdowns and the other costs are given in the
listed references.63–65 If this potential is exploited, the cost for dispatchable
solar power from CSP plants will drop significantly below 9 cents/kWh
and can be considered competitive in many commercial markets. The time
to achieve this cost reduction is strongly coupled to the deployment rate
of the technology. A total installed capacity between 10 and 100 GW is
estimated to be sufficient to achieve this target between 2020 and 2030.66
8.2.2 Scaling up
CSP technology favors big power plant configurations67 because procure-
ment of large amounts of solar field components can lead to discounts. Engi-
neering, planning and project development costs are essentially independent
of the scale of the plant; operation and maintenance costs decrease with
plant size, and large power blocks have higher efficiencies than small ones
and cost less per kW.
The impact of scaling up on CSP electricity cost is still under discussion.
The Kearney report64 indicates a 24% reduction of capital expenditure for
an increase of trough plant size from 50 MW to 500 MW, and Lipman65
to 250 MW. Finally, the Sargent and Lundy study68 points to a 14% cost
reduction for a 400 MW power block.
8.2.3 Volume production

For parabolic trough technology, the Sargent & Lundy study68 estimates
a cost reduction of 17% due to volume production effects when installing
600 MW per year. Cost decreases in the range of 5% to 40%, depending on
components, are expected in the Bright Source energy report.61
8.2.4 Technology innovations

Technological innovations will increase power generation efficiency, mainly
through increasing operating temperature. Innovations will reduce solar
field costs by minimizing component costs and optimizing optical designs
and will, as well, reduce operational consumption of water and parasitic
power.
Expected cost reductions and plant efficiency improvements associated
with technology innovations are reported by Kearney.64
It is not just the cost of CSP electricity generation which determines
its economic competitiveness. Rather, the value is represented by three
components:
• the value of the kWh’s of electrical energy generated by the plant, which
will vary over time in a competitive electricity market, reflecting the
availability and cost of electricity from other sources;
• the contribution that the CSP plant makes to ensuring that generating
capacity is available to meet peak electricity system demand; and
• the ‘services’ provided by the plant in helping the electricity transmis-
sion system operator to balance supply and demand in the short term
(typically, on time scales of seconds and minutes).
Potentially, incorporation of thermal storage in a CSP plant can be benefi-

cial to all three components of value. In relation to the first value compo-
nent, system simulations69 indicate that as the solar share rises in an energy
system there is increasing value in shifting generation to the evenings when

the sun is not shining, and hence indicating an incentive to install CSP
plants with thermal storage. The availability of such plants in the system
means that higher penetrations of solar power can be achieved overall and
is an important consideration, beyond just generating costs, in determining
the optimum mix of CSP and PV technology.
With regard to the second component of value, the provision of generat-
ing capacity to meet peak electricity system demand, CSP with storage can
contribute to meeting peak system loads and can provide back-up capacity
to cover variable renewable sources. Incorporation of supplementary firing
will further increase the capability of the CSP plant to provide capacity
at the system peak, though the efficiency of fossil-fuel use for such sup-
plementary firing is likely to be significantly lower than if it is used in a
combined cycle power plant. The value of providing capacity to meet the
system peak demand will depend on the system, so its quantification needs
to be informed by system models.
Turning to the third component, the value of thermal energy storage
in enabling the CSP plant to deliver grid services, CSP with storage can
provide spinning reserves, being able to ramp up power, if operating at
part-load, in less than 30 minutes by drawing on the stored heat (the rate
of ramping is limited by the thermal inertia of the equipment). Ramping
down is quicker on timescales of around 15 minutes by diverting heat to
storage. This is used in Spain to deliver, on demand, 30% power ramps in
less than an hour, enabling the plant to be considered dispatchable by the
grid operator REE.
9 Conclusions
CSP is in a strong commercial growth phase at present, building on many
years of intensive R&D activity. The present trend continues with the theme
of larger capacity plants, most of which are based on parabolic trough tech-
nology. However, central receivers using molten salt as heat transfer fluid
and storage medium are now being increasingly deployed as the technology
of choice.
In fact, there is a general move toward higher temperature systems for
improved efficiencies, as this leads directly to a reduction in collector area,
which is the single most significant capital cost component, as well as lower
storage costs.
The industry has developed rapidly since 2006, when it consisted of

relatively few companies with in-house technology, to the present, where a
diverse range of large multi-national companies has been established, pro-
viding strong competition in components, construction and project manage-
ment, and finance. Risk still exists as the projects are large and strongly
dependent on capital that needs to be underwritten by power purchase
agreements and, for now, other incentives.
New and advanced technology opportunities are also emerging. These
include very high efficiency supercritical CO2 Brayton cycles, and the
opportunity to apply all of the collector and receiver expertise developed
for high temperature CSP electricity generation as the basis for developing
a new market in commercial solar fuel technology.
The key for the future of CSP lies in its ability to deploy dispatchable
solar energy in large quantities, building on much of the knowledge and
technology available in the energy industry today.
References
1. International Energy Agency, Key World Energy Statistics 2011 (IEA Press,
2010).
2. C. J. Winter, R. L. Sizmann and L. Vant-Hull, Solar Power Plants: Funda-
mentals, Technology, Systems, Economics (Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1991).
3. R. Pitz-Paal, High temperature solar concentrators, in Solar Energy Conver-
sion and Photoenergy Systems, eds. J. B. Galvez and S. M. Rodriguez (Eolss
Publishers, Oxford, UK, 2007).
4. C. E. Kennedy, Review of mid to high temperature solar selective surfaces,
Technical Report NREL/TP-520-31267 (2002).
5. A. Akbarzadeh, J. Andrews and P. Golding, Solar pond technologies: A review
and future directions, in Advances in Solar Energy, ed. D. Y. Goswami (Earth-
scan, USA, 2005).
6. D. R. Mills, Solar thermal electricity, in Solar Energy — The State of the
Art — ISES Position Papers ed. J. M. Gordon (James and James, 2001).
7. http://www.solar-updraft-tower.com.
8. P. DeLaquil, D. Kearney, M. Geyer and R. Diver, Solar thermal electric tech-
nology, in Renewable Energy — Sources for Fuel and Electricity, eds. T. B.
Johansson, H. Kelly, A. K. N. Reddy and R. H. Williams (Earthscan Publi-
cations Ltd, and Island Press, USA, 2001).
9. http://www.nrel.gov/csp/troughnet/power plant data.html.
10. E. Lüpfert, M. Geyer, W. Schiel, E. Antonio, R. Osuna, E. Zarza and P. Nava,
Eurotrough design issues and prototype testing at PSA, in Proceedings of the
ASME Int. Solar energy Conf. — Forum 2001, Solar energy: The Power to
Choose, April 21–25, Washington DC (2001).
11. K. J. Riffelmann, J. Kötter, P. Nava, F. Meuser, G. Weinrebe, W. Schiel,

G. Kuhlmann, A. Wohlfahrt, A. Nady and R. Dracker, Helitrough — A new
collector generation for parabolic trough power plants, Presented at 15th Int.
SolarPACES Symp., September 15–18, Berlin, Germany (2009).
12. N. Castañeda, J. Váquez and D. Castañeda, First commercial application
of senertrough. High performance at reduced cost, Presented at 17th Int.
SolarPACES Symp., September 20–23, Berlin, Germany (2011).
13. S. Fernández and A. Acuñas, New optimized solar collector SENERtrough-
2, Presented at 18th Int. SolarPACES Symp., September 11–14, Marrakech,
Morocco (2012).
14. H. Price, E. Lupfert, D. Kearney, E. Zarza, G. Cohen, R. Gee and R. Mahoney,
Advances in parabolic trough solar power technology, J. Sol. Energy Eng.
124(2) (2002), pp. 109–125.
15. R. Pitz-Paal, J. Dersch, B. Milow, F. Téllez, A. Ferriere, U. Langnickel,
A. Steinfeld, J. Karni, E. Zarza and O. Popel, Development steps for parabolic
trough solar power technologies with maximum impact on cost reduction,
J. Sol. Energy Eng. 129 (2007), p. 371.
16. L. P. Drouot and M. J. Hillairet, The themis program and the 2500-KW
themis solar power station at Targasonne, J. Sol. Energy Eng. 106(1) (1984),
pp. 83–89.
17. M. Martin, Molten salt electric experiment (MSEE), Sandia National Labo-
ratories, SAND85-8175, Albuquerque, New Mexico (1985).
18. R. W. Bradshaw, D. B. Dawson, W. De La Rosa, R. Gilbert, S. H. Goods,
M. J. Hale, P. Jacobs, S. A. Jones, G. J. Kolb, J. E. Pacheco, M. R. Prairie,
H. E. Reilly, S. K. Showalter and L. L. Vant-Hull, Final test and evaluation
results from the solar two project, OSTI ID: 793226 (2002).
19. N. P. Siegel and R. W. Bradshaw, Thermophysical property measurement of
nitrate salt heat transfer fluids, Presented at ASME 2011 5th International
Conf. Energy Sustainability, Washington DC (2011).
20. M. Falchetta and D. Mazzei, Design of Archimede 5MW molten salt parabolic
trough solar plant, Presented at 15th Int. SolarPACES Symp., September 15–
18, Berlin, Germany (2009).
21. D. A. Nissen and D. E. Meeker, Nitrate/nitrite chemistry in sodium nitrate-
potassium nitrate melts, Inorg. Chem. 22(5) (1983), pp. 716–721.
22. R. W. Bradshaw and C. E. Tyner, Chemical engineering, Factors affecting
solar central receiver applications of ternary molten salts, Sandia National
Laboratories, SAND88-8686, Albuquerque, New Mexico (1988).
23. T. Bauer, N. Pfleger, D. Laing, W.-D. Steinmann, M. Eck and S. Kaesche,
High temperature molten salts for solar power application, in Molten Salts:
Fundamentals and Application, eds. F. Lantelme and H. Groult (Elsevier,
Amsterdam, 2012).
24. R. W. Bradshaw, J. G. Cordaro and N. P. Siegel, Molten nitrite salt devel-
opment for thermal enregy storage in parabolic trough solar power systems,
Proc. ASME Int. Conf. Energy Sustainability, San Francisco, California, USA
(2009).
25. D. Kearney, B. Kelly, U. Herrmann, R. Cable, J. Pacheco, R. Mahoney,

H. Price, D. Blake, P. Nava and N. Potrovitza, Engineering aspects of a
molten salt heat transfer fluid in a trough solar field, Energy 29(5–6) (2004),
pp. 861–870.
26. R. W. Bradshaw and S. H. Goods, Corrosion resistance of nickel-base alloys in
molten alkali nitrates, Sandia National Laboratories, SAND2000-8240, Albu-
querque, New Mexico, USA (2000).
27. Müller-Elvers and Wittmann, Design and construction of molten salt
parabolic trough HPS project in Évora, Portugal, in Proc. 18th Int.
SolarPACES Symp., September 11–14, Marrakech, Morrocco (2012).
28. Annual Report 2012, CIEMAT — PSA.
29. V. A. Baum, Prospects for the application of solar energy, and some research
in the USSR, Proc. World Symp. Applied Solar Energy, Stanford Research
Institute, Menlo Park, pp. 289–298 (1956).
30. C. Silvi, The pioneering work on linear fresnel reflector concentrators (LFC)
in Italy, in Proc. SolarPACES Conf., Berlin, September (2009).
31. D. R. Mills and G. L. Morrison, Compact linear fresnel reflector solar thermal
power plants, Solar Energy 68(3) (2000), pp. 263–283.
32. G. Morin, J. Dersch, W. Platzer, M. Eck and A. Häberle, Comparison of
linear fresnel and parabolic trough collector power plants, Solar Energy 86(1)
(2012), pp. 1–12.
33. http://www.physics.usyd.edu.au/app/research/solar/clfr.html.
34. http://www.novatecsolar.com/79-1-Australias-Largest-Solar-Thermal-Plant-
to-Expand.html.
35. http://www.areva.com/EN/operations-415/concentrated-solar-power-techno-
logy.html.
36. http://minister.ret.gov.au/MediaCentre/Speeches/Pages/Round1SolarFlag-
shipsProjects.aspx.
37. http://www.nrel.gov/csp/solarpaces/project detail.cfm/projectID=37.
38. http://www.novatecsolar.com/8-1-Projects.html.
39. http://www.volker-quaschning.de/articles/fundamentals2/index e.php.
40. P. DeLaquil, D. Kearney, M. Geyer and R. Diver, Solar thermal electric tech-
nology, in Renewable Energy — Sources for Fuel and Electricity, eds. T. B.
Johansson, H. Kelly, A. K. N. Reddy and R. H. Williams (Earthscan Publi-
cations Ltd, and Island Press, USA, 2001).
41. http://www.wizardpower.com.au/index.php?option=com content&view=ar-
ticle&id=36&Itemid=35.
42. K. Lovegrove, G. Burgess and J. Pye, A new 500 m2 paraboloidal dish solar
concentrator, Solar Energy 85(4) (2011), pp. 620–626.
43. W. Scheffler, Introduction to the revolutionary design of scheffler reflectors,
in Solar Cookers and Food Processing Conf., Granada, July, pp. 12–16 (2006).
44. Funding Opportunity Number DE-FOA-0000471.
45. http://www.nrel.gov/csp/solarpaces/project detail.cfm/projectID=40.
46. D. A. Brosseau, P. F. Hlava and M. J. Kelly, Testing thermocline filler mate-
rials and molten salt heat transfer fluids for thermal energy storage systems
used in parabolic trough solar power plants, SAND2004-3207 July (2004).
47. S. Zunft, M. Hänel, M. Krüger, V. Dreißigacker, F. Göhring and W. Wahl,

Jülich solar power tower — experimental evaluation of the storage subsystem
and performance calculation, J. Sol. Energy Eng. 133(3) (2011), p. 031019.
48. R. Buck, Volumetric receivers for solar-hybrid gas turbine power systems,
DLR Forschungsbericht 2001-10, pp. 62–67 (2001).
49. D. Laing, High-temperature solid-media thermal energy storage for solar ther-
mal power plants, Proc. IEEE (2011).
50. www.csp-world.com/cspworldmap/kuraymat-iscc.
51. p://ec.europa.eu/research/energy/pdf/solgate en.pdf.
52. http://sfera.sollab.eu/downloads/4th presentation.pdf.
53. T. Mancini, P. Heller, B. Butler, et al., Dish-stirling systems: An overview of
development and status, J. Sol. Energy Eng. 125 (2003), pp. 135–151.
54. F. Dinter and D. M. Gonzales, Operability, reliability and economic benefits
with CSP with thermal energy storage: First year of operation of Andasol 3,
Energy Procedia 49 (2013), pp. 2472–2481.
55. www.shamspower.ae/en/.
56. www.environmental-expert.com/products/abengoa-ps10-andps20-solar-power-
plants-334737.
57. J. I. Burgaleta, S. Arias and I. B. Salbidegoitia, Operative advantages of a
central tower solar plant with thermal storage system, 15th Int. SolarPACES
Symp., Paper 11 720, Berlin (2009).
58. P. K. Meduri, C. R. Hannemann and J. E. Pacheco, Performance characteri-
zation and operation of eSolar’s sierra suntower power tower plant, Presented
at 16th Int. SolarPACES Symp., September 21–24, Perpignan, France (2010).
59. D. Rogers, M. Slack and B. Cassity, Addressing the challenges associated with
esolar’s unique approach to central receiver power plants, in Proc. 18th Int.
SolarPACES Symp., September 11–14, Marrakech, Morocco (2012).
60. S. Pomp, P. Schwarzbözl, G. Koll, F. Göhring, F. Hartz, M. Schmitz and
B. Hoffschmidt, The solar tower Jülich — first operational experiences and
test results, in Proc. 16th Int. SolarPACES Symp., September 21–24, Perpig-
nan, France (2010).
61. http://www.brightsourceenergy.com/ivanpah-solar-project (2013).
62. SunShot Vision Study, US Department of Energy, February (2012).
63. R. Pitz-Paal, J. Dersch, B. Milow, F. Tellez, A. Ferriere, U. Langnickel, A. Ste-
infeld, J. Karni, E. Zarza and O. Popel, Concentrating solar power plants —
how to achieve competitiveness, VGB Power Tech 8 (2005), pp. 45–46.
64. A. Kearney, Solar Thermal Electricity 2025 (ESTELA, 2010).
65. E. Lipman, Reducing CSP plant LOEC with precies engineering synergies
and R&D, Plenary Lecture presented at 16th SolarPACES Symp., September
21–24, Perpignan, France (2010).
66. Easac, Concentrating solar power: Its potential contribution to a sustainable
energy future, EASAC policy report 16 (2011).
67. U.S. Energy Information Administration, Updated capital cost estimates for
electricity generation plants, US Department of Energy (2010).
68. Sargent & Lundy LLC Consulting Group, Assessment of parabolic trough
and power tower solar technology cost and performance forecasts, National
Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL), Golden, Colorado, USA (2003).
69. C. Kost and T. Schlegl, Stromgestehungskosten erneuerbare energien, Renew-
able Energy Policy Innovation, Fraunhofer ISE (2010).

Chapter 4
Large-Scale Photovoltaic Power Plants
G. Almonacid Puche, P. G. Vidal and E. Muñoz-Cerón

Centro de Estudios Avanzados en Energı́a y Medio Ambiente
Universidad de Jaén
(Center for Advanced Studies in Energy and Environment, University of Jaén)
Campus de Las Lagunillas, 23071 Jaén (Spain)
This chapter contains an overview of the main aspects that characterize or have
a particular impact on large-scale photovoltaic (PV) power plants. The chapter
starts with an introduction and an overview of the megawatts installed in PV
plants, and then analyses some key issues in the electrical engineering of plants’
layout, devices and grid connection. The chapter also goes through important
aspects regarding the behavior, commissioning, operation and maintenance of
this type of plants. Several socio-economic factors like policies, planning and
regulations, financing tools etc. are considered and a forward-looking view is
taken on the prospects for this technology.
1 Introduction
Large-scale photovoltaic (PV) power plants (also called utility-scale or
megawatt-scale power plants) may be installed on large rooftops or on
the ground, and may employ different PV technologies. What distinguishes
large-scale solar from distributed generation (DG) is the size of this type
of project and the fact that the electricity that they produce is sold to
wholesale utility buyers, not to end-use consumers.1 Large-scale PV plants
provide the benefit of fixed-priced electricity during peak demand periods
when electricity from fossil fuels is more expensive.
According to the latest data from the PV Power Systems Programme
(PVPS) of the International Energy Agency IEA,2 at least 36.9 GW of
PV systems have been installed and connected to the grid in the world
during the past year. Likewise, large-scale PV projects have grown rapidly
in number and size over the last few years, aided by the fall in the price
125
126 G. Almonacid Puche, P. G. Vidal & E. Muñoz-Cerón
Fig. 1. PV module price (1977–2013).

Source: Bloomberg New Energy Finance.
of the PV components, and, most significantly, by the drop in the price

of conventional crystalline silicon PV modules, that has decreased sharply,
from 3.5 /W to 0.5 /W,3 as shown in Fig. 1. Due to this incredible drop
in price, the installed capacity of solar energy has increased more than
tenfold in the last 6 years.
As major markets like the EU, the USA, China, and Japan continue
to ramp up installations and new markets like India, South Africa, Chile
and others emerge, the promise of large-scale PV electricity production
continues to be a bright spot in the PV market.
A large-scale PV project is complex and involves many different par-
ties including developers, landowners, utilities, grid operators, government
agencies and financing parties. These projects must pass through a number
of different stages grouped as pre-financial and post-financial activities. For
instance, Fig. 2 shows an overview of the project time frame for a 20 MW
utility-scale PV project.4
A successful PV project requires careful consideration of financing
options. Financing stands or falls depending on the actual solar power fed
annually into the grid. Usually, banks expect a return on project investment
of 9% or possibly higher. The strong market for large-scale plants that pre-
vailed at times in Spain (2008), Germany (between 2010 and 2012) and
Italy (2011) often created unrealistic expectations of the returns that solar
power was able to yield. The Eurozone crisis and the withdrawal of state
subsidies are therefore forcing investors to take a more realistic view of
PV plants and are enabling them to exploit long-term advantages more
Large-Scale PV Power Plants 127
Fig. 2. Project time frame for a typical large-scale PV project.4
successfully. To achieve this, large-scale PV plants do not only require

an accurate solar energy forecast, but also quality electrical engineering,
and careful monitoring, along with other socio-economic considerations.
All these are paramount to generate a successful project. A growing num-
ber of investors are recognizing the fact that the technology has matured
and the risk of default is low. The investment, and consequently the price
achievable on the power market, is not linked to the uncertainties of the oil
market. The sun supplies its energy for free, which gives PV a fundamental
advantage.
2 Electrical Engineering: Key Points in Large PV

Generators
2.1 Layout of a Large-Scale PV Plant
The choice of the architecture employed in a PV generator is key when
designing large-scale PV plants. Such architecture is determined by the
configuration of the modules connected to a given inverter, by the number
of branches, by the number of modules per branch and by the number of
inverters required to obtain the total power generated by the plant, as well
as by the number of transformers that will be necessary to connect the plant
to the medium voltage grid. In general, there is not one particular indicator
to know a priori which is the best module configuration or the best inverter
topology since the best possible solution depends on a variety of factors
linked to the power of the plant, the characteristics of the geographical
area of the installation, the characteristics of the connection grid and on
applicable regulations.
Any design process oriented to obtain the best possible solution must
aim at minimizing the initial cost of the installation and should consider
important factors like the value of the energy produced, the efficiency and
reliability (performance ratio (PR)) along with the cost of the electricity
produced.
The design of large-scale PV plants has traditionally been based on
centralized installations with powerful centralized inverters. In such designs,
a large number of PV modules is connected in series and/or parallel to one
inverter. Then, one or two of these inverters are connected to the medium
voltage grid through a transformer (see Fig. 3). These centralized inverter-
transformer blocks may surpass 1 MW and have been used in PV plants
beyond 250 MW. However, this configuration of centralized blocks is only
effective when the structure of the plant is homogeneous, that is to say,
when it uses the same modules, with no partial shading and with the same
slope and orientation.
In the last few years, large-scale PV plants have also been built through
configurations of small inverters of reduced power connected in parallel in a
low voltage grid. Then, this block is connected to the medium voltage grid
through a transformer that creates a generation block yielding an amount
of power similar to that of the previous configuration.
These distributed inverters can be arranged in two different ways: in
string inverters, the first type, each string of the generator is wired to one
string inverter; in multistring inverters two or three strings are wired in
parallel to one inverter. Each string of the first type or group of strings of the
second has an independent (maximum power point) (MPP) tracker. As a
consequence, higher efficiency is obtained in non-homogeneous installations
or installations with shadowed lines at dawn or dusk.
Given the impact that the cost of inverters has on the initial investment,
it might be logical to conclude that any configuration based on a centralized
generator is the best possible solution. However, these results may vary if
Fig. 3. Different configurations of PV inverters.
all costs and energy efficiency of the system throughout its operating life
are also analyzed.
Both installation and operation costs should be included in a detailed
analysis. The specific cost for the investor (the cost per kW) diminishes
as the power increases. While plants with high-power centralized blocks
favor lower cost as well, small-decentralized inverters may be more suit-
able if factors like wiring, junction boxes, building costs, transportation or
installation are taken into consideration. Maintenance is easier and repair
costs more economical in plants with standard small-decentralized invert-
ers, which can be easily found on the market and whose replacement parts
are easy to find as well. This availability facilitates their substitution by
local installers in the event of a malfunction. As a consequence, the usual
maintenance contracts would not be completely necessary.
PR are also better in installations with decentralized architectures.
When large-scale plants are divided into smaller subgenerators with an
MPP tracker, inverters can be adapted to the subgenerators more easily
and shading losses can be reduced by using different modules with high
fabrication tolerances and groups of modules with different orientation or
slope. In the event of a malfunction of the inverter, production losses are
also reduced since only a small part of the installation is affected, which
can be rapidly substituted if replacement inverters are in stock.
Fig. 4. Solar inverter topologies.
2.2 Inverter Topology

Until a short time ago, all inverters used in PV systems included a low-
frequency transformer which was situated between the power stage and the
grid (see Fig. 4). This transformer, the specifications of which are deter-
mined by national regulations in some countries, provides the PV system
with galvanic isolation from the grid at the same time that it serves to
protect operators, to prevent capacitive leakage, to avoid the flow of direct
current to the grid and, in some cases, to increase the output voltage of the
inverter. On the downside, these transformers have disadvantages like cost
increase, weight, size and, most importantly, efficiency losses (an average
of 2%) due to transformer losses.
More recently, high-frequency transformers have substituted for low-
frequency ones at the DC side to provide galvanic isolation. This is obtained
through a remarkable reduction in inverter size, weight and cost. However,
this option has not gained market penetration since it does not improve
efficiency and makes the power stage more complex.
Using transformerless PV inverters combined with floating DC sys-
tems (in which the positive and negative terminals are isolated from the
ground) reduces costs and improves efficiency and, consequently, is becom-
ing a popular alternative. When compared to the previous configurations,
the combination of transformerless PV inverters and floating DC systems
boosts efficiency by 2% and reduces costs by 25%. The main problem with
this configuration is to attain galvanic isolation from the grid. Without
galvanic isolation, DC currents can flow to the grid, saturating the mag-
netic nucleus of the distribution transformer, which may cause overheating
and a malfunction. Further shortcomings include capacitive current leakage,
safety issues for operators, eventual tripping of the devices that protect the
inverter or the AC power line, and issues in the quality of power and system
losses.
In order to prevent a malfunction of the inverter, galvanic isolation
through a transformer is necessary in those PV systems with ground connec-
tion in the DC input (positive or negative terminals connected to ground)
and in the AC output (neutral of the grid connected to ground).
Galvanic isolation in these systems greatly depends on national regula-
tions. It is mandatory in countries like the USA, the UK and Italy, and can
be built in the two configurations described above (low frequency and high
frequency). In countries like Spain or Germany, galvanic isolation can be
omitted as long as the inverters offer an alternative solution to separate the
PV generator from the grid, which also guarantees the safety of operators
and the quality of the power supplied to the grid (see Fig. 4).
2.3 Capacitive Leakage Current

Capacitive leakage currents are a key factor to consider when planning PV
systems without transformers. These currents are produced by the existing
capacity between the PV array and the ground and the common mode volt-
age fluctuations across this capacitance. Such capacitive currents, depend-
ing on the country, are limited for grid-safety reasons and to protect the
operators who work at the systems.
All PV generators have some “parasitic” capacitance formed between
the surface of the PV panel and the grounded frame. The value of this capac-
ity depends on the size of the PV generator, on the materials used and on
the type of module used. Under bad weather conditions like those produced
by rain, frost or high humidity, the value of such capacity increases, ranging
in crystalline silicon modules between 60nF and 120nF per kWp.a
As mentioned above, inverters without transformers lack galvanic iso-
lation between the PV matrix and the grid, which favors the circulation of
the leakage currents originating in the fluctuations of the potential of such
parasitic capacity. These currents are closed by connecting the neutral of
the electric grid to ground and may reach values of hundreds of mA. Large-
scale PV plants with distributed inverters usually have a great length of
low voltage grid. In such cases there is a very high parasitic capacitance in
a kWp stands for kilowatt peak, defined in “Fundamentals of Photovoltaic Cells and
Systems”, Sec. 3.3.

Fig. 5. Leakage current in a PV transformerless inverter system.
the aforementioned low voltage grid. This parasitic capacitance offers an

alternative path to leakage currents (see Fig. 5) This current can cause grid
current distortion, losses in the system and safety problems.
The new topologies used in transformerless systems aim at minimizing
voltage fluctuations in the PV matrix to reduce leakage currents. Three-
phase inverters can reduce such voltage fluctuations in large-scale PV plants
built with distributed transformerless inverter systems.
In the case of PV plants with big centralized inverters, with compact
inverter-transformer solutions for the connection to the medium voltage
grid, the low voltage grid is part of the compact block can have any voltage
value and its neutral is not connected to ground (if the low voltage winding
of the transformer is Y-connected). In this situation, the transformer that is
connected to the medium voltage grid performs the role of galvanic isolator
from the medium voltage distribution grid (see Fig. 6).
2.4 Grounding
There are two possible solutions for the grounding of PV generators. In
grounded arrays, for example, one of the conductors of the generator (either
positive or negative) is grounded. In ungrounded arrays, on the other hand,
none of them is grounded. In both cases, it is necessary to ground all non-
current-carrying metal parts. For safety reasons, in grounded arrays, only
one grounding electrode can be used both for the grounding of the metal
frame and for the grounding of the generator.
As previously mentioned, one of the shortcomings of grounded arrays is
the fact that these require galvanic isolation and, as a consequence, inverters
with transformers, which reduces efficiency and increases costs.
Fig. 6. PV plants with big centralized inverters.
Ungrounded arrays allow, with the right topology, the use of trans-
formerless inverters. Besides the be positive aspects of eliminating the trans-
former, ungrounded arrays offer safety improvements, equipment-protection
enhancements and minimize the risk of fire thanks to the detection of
grounding failures in the DC components. For all these reasons, ungrounded
arrays are the most common choice in Europe. In the last few years, after
the changes introduced in the National Electrical Code (NEC) regulations,
these arrays are being used in large-scale PV plants in the USA as well.
Some ungrounded arrays may not be compatible with certain types of
modules. In the case of thin-film modules, for example, there is the risk of
oxidation and damage in Transparent Conducting Oxide (TCO) layers if the
negative conductor is not grounded. In modules with contacts in the back,
a polarization effect can occur, which causes a progressive diminution of

module efficiency. This effect can be avoided by grounding the positive pole.
2.5 Insulation Resistance

A PV generator has non-infinite insulation resistance (Riso ) distributed
along the installation that creates resistive leakage currents. The value of
Riso is determined by the parallel sum of the insulation resistances of the
modules, the CC wiring and the inverter, and it diminishes as the size of the
installation increases. The Riso of a given installation is also influenced by
weather and has its minimal values under wet weather conditions. A drastic
drop of this resistance may originate in insulation issues, which should be
watched over to prevent short-circuits and fire. The safety of operators is
thus linked to high Riso values.
Nowadays, most inverters measure the value of Riso . It is permanently
measured in ungrounded arrays and in inverters with transformers. In
the case of ungrounded arrays and in inverters with transformers, insu-
lation resistance is measured before the inverter is connected to the power
grid. Measuring Riso values in grounded arrays is more complex since the
grounded conductor should be insulated first.
The value of the Riso is specified by different regulations, for example:
In the case of modules, international standard IEC 61215 establishes a
minimum Riso which is calculated through the formula Riso × A ≥ 40 MΩ,
where A represents the area of the module.
For grid-connected PV systems, standard IEC 62446 establishes a min-
imum value of 1 MΩ for Riso in the insulated PV generator.
For inverters without galvanic isolation, the norm DIN VDE 0126-1-1
requires the following Riso values at the point where the inverter is con-
nected to the power grid: Riso > 1 kΩ/V, with a minimum of 500 kΩ. It
does not establish any requirement for inverters with a transformer.
The last two regulations do not explain the reasons why such limits
are set, limits which are not compatible with large-scale PV plants. In the
case of a 100 kWp plant that mounts modules with efficiencies of 16% that
abide by IEC 61215 standards, for example, the modules alone yield Riso
values of 62.5 kΩ, far beyond the indicated values.
2.6 Electrical Hazards

Electrical hazards may be caused by three different types of situations:
direct contact with one active conductor; indirect contact with voltages on
masses due to insulation issues; and electric shocks originating in capacitive

currents if an operator touches the surface of the panel. In large-scale PV
plants, the risk is even higher due to the existing high voltage (which in some
plants has already surpassed 1000 V) and due to the big area of modules
and the length of their wiring (which originates in larger capacitance loads
at lower Riso values). The difficulty of avoiding voltage in PV plants makes
it compulsory to design facilities in which the risks are reduced to the
minimum and calls for preventive measures if such limits are surpassed.
Ungrounded arrays with inverters that use galvanic isolation provide
top levels of safety. Ideally, these should also have displays that constantly
monitor the Riso values of the PV generator, all the masses of which should
be connected to the same ground electrode.
With such a configuration, direct contacts are free from risk under
single fault conditions since the voltage on the masses is far below the
safety voltage. If the fault is not corrected and a second fault condition
occurs, since there is a common ground, there is no risk either since both
issues result in a short-circuit.
In the case of direct contact with one active conductor, the current
that flows through the person during the electric shock can be limited by
controlling the Riso . If the limit of current that a human body can stand is
set at 100 mA, without considering the resistance of one particular person,
Riso must be maintained at a value 10 times over the maximum generation
voltage.5 In the event of a transitory shock from the parasitic load through
direct contact, voltage values in the range of 1500 V have also proved to
cause minimal risk for operators.6 Finally, for these systems, capacitive
leakage currents (see Sec. 2.3) are minimal due to the fact that galvanic
isolation reduces voltage fluctuations.
In ungrounded arrays without galvanic isolation and with grounded
low-voltage AC neutral there is a direct path, closed by the grounding,
for the flow of capacitive and resistive leakage currents. As a consequence,
safety levels are lower in the event of a direct or indirect contact. In such
cases, the differential current device installed in the AC low voltage grid
would measure the sum of both currents and insulate the inverter of the
AC grid, leading for the system to a situation similar to that described in
the previous case.
In grounded arrays with galvanic isolation, the use of one single elec-
trode for the grounding of the masses and of the generator may cause short-
circuits originating in insulation issues that prevent the return of currents
to the ground. In such situations, the masses do not have potential energy
and therefore there are no risks derived from indirect contacts. If direct
contacts occur, the worker suffers an electric shock the value of which will
depend on the voltage of the generator and on the impedance of the body
of the person. Since there are not any differential devices in the grid which
are able to detect this situation and to eliminate the voltage, it poses a real
electrical hazard.
3 Grid Connection
In recent years, the number of grid-connected renewable energy systems
has increased enormously up to the point where, in some countries like
Spain, these sources are now the main source of energy generation. This
type of generation, geographically dispersed and generally connected to the
network, is commonly known as DG.
Grid-connected PV systems are one of these types of energy genera-
tion. Their development in recent years has been based on two types of
installation:
• Grid-connected low-voltage small installations devoted to residential self-

consumption.
• Large PV installations normally connected to medium voltage networks.
The power flow in these systems works in both directions: The grid absorbs
the excess of energy produced by the PV installation when the sun is shining
and provides the required energy in the hours without radiation.
The growing number of large-scale grid-connected plants with high
installed capacities involves important technical challenges and demands
new interconnection requirements to maintain the safety, reliability and
power quality level in the connected area. For this reason, some countries
like Spain7 and Germany8,9 (leaders in production, installation and integra-
tion of PV technology) have developed connection regulations which require
these generators to support the operation and stability of the network. This
has raised the possibility of integrating a great amount of PV power into
the distribution network.
The international standard IEEE 15473, and their respective interpre-
tive standard IEEE 1547.24, together establish criteria and requirements
for interconnection of DG with Electric Power Systems (EPS). This docu-
ment provides requirements relevant to the performance, operation, testing,
safety and maintenance of the interconnection. The criteria and require-
ments are applicable to all DR technologies, with a total capacity of 10
MVA or less at the point of common coupling (PCC) (i.e. the grid con-
nection point of a generation plant), interconnected to an EPS at typical
primary and/or secondary distribution voltages.
3.1 Grid-Connection Requirements for Large-Scale PV

Plants
3.1.1 Voltage control under normal operating conditions — Static
voltage support
According to the Standard IEEE 1547, the DG shall not actively regulate
the voltage at the PCC in order not to interfere with the local EPS service
regulations, which will also avoid islandingb in the generator. This does not
mean that the generator cannot regulate the voltage flow by injecting or
absorbing reactive power in order to meet the demands of the area EPS
operator.
In accordance with the previous recommendations, the Spanish7 con-
nection regulations establish the power factor limit to be between 0.98
capacitive and 0.98 inductive. Likewise, plants with an installed capacity
equal to or greater than 5 MW (0.5 MW in the case of electrical systems for
non-mainland territories) must follow the instructions issued by the net-
work operator to modify the mentioned limits depending on the needs of
the system. Following the voltage set points of the network operator, the
facilities will be allowed to participate voluntarily in the adjustment service
of voltage control.
On the other hand, German9 connection rules require that PV plants
connected to medium voltage networks be able to participate in voltage
controls when the voltage falls within acceptable limits. For this, the plant
reactive power may be adjusted to any power factor limit within 0.95 capac-
itive and 0.95 inductive on demand from the network operator.
3.1.2 Dynamic grid support in fault operation

This requirement makes it compulsory for PV plants to provide dynamic
voltage control, that is to say, support under certain fault conditions in
the grid. The aim of this requirement is to avoid collapse in the system
produced by deep voltage dips due to the sudden disconnection of large PV
b Islanding
can occur when a part of the grid is electrically isolated from the power system
but the part with islanding is energized by distributed generators.
plants. The generation plant must remain connected and provide support
during the period that the network fault lasts.
Spain has implemented an operational procedure, as part of connection
norms, which states the appropriate response in the event of voltage dips in
PV plants. All PV plants with power above 2 MW are to comply with this
procedure. For this reason, the PV plant and all its components must be
able to remain connected in the event of voltage dips at the connection point
produced by three-phases, two-phases or one-phase short-circuits, with the
profiles and magnitude indicated in Fig. 7. This means that the installation
will not be disconnected due to the voltage dips that fall within the shad-
owed area of the figure. The functioning conditions during the time that
the fault lasts are also specified as regards the consumption-generation of
active and reactive power.
In Germany, connection norms make it compulsory for all PV plants
connected to medium voltage networks to participate in the dynamic sup-
port of the grid. In technical terms, this means that the PV plant must be
able to:
• Remain connected in the grid during the presence of a fault.

• Support the grid under fault conditions by injecting reactive current in
the grid.
Fig. 7. Voltage–time curve which defines the area of the voltage dip at the connection
point which the PV plant must withstand. Ground-phase voltage corresponds to the
phases affected by the fault.
Limits of a typical voltage dip

Limit 1 Lower limit of
U/Uc Limit 2 voltage range
100%
70%
Below this line, no
obligation to continue
45% grid feed-in
30%
15%
0 150 700 1.500 3.000 Time (ms)
Ocurrence of grid failure event

Fig. 8. Borderlines of the voltage profile of a type-2 generating plant at the network
connection point.
• Not consume more reactive power after the fault than before the fault
occurred.
These requirements are applicable to all types of short-circuits. Figure 8

shows the requirements of the first point. According to this figure, the
required behavior for the PV plant is: the plant must remain connected
to the network and inject reactive power during the first 150 ms of the
fault; over limit point 1 the plant is under continuous and stable operation
conditions; between limit points 1 and 2, according to the grid operator, the
plant can be disconnected; below limit point 2 and under 30% of nominal
voltage, the plant can be disconnected.
3.1.3 Active power output

Grid-connected large-scale PV plants are likely to pose significant stability
risks in the system if the network operator is not able to limit temporally
its output power or able to disconnect the installation.
To avoid this, the German connection regulations make it compulsory
for PV plants to be able to limit their output power either by controlling
the signals provided by the network operator or automatically in the event
of over frequency. In automatic responses, when the grid frequency is over
50.2 Hz, generation units must reduce their active output power with a
slope of 40%/Hz with respect to the instant value of active power provided
with frequency under 50.2 Hz. The power cannot increase again unless the
frequency is less than 50.05 Hz.
In Spain, all installations or groupings of PV installations with power
above 5 MW must be linked to a generation control center that will interact
with the system by sending real-time information about the installation,
guaranteeing its reliability in accordance with the instructions given.
3.1.4 Unintentional islanding

Unintentional islanding takes place when the PV generator energizes a part
of the grid, which is separated from the EPS, through the PCC. In such
cases the generator shall detect the island and disconnect from the grid as
soon as possible. According to Standard IEEE 1547,10 the interconnection
system shall cease to energize the EPS within 2 s of the formation of an
island, but this time can be reduced in accordance with the local and NECs.
Unintentional islanding is not a desirable operating condition for PV
generators. If a zone of the electric system remains energized by the PV
system after being islanded from the rest of the power electric system, the
safety of the workers operating on the grid is potentially compromised. In
addition to this, the voltage and frequency of the islanded zone may reach
inadmissible values. This could affect the quality of the power delivered to
customers in the area. Other factors to take into account under islanding
conditions are the risk that grid equipment may be damaged or the possi-
bility of interfering in a quick restoration of the service through automatic
reclosing.
Therefore, protection against islanding is an important requirement for
the connection of PV generators to the network. Different detection meth-
ods have been developed in recent years. These fall into three categories,
namely passive methods, active methods and methods based on the use of
communication between the grid and the inverter.
The most common one is the passive method, which monitors grid
voltage and grid frequency. If these values exceed the programmed range
of values, the inverter is disconnected from the network. All inverters
require over/under-voltage and over/under-frequency protection methods.
The range of values and time responses that trigger them may vary depend-
ing on the country.
Active methods for detecting the island introduce deliberate changes
or disturbances to the connected circuit and then monitor the response
to determine if the supply network, with its stable frequency, voltage and
impedance, is still connected.
Some countries, like Spain, require over/under-voltage and over/under-
frequency passive protection measures programmed with the indicated
adjustments. Other countries, like Germany, also demand a specific method
based on sudden impedance shifts.
3.2 Power Quality

One important requirement for grid-connection is the quality of the power
delivered by the PV generator. The following factors must be considered
when evaluating power quality:
3.2.1 Voltage fluctuations at the PPC

These fluctuations are produced during the connection, disconnection, and
load variation of the PV generator. The magnitude of such voltage varia-
tions depends on the relationship between the size of the generator and the
grid impedance at the PPC. Short-circuit power at this point is a reference
value for the impedance. Voltage drop variations in this impedance during
the connections and disconnections of the PV generator cause fluctuations
in the voltage delivered to customers.
The value of the delivered voltage is an important reference when it
comes to the quality of the service delivered to customers. This value must
be maintained within the allowed limits. These limits may vary from coun-
try to country, 5% being a typical value for the maximum deviation allowed
from the nominal voltage. Different regulations, such as ANSI C84.111 in
the USA or EN 516012 in Europe, define the main characteristics of the
voltage delivered by a distribution network and the limits within which it
must be maintained.
German connection rules9,13 determine that, under normal network
operating conditions, the magnitude of the voltage changes caused by all
generating plants with a point of connection to a medium voltage network
must, at no junction point within this network, exceed a value of 2% as
compared to the voltage without generating plants. In the event of discon-
nection of one generating plant or of several plants simultaneously at one
network connection point, the voltage change at every point in the network
is limited to 5%.
Spanish connection norms included in Royal Decree 413/20147 do not
establish a maximum percentage of variation but do limit the connection
capacity of non-manageable DG, as is the case for PV generation, in 5%

of the short-circuit power at the PPC. This requirement limits indirectly
the maximum voltage deviation in medium-voltage networks to values not
higher than 2.5% of the nominal voltage at this point of the network.
3.2.2 Limitation of DC injection

Injecting DC current into the grid may entail risks for the equipment and
the electric system at the same time that it may saturate the distribu-
tion transformers turning them into a source of harmonics. Standard IEEE
154710 establishes that the DG system and its interconnection system shall
not inject DC current greater than 0.5% of the full rated output current at
the point of DG connection.
3.2.3 Harmonics
Injecting harmonic currents may produce negative effects in the EPS ser-
vice such as equipment overheating, unnecessary triggering of protection
systems, and resonances and may also contribute to the distortion of the
voltage delivered at the connection point. To prevent these effects, inter-
connection regulations limit the harmonics that PV generators can inject
into the network.
Standard IEEE 145710 defines, for each harmonic order, the maximum
current distortion that the generator can inject at the PPC and limits the
Total Demand Distortion to 5%. Such limits are applicable to connections
to distribution systems with voltages lower than or equal to 69 kV. These
emission limits match the most restrictive harmonic current injection limits
of the regulations established by IEEE 519-1992 “Recommended Practices
and Requirements for Harmonic Control in Electrical Power Systems”.
The European standard EN 61727 “Photovoltaic (PV) systems —
Characteristics of utility interface” establishes a limit of 5% for total current
harmonic distortion.
The German regulations included in the guideline BDEW9 for the con-
nection of generators to the medium voltage grid set the admissible limits
for harmonic and inter-harmonic currents related to the network short-
circuit power which may be fed into the medium voltage grid. If several
generators are connected to one point, the guideline also establishes the
procedure for the distribution of the admissible harmonic currents in each
one of the generators.
3.2.4 Limitation of flicker induced by the PV generator

Flicker is a power-quality issue predominately associated with noticeable
changes in light caused by changes in voltage levels. The severity of this
phenomenon is assessed through two indexes, short-term severity (Pst) and
long-term severity (Plt). In general, PV generation does not produce annoy-
ing flicker fluctuations in the network. Changes in PV generation produced
by clouds are not enough to produce flicker.
4 Energy Yields and Efficiencies

In this section, we will deal with factors that characterize the performance of
a PV plant, by means of which its energy production can be estimated. Such
factors include efficiency, efficacy or the different losses that may reduce the
productivity of a given ideal system. In addition, we will outline, through
different examples, the software used for the design, simulation and estima-
tion of figures of merit in PV plants.
4.1 Efficiency and Productivity

Efficiency and efficacy are two figures of merit in various types of sys-
tems (not only in PV plants) which can help to describe the characteristics
and quality of a system. Both efficiency and efficacy provide information
on the quality of the system, being different and complementary factors.
Efficacy, the ratio between the theoretical and the actual output of the
system, provides information on the performance of the system, at least
comparatively. Efficiency, the ratio between the output and the input of
the system, provides information on the system from a technological rather
than comparative perspective, and at the same time provides a quantitative
estimate of the production of the system.
In the PV sector, and more particularly in large-scale PV plants, two
figures of merit related to the aforementioned concepts are generally used.
On the one hand, the PR is a parameter that measures effectively the
real behavior of the system (produced energy) when compared with the
hypothetical production of an ideal plant, with the same characteristics as
the PV plant being studied but with its cells working at a temperature of
25◦ C (like at STCc [Standard Test Condition]) and with no losses at all.
c Irradiance:
1000 W/m2 ; cell temperature: 25o C; solar spectrum AM1.5; STC have been
defined in chapter: “Fundamentals of Photovoltaic Cells and Systems”, Sec. 4.3.1.
The PR describes the relationship between the actual and the theo-
retical energy outputs of the PV plant. It thus shows the proportion of
the energy that is actually available for export to the grid after subtracting
energy losses (e.g. due to thermal losses, collection losses, conduction losses,
etc.) and after subtracting energy consumption for operation.
The PR indicates the overall effect of losses on the rated output due
to array temperature, incomplete utilization of the irradiation and system
component inefficiencies or failures.14
It is defined analytically by the following formula:
EAC EAC EAC
PR = = R = , (1)
Eth PSTC Gi (t)dt PSTC
GSTD GSTC Hi
where EAC is the actual energy produced by the PV system in a given

period of time (typically one year),
PSTC is the nominal power of the plant under STC (also called peak power),
Gi (t) is the irradiance on the PV generator surface,
GST D is the irradiance at the STC (1000 W/m2 ),
Hi is the irradiation on the PV generator along the time considered for
EAC and
Eth is the energy produced by the same PV system working under STC
cell temperature and without losses.
It is clear that this parameter provides information on the behavior
of the system. The closer this parameter approaches one, the better the
plant will operate. This is a generalized indicator, virtually universal, since
it provides useful and comprehensive information on the behavior of the
system and is both easy to obtain and to understand: simply by knowing the
energy exported to the grid, the PV generator irradiation during the same
period and the nominal power of the plant. It also provides a measure of the
global losses of the system (LG ) which prevent the maximum theoretical
value of the energy output from being reached. So,
LG = 1 − PR. (2)
However, this parameter has shortcomings that need to be taken into

account. It is important not to focus only on its value but also to seek addi-
tional information from other quality parameters. As regards the losses of
the PV system, for example, it does not differentiate between unavoidable
losses and the losses that a well-engineered plant can prevent.
In this respect, we can distinguish other factors by including only some

of the losses in the denominator of Eq. (1). If we only consider unavoidable
losses, we would obtain the Performance Index (PI). This parameter does
not provide precise information on the engineering of the plant nor on the
compliance with the specifications of the equipment. For this reason, its
use is less common and the information that it yields may be confusing due
to the fact that it is difficult to determine the standard for what can be
considered as “avoidable” or “unavoidable” losses.
Another characteristic of PR to be taken into account is the fact that
it tends to “favor” low-productivity systems. This may sound paradoxical
as regards the profitability of the system. In general, highly productive
systems work under high radiation and temperature, which increases the
generation losses. In other words, under Nordic weather (low radiation,
low temperatures) PR values are higher than under high isolation (and
consequently higher temperature) despite the fact that the former produces
less energy per unit of nominal power.
This last aspect brings into play a third consideration about PR. For
a hypothetical investor, this parameter does not provide information on
the profitability of the system. That is to say, its value does not (directly)
indicate anything about the production of the system. To obtain such values
we must examine efficiency-based indicators. Perhaps, the most widely used
in large-scale PV plants is Final Yield Factor (FY), which defines the energy
produced during a given period of time (which usually stretches over a year)
normalized to the nominal power.
EAC
FY = . (3)
PSTC
4.2 Losses in Large-Scale PV Plants

The actual energy production of a PV power plant, EAC , is obtained from
the expression:
Hi
EAC = PSTC P R = Eth · P R. (4)
GSTC
In Eq. (4), PR reflects the effects of losses in the system which reduce
the theoretical energy production. Some of these losses are linked to the
transformation of the solar input and the final amount of energy supplied
to the network. A brief overview and evaluation of the main factors which
account for the total losses in a PV power plant are included in the following
paragraph.
Losses can be classified into four main groups, three of which are related
to the functioning of the PV generator, the so-called capture losses: collec-
tion losses, losses due to functioning under conditions other than STC and
losses derived from dispersion and module specifications. The fourth group
is associated with the PV Balance of System (BoS).
In the first group, collection losses (Lcoll ), we include several factors
that reduce the effective light that will be converted into electricity by the
solar cells. These factors include shading due to obstacles in the path of
sunlight impinging on the solar cells, reflection due to an off-normal axis
incidence angle, module soiling losses and spectral losses due to the actual
solar spectrum being other than the 1.5 Air Mass spectrum (AM1.5).d Most
of the time, cells are not working under STC (which are very unlikely out-
doors) and, as a consequence, the efficiency of the module is usually lower
than the nominal one under STC. The main factor that reduces efficiency
is cell temperature, which is usually higher than 25◦ C. Taking into account
that cell efficiency has a temperature coefficient of about −0.5%/K (Si-x)
and that the temperature of the cell is usually 20 or more degrees over STC,
the temperature loss can easily be above 10%. Another effect included in
these losses is the low irradiance effect that reduces the open circuit voltage
of the cell. These are the second group we called deviation from STC losses,
LSTC .
Finally, as regards capture losses, we must take into account the current
mismatch of the module in one string that limits the overall current in each
string of the array. A string is a set of connected modules, all of which
have the same current. Not all the modules can produce the same current
under the same operating conditions (dispersion). As a result, the string
current is limited by the module with the lowest value. Another factor to
take into account in this block is the deviation from the manufacture’s
specifications (tolerance parameters). The most important is the module
power. The actual power of any one module, due to the tolerance, can be
different (lower) than the nominal one. These are all called specification
losses (LSpec ).
d AM1.5 refers to the irradiance traversing an atmosphere length 1.5 times its vertical
length. The solar spectrum AM1.5 is the spectrum considered in STC. See chapter:
“Fundamentals of Photovoltaic Cells and Systems”, Sec. 2.3.
In PV power plants there are devices and components other than

PV modules. These are known collectively as the BoS equipment, whose
non-ideal operation causes additional losses. These include wiring, DC/AC
inverter and LV/HV transformer losses. In DC and AC wiring there are
ohmic losses due to the resistance of the cables. The DC/AC inverters usu-
ally include a Maximum Power Point Tracker (MPPT). This device pro-
duces some losses while searching for the Maximum Power Point (MPP) of
the PV array that changes along with the environmental conditions. There
are also additional losses due to the non-ideal efficiency of the inverter
(DC/AC conversion process). Taken together these are all known as the
BoS losses, LBoS .
There are various methods and algorithms to calculate some of these
loss factors. However, some of these factors can only be estimated through
empirical procedures based on experience. This falls beyond the scope of the
present chapter and we recommend the simulation tools described below to
determine, calculate or estimate these loss factors.
Every device reduces the efficiency of energy production by a factor of
(1 − Li ), where the subscript “i” represents the different devices. So, the
overall losses of a PV power plant (see Fig. 9) can be calculated as follows:
LG = 1 − (1 − Lcoll )(1 − LSTC )(1 − LSpec )(1 − LBoS ). (5)
Fig. 9. Overview of the overall losses in a large PV power plant.

From Eq. (2), we can consider PR as a product of the different losses, i.e.
P R = (1 − Lcoll )(1 − LSTC )(1 − LSpec )(1 − LBoS ). (6)
4.3 Software Simulation Tools

The huge investment needed to set up a PV plant demand an accurate
prediction of PV plant behavior as well as the amount of energy that it can
produce to guarantee profitability and minimize financial risks. The analysis
of the losses and parameters included in the previous sections leads us to
estimate energy production and to optimize the behavior of the PV plant
through a detailed study of the elements of the PV plant along with the
factors that produce losses.
There are powerful software tools available to perform sound simula-
tions of the behavior of a PV plant and accurate predictions of its energy
yield, its productivity, profitability and reliability. Such tools rely on com-
prehensive and detailed databases of the different devices (modules, invert-
ers, etc.) and of the amount of radiation as well as other environmental
variables that impinge on the calculation.
By this means, an initial estimation of the behavior and productivity of
the PV plant can be carried out using a few, not very complex initial data
like location, orientation, the type of PV technology, the type of inverter
and the local azimuth. Nevertheless, it goes without saying that properly
designing and engineering a large-scale PV plant (which entails optimal
behavior and productivity analysis, a precise scouting of its siting and an
appropriate choice of modules, orientation, layout and other BoS devices)
is not an easy task and demands powerful simulation tools to predict the
best possible energetic, economic and environmental solutions.
Sizing tools and calculation programs are the most straightforward
ones. These allow dimensioning PV plants taking into consideration ener-
getic, siting and cost requirements.
Besides the tools which are specific for PV applications, PV plants can
also be modeled and simulated through more extended software like Matlab
or Pspice. Such tools are the ones that many engineers are familiar with
and allow an advanced mathematical treatment aimed at simulating specific
devices and systems. Such tools are useful for research, development and
education purposes.
However this is not the case for large-scale PV plants, where energetic
needs, cost limitations and detailed studies of devices are less relevant than
accurate and reliable estimation of behavior, productivity and energy yield.
As a consequence, specific software simulation tools are required in the case

of large PV installations.
The interested reader can find a comprehensive review of PV system
design, sizing and simulation tools in the existing literature.15,16 Here, we
will outline briefly some of the results of two of these programs, with dif-
ferent characteristics but which have been used extensively.
Among the handy tools that allow an initial estimation of a given invest-
ment project, PV Geographic Information System (PVGIS) software can
be easily accessed.17 This easy-to-implement, open access and free piece
of software has been developed by the Joint Research Centre (JRC) of the
European Commission. The application provides radiation data from differ-
ent sources, chiefly from the European Solar Radiation Atlas as well as from
satellites. Likewise, it offers the possibility of estimating the solar electric-
ity production of a PV system under different variables, since it allows the
selection of different parameters for module technology, mounting options,
etc. by means of which users can obtain an initial estimate of energy yield
data, which can be exported as text or graphs.
On the downside, this tool does not allow the possibility of simulating
large PV power plants and, consequently, it does not provide good estimates
for large-scale plants. Overall, the software is easy to use, free to access and
a great starting point for early productivity estimations for PV plants set
in Europe, Asia and Africa.
More powerful tools will be required for a detailed estimation of the
behavior and results for large-scale PV plants. Such tools must rely on
sounder theoretical grounds and provide a wider range of uses. The PVSyst
program is regarded as one of the most powerful and comprehensive tools of
its kind. It uses large databases of radiation, modules and devices that are
likely to be mounted in a large-scale PV plant. Currently it displays two user
levels. The first level assists in the pre-sizing of the PV system and requires
limited input data. The second level involves the choice of a wide variety
of options that provide a complete calculation of all the mechanisms and
processes involved in the performance and results for a large-scale PV plant.
5 Commissioning. Operation & Maintenance

Most of the projects regarding PV systems are turn-key plants in which
the owner of the installation asks the installing company to design and to
implement the plant. In order to accept the plant, validate its appropriate
installation and transfer the responsibility of the system to the owner, all
the components must be properly installed and operating as expected, and

the system must comply with applicable standards and norms. Beyond this
point, the PV plant is commissioned and the starting point for the operation
of the installation can be scheduled.
Although the utilities which are receiving the electricity from the PV
plants normally have their own set of procedures for the compliance with
inspecting, testing and commissioning requirements (in order to guarantee
the safety performance of the plant and also the absence of any sort of
hazards) there are codes and regulations stipulated by local, regional and
national governments.18
Among all the codes and regulations, the International Electrotechnical
Commission standard (IEC 62446) is remarkable, as it defines the commis-
sioning tests, inspection criteria and documentation expected to verify the
safe installation and correct operation of the system. This document can
also be followed during the periodic retesting which is necessary for main-
tenance and operating protocols.19 Normally, national governments have
adopted this standard as a general rule, with some specific modifications
adjusted to the singularities of the region.
The list below includes some basic aspects to consider during the com-
missioning of a plant. These aspects may be complemented and/or modified
to abide by local standards and regulations, utility constrains and installer-
owner agreements.
5.1 List of Procedures for the Commission of a Large PV

Plant
Most of the procedures gathered either in the IEC standard or in the proto-
cols defined by the utilities and national or local regulators can be divided
into the following:
• Visual inspection,
• Testing and initial startup,
• System documentation.
Although there may exist some differences in the number and ways of
implementation of the procedures applied for the commissioning of a plant,
the following steps can be used as a general reference.
5.1.1 Visual inspection

The visual inspection, also known as the final check-out prior to the initial
startup, is the first verification procedure. During the visual inspection, the
Table 1: Visual inspection checklist.
— Verification of the supply and installation of the entire equipment and devices
— Verification of the quality of materials (elements, structures and civil works
materials, etc.)
— Proper labeling and identification of PV modules
— Front and rear inspection of PV modules (surface damage, delamination, fastening,
grounding connection, electrical frame insulation and encapsulant)
— Verification of the peak power installed (laboratory calibration versus flash test)
— Shading of modules (self-shading or from the surrounding elements)
— Optimal tilt and orientation of PV modules
— Verification of the supporting structure for PV modules
— DC Electrical connection (proper environment isolation of the boxes and electrical
connection in accordance with wiring diagrams)
— Verification of the buried cable installation
— Verification of the proper installation of the earthing system and overvoltage
protection
— AC Electrical connection (inverter and electricity meter)
— Proper installation and connection of the monitoring and control systems
— Proper installation and connection of the weather station (irradiance and
temperature sensors mainly)
— Cleanliness of the installation
correspondence between the planned design and the executed (civil and
mechanical) work is checked along with aspects related to electrical and
instrument issues.
This visual inspection also comprises the verification of administrative
constraints and the compliance with safety standards depending on the
system documentation, which should be handed to the owner.
A brief checklist of the most important visual inspection items is col-
lected in Table 1.
5.1.2 Testing and initial startup

During the commissioning and prior to the startup of any PV system, sev-
eral measurements have to be carried out in order to prevent damage to the
equipment and to protect the users or operators from safety hazards.19–21
Once the previous steps have been accomplished, the PV system can
be switched on and its electrical characteristics measured under real oper-
ational conditions. This is done to ensure that the system is operating as
expected and also to detect any possible sources of future malfunctions in
the system.
The procedures and measures that should be applied before and after
the startup are collected in Tables 2 and 3.
Table 2: Pre-startup testing procedures and measurements.
— Verification of the polarity of the PV strings

— Short-circuit current measurement of each PV string
— Open-circuit for each string and the entire PV generator
— Insulation resistance of the DC main cable
— Insulation resistance of the PV generator
— Insulation resistance of the AC section (wiring and transformer)
— Ground resistance measurement of the PV field (continuity of protective earth)
— Ground resistance measurement of the inverters and transformer centers
Table 3: Post-startup testing measurements.
— Operating current for each string

— Peak power output measurement
— Voltage drop above each safety device
— Voltage drop above DC main cable
— Voltage drop above each safety device
— Verification of the tripping of the protection devices
— Operational state of the inverter (alarms, monitoring parameters)
— Operational state of the electricity meter
— Operational state of monitoring and control systems
— Operational state of the weather station
— Thermography of the PV modules (hot-spot detection)
— Thermographic study of the electrical connection boxes (hot-spot areas detection)
5.1.3 System documentation

Once the installation is finished and the initial tests reinforce the proper
and safe operational state of the PV plant as contracted and designed, the
installer should provide the owner of the plant with all the documentation
related to its system. A collection of the essential documents needed for the
acceptance and commissioning of the plant is included in Table 4.18,19,21
5.2 Operation and Maintenance of a PV Plant

As a general rule, grid-connected PV systems require low maintenance,
especially if the modules are installed on fixed structures. Nevertheless, it
is mandatory to undertake some basic maintenance tasks in order to assure
the operational behavior, the optimal energy production and the durability
of the plant.
Normally, the installer of the plant should provide the owner with a
document with the Operation and Maintenance (O&M) procedures adapted
to the particularities of the plant as it was described in the previous section.
Table 4: System documentation recommendations.
— Part list, datasheets and equipment’s manufacturer manuals

— Wiring diagrams
— Mechanical design information (also drawings)
— System performance estimate
— Operation and maintenance information (procedures for troubleshooting)
— Safety requirements
— Test Results and commissioning data
— Permits
— Certificates of inspection
— Utility interconnection agreements
— System warranty info
Depending on the severity of the maintenance tasks, two different types

of maintenance protocols can be defined:
• Preventive Maintenance
• Corrective Maintenance
Preventive maintenance involves a set of actions whose aim is to maintain

the plant under an optimum state of conservation and operation. Their
application frequency varies from daily actions to others more extended in
time. The objective is to prevent (or to reduce to a minimum) any mal-
function in the plant over time.
On the other hand, corrective maintenance involves the substitution
and reparation actions that will allow the plant to operate correctly
throughout its operating life.
Table 5 shows a list of the main actions corresponding preventive main-
tenance, gathered in any standard O&M procedure, and recommendations
regarding their inspection frequency.
It is easily observable that the O&M procedures defined in the pre-
ventive maintenance list include many of the items from the testing and
inspection checklist of the commissioning protocol.21 In this case, with the
exception of the triennial activities, these tasks can be carried out by a
non-technical operator.
It is important to mention that maintenance requirements could be
reduced if the proper monitoring system is installed. This monitoring sys-
tem has proved to be very useful in daily checks and chiefly during monthly
inspections of energy production.
Table 5: Preventive maintenance protocol actions.
Activity Frequency
— Inspection of the operational state of the inverter and electricity Daily

meter
— Inspection of the operational state of the monitoring and control Daily
system
— Measurement of energy generation (yield) Monthly
— Inspection of the operational state of the weather station Monthly
— Module Inspection (surface damage, delamination, burned Biannually
connections, fastening, corroded grounding connection, electrical
frame insulation)
— Inspection of the mechanical security of the structure Annually
— Revision of the connections, wiring and circuit boxes (mechanical Annually
damage, loose connections)
— Verification of the tripping of the protection devices and main Annually
switch
— Inspection of shading on the PV generator’s surface Annually
— Repetition of insulation and ground measurements (same as Triennial
commissioning)
— Repetition of voltage drop measurements (same as commissioning) Triennial
— Repetition of operating current measurements in each string (same Triennial
as commissioning)
— Repetition of peak power output measurement (same as Triennial
commissioning)
— Repetition of thermographic studies of the modules and the Triennial
electrical connection boxes (same as commissioning)
— Cleaning of the modules (also include pruning to prevent possible (as required)
fire hazards)
Table 6: Most common Failures in PV plants.
— Defects in the connection and cabling

— Faults on modules (delamination, soldering joints, moisture ingress, disconnected
modules, reverse polarity, hot spots)
— Isolation and grounding faults
— Defects in protection devices
— Stops and faults of the inverter (hardware defects, decreased efficiency, high level of
harmonics)
Corrective maintenance deals with the typical faults and breakdowns

of any PV system, and qualified technical personnel should always conduct
them.
Although a troubleshooting guide is beyond the scope of the present
manual, Table 6 gives a brief summary of the most common sources of
faults in large-scale PV power plants that should be covered by corrective

maintenance.20,22,23
Corrective maintenance should be included and specified in detail in
the warranty documentation received when commissioning the plant.
6 Promotion Policies — Planning and Regulation

Nowadays, the different sources of energy in the electricity generation mix
is having an expanding impact on the development of the balance of energy
sources and on policies within countries. In this scenario, renewables are
responsible for a major change in the conception of electrical generation.
PV technology stands out in the Renewable Energy (RE) supply, as it
represents a realistic alternative in the energy market and is particularly
appropriate in countries which are changing the technologies of their elec-
tricity generation mix.
Despite the increased deployment of installed PV technology in recent
years, its development still remains subject to a policy-driven market and
greatly depends on electricity savings and on the potential sales in the
wholesale electricity market.24 In this sense, public policies can not only
support but also accelerate PV energy cost reduction. Such is the main
objective of government promotion policies, namely, the encouragement of
certain technologies in their early-stages so that these can achieve large-
scale deployment.25
Nevertheless, the definition of several rules or directives is not enough
for the effective promotion of RE. A supporting economic mechanism must
be designed to minimize both the cost to consumers and generation costs.
The distinguishing approach in the promotion policies proposed by
some authors comes from the coupling of energy and economic analyses with
the optimization of the place for the installation of a certain RE source. It
is intended to strengthen the philosophy that the installation of PV energy
should not be made at any price in a massive intervention, regardless the
suitability of the location. The principles of equi-marginality and lowering
the cost of governmental support should be combined to adapt the PV plant
to the places with best renewable energy resources, thus minimizing both
the cost to consumers and generation costs.26
The regulation tools that governments have been using since the deploy-
ment of PV technology in recent years can be grouped according to their
energy or finance policy focus. The most representative ones among the
large number of supporting mechanisms are listed in the following para-
graphs.27–29
Feed-in Tariff (FiT): Price-driven regulation which consists in offering

PV electricity producers a guaranteed constant price for the energy sup-
plied to the grid during a determined period of time. This unitary price is
independent of market electricity prices.
Premium Feed-in Tariff (PFiT): Variation of the previous regulation
in which the electricity supplied to the grid will be dependent on price
variations of the electricity market. It also includes a floor and a cap unitary
price, in order to guarantee a balance between risk and profits.
Net Metering (also Net billing): Access-type regulation consisting in
the compensation for the electricity consumed by one user in his residence
with the electricity generated by a PV system installed in his domain whose
energy is injected to the local distribution grid. The total electricity metered
is the balance of the PV electricity delivered to the grid minus the electric-
ity consumed from it. Therefore, there is compensation between the con-
sumption and the production profiles and it is normally applicable during
a specific billing period.
Self-Consumption: Access type regulation consisting in connecting a PV
installation to the consumer’s own grid, allowing him to consume the energy
self-produced with the PV system installed in his domain and also receiving
value for the non-consumed electricity (excess) that is fed into the general
grid.
VAT reduction: Fiscal incentive that reduces the taxes for the production
of renewable electricity and that also includes any economic activity related
to this technology. It may also consider tax exemption.
Tender and auctions: Quantity-driven mechanism consisting in the remu-
neration, above the market electricity price, of the electricity supplied by a
RE source, whose right to feed into the grid has been obtained through a
public tender of a certain quota of PV supply.
Investment Grants: Fiscal subsidy which does not have to be returned
with the aim of reducing investment cost when installing any PV system.
Fiscal credit: Fiscal incentive based on the annual tax credit provision
to the investor of a PV system depending on the amount invested and the
renewable electricity produced. It allows tax deductions.
Beneficial Credit Terms: Public finance mechanism by means of which
the investor of a RE plant is financed through lower interest rates and less
barriers and requirements.
Although there are more supporting mechanisms like storage incentives,

indirect sale of the electricity produced, energy production payment by the
government, green certificates, etc. the tools previously defined are the most
common. It is important to point out that some regulations do not use one
single supporting mechanism, but a combination of them.
Among the regulation tools identified, the FiT has been the one most
commonly used, causing several countries to reach PV grid parity, as the
price of producing a unit of electricity through PV can be compared to
their local retail electricity prices in a competitive way.
Moreover, these FiT policies have boosted the industry to a level
where, in certain cases, this parity has been reached without any subsidy
or FiT incentives. A favorable regulatory framework has also been nec-
essary30 as well as the application of reduction mechanisms, where FiT
have been progressively reduced based on the connected power in previous
periods.25
Despite the aforementioned promotion of PV energy and as the share
of PV increases, grid-market integration is facing new challenges.24 In this
sense, Europe, as the main PV installer up to date, is facing an enor-
mous competitiveness challenge due to the fact that the priority imposed
on renewable energies in the short-term has increased energy generation
costs,31 particularly when there is some skepticism concerning the feasibil-
ity of running Europe just on the basis of RE.32 This technical and economic
disbelief is also translatable to the rest of the world.33
Beyond the extra cost charges, a critical issue that should be faced is
the security of supply, its sustainability and the economic competitiveness,
as they seem to be unbalanced in some energy policy targets.34 In that
sense, DG should be favored by policies that increase its market penetra-
tion35 in order to avoid the boom and subsequent bust that the market
of PV technology has recently experienced in several countries, especially
within the European Union. The lessons learned should be used as an
example for the proposal of future policy recommendations for solar PV
deployment.36,37
Either way, any RE policy should consider its impact and effective-
38
ness and the means through which it can be adapted to dynamic market
conditions.39 At this point, the trending concepts of self-consumption and
net-metering are becoming a promising alternative.40,41 According to some
reports, around 4% of the world PV market has been installed according
to self-consumption mechanisms.42
7 Economic Analysis: Financing and Due Diligence

Large-scale PV projects have experienced tremendous growth in the world
in the last few years, above all in the US, China, South Africa, Chile and
India. The large budget for such projects requires special development and
financing methods. The key consideration during project development is
the balance of expenditure and risk. Different financing mechanisms can
be implemented in such installations, but the most commonly used tool is
project finance, where the aim is to financing the PV plant without risk
to the stakeholder. Such projects must pass through a number of different
stages, categorized as pre-financial and post-financial activities. Financial
institutions require independent advisors to carry out the prior and post-
financial closing. In the pre-financial close stage, the Full Due Diligence
process is important, consisting mainly of Legal & Tax Due Diligence, Tech-
nical Due Diligence (TDD) and Insurance Due Diligence (IDD). It provides
support to lenders and investors in ensuring that projects are viable and
contractually sound, focusing on identifying and controlling technical risks
throughout the project life-cycle.
From a financial point of view, investing in large-scale PV projects is
attractive in many countries around the globe, using conventional PV (Si-x)
as well as other new PV technologies (e.g. concentrating PV, thin-film tech-
nology, etc.).43,44 In addition, large-scale, ground-mounted PV power plants
are largely benign with regard to wildlife and other environmental indica-
tors compared with fossil-fuel based power generation.45 More investors are
recognizing that PV technology has matured and the risk of default is low.
The investment, and thus the prices achievable on the power market, is not
linked to uncertainties in the oil market. And the sun’s energy is free, which
gives PV projects a fundamental advantage.
7.1 Economic Parameters: Grid Parity, Life-Cycle Cost

(LCC) and Levelized Cost of Electricity (LCOE)
Regarding the economic analysis of large-scale PV power plants there are
several concepts that need to be defined: Grid Parity, Life-Cycle Cost (LCC)
and Levelized Cost of Electricity (LCOE). They play the role of competi-
tiveness and cost referees.
Grid Parity occurs when the cost of producing a unit of electricity
by PVs is the same as the average end-price for electricity to consumers.
Grid parity should not be confused with generation-parity, as the latter
concept includes the transport and distribution of the electricity which was
generated off the grid.
The LCC of the PV system, includes the present worth of all the
expenses incurred throughout the life of the plant (N years) and will
depend on the initial investment (PVIN , ) and the annual operation and
maintenance (O&M ) cost (PVAOM , ) associated with the selected PV
technology.46,47
Unless the project is not financed, the initial investment will be affected
by the annual interest rate for borrowing money during a period of time,
and the O&M will extend throughout the lifetime of the plant, so the sum
of these annual costs has to be added to the present worth of the initial
investment in the PV system (PW [PV IN ], ) and to the present worth
of the operation and maintenance cost over N years (PW [PV OM (N )], )
associated with the PV technology, being the present worth the current
worth of the future investment.
Here, like in any other investment, it is necessary to establish the
present worth of the capital invested. Therefore we have taken into account
the nominal discount rate, r (%).48
LCC ( ) = PW [PV IN ] + PW [PW OM (N )]. (7)
The investment can be financed either with company capital (own capital,
OC) (PW [PV OC ], ) or external capital (PW [PV EC ], ). The assumption
has been made that there is an annual retribution, for own capital in the
form of a dividend (di ) and the investment will be amortized at the end of
the life-cycle of the system (N years). As a result, to calculate the present
worth of the owned capital, the following equation is used, considering the
factor q = 1/(1 + r):

q · (1 − q N )
P W [PV OC ] = PV OC di · N
+q . (8)
(1 − q)
The rest of the investment, PVEC = PVIN − PVOC , may be financed with
an annual loan interest il (%) and loan term Nl (years), so its present
worth is,

(1 + il )Nl q · (1 − q Nl )
PW [PV EC ] = (PV IN − PV OC ) · il · . (9)
(1 + il )Nl − 1 (1 − q)
Finally, the present worth of investment cost can be expressed as:
PW [PV IN ] = PW [PV EC ] + PW [PV OC ]. (10)

The annual operation and maintenance cost is assumed to be proportional

to the initial investment. Additionally, an annual escalation rate (εPVAOM )
of the operation and maintenance cost of the system has been defined, so
PW[PV OM (N )] may be re-written as:
KPV · (1 − KPV
N
)
PW[PV OM (N )] = PV AOM · , (11)
1 − KPV
where

(1 + εPVAOM )
KPV = . (12)
(1 + r)
The LCOE [also called LEC], is defined as the cost of a unit of electricity
( ·kWh−1 ) produced by a given system over a specified number of years,
normally throughout its whole operational lifetime. This cost is expressed
in current monetary units and it is levelised for all the years that the sys-
tem is intended to be generating electricity.49 In the LCOE analysis, the
cost of transport and maintenance of the network is not considered, so
that it is possible to use this number to obtain the value for grid parity.
This parameter calculates the price of the electricity that the system gen-
erates by dividing the project’s total cost into the energy produced during
its complete operating life. The LCOE can be defined by the following
expression50,51 :
LCC
LCOE ( · kW h−1 ) = N EPV ·(1−εpl )i
. (13)
i=1 (1+r)i
In the previous equation, EPV is the annual PV electricity yield

(kWh·year−1 ), where an annual decrease of the power generated of εpl (%)
has been assumed.
The parameter LCOE is a widely used term in the PV industry and
it is often used as a marketing tool in discussions regarding large-scale
projects. The economic feasibility of PV projects is increasingly being eval-
uated using that parameter in order compare it to investment in other
electricity generation technologies. LCOE can also be used for economic
comparison between different PV energy system configurations.52 In addi-
tion, LCOE is the widely accepted criterion to fairly compare the cost of
energy generated by different power plants.
Table 7 shows the values of the parameters involved in the LCOE for a
possible actual scenario in 2014, in wide areas (horizontal irradiation over
1600 kWh/m2 ), with Si-x technology and standard economy.
February 11, 2016
14:7
Table 7: Possible scenario in 2014 of the parameter values involved in calculation of LCOE.

Large-Scale PV Power Plants
LCC
Present
Energy Financing Own capital Q&M worth Life
Initial Q&M Growth Years of
Final invest- Extemal Interest Loan Own Cost rate of Discount useful
yield De-rating ment captital loan years capital Dividends %(P Vin ) Q&M rate life
EP V εpl P Vin ( ) x% of il Nl (Year) (1 − x) % di P Vold εPVOM r N (year)

(kWh/ (annual %) P Vin (%) (annual %) of (annual %) (%) (annual %) (annual %)
kWp/ P Vin (%)
year)
b2236-ch04
1350 0.5 1900 80 4.13 20 20 3 1.5 2.8 3.9 20
161
page 161
With these values we have a present worth (i.e. the current worth of
future investments) of the PV system of 2395 /kWp and a LCOE of 13.5
c /kWh.
7.2 Financing
A primary objective in financing a power plant is to ensure that the plant
operates continuously and reliably, thereby generating the maximum eco-
nomic and energy performance returns. It is therefore important to analyze
the risk and uncertainties involved in the project before assessing how much
collateral is required or whether project financing is possible. This requires a
thorough study of the individual factors and associated risks and by means
of mitigation of any identified risks to quantify and to reduce, if possible,
the project uncertainties.
A number of financing mechanisms are available for infrastructure
projects. They include the following: cash purchase, government funding,
corporate or on-balance sheet finance and project finance.
Project finance is the typical tool for financing very big projects in
different sectors such as energy and water. In project finance, the viability
of projects is solely based on their own capacity to produce future cash flow,
which makes it feasible to develop projects with high levels of leverage due
to project developers’ shortage of funds.53–55
Project finance is the usual financing tool for large-scale PV plants.
Financial institutions require independent advisors to use this tool. The
working tool to carry out the recommendations of the independent advisors
is known as due diligence.
7.3 Technical Due Diligence

The bankability of a PV plant is not only addressed through the modelling
of its energy yield followed by an on-site measurement campaign,56,57 it
is necessary to analyze more aspects. To achieve this, the most frequent
resource is the aforementioned Technical Due Diligence (TDD). It comprises
all the technical aspects of a project, from the production estimation to the
contractual agreements and costs. The objective of the TDD is to under-
stand and mitigate a variety of technical, legal and socio-environmental
risks before valuable time and resources are allocated to the project.
Although bankability assessments vary from bank to bank and are not
based upon a single criterion or universal formula, the factors by which
it is most frequently determined fall into four main categories: company,

product, processes and service.
TDD entails a multi-disciplinary analysis in which risk assessments are
made for all individual aspects involved in the PV plant. Typical areas
assessed in the TDD are4,58 :
— Solar resource assessment,

— Losses and yield estimation,
— Major component technology review,
— Equipment supplier evaluations: references, previous experience and
delivery periods,
— Evaluation of the base case: price, expenses, revenue, etc.,
— Engineering review: technological evaluation of equipment and plant
design,
— Contract evaluation (EPC, O&M, PPA, etc.),
— Evaluation of authorizations, licenses, permits, etc. and
— Environmental evaluation.
8 The Future of Large-Scale PV Power Plants

The future of large-scale PV power plants is location dependent and is also
influenced by the promotion policies applied. In recent years, the trajectory
of the PV industry has been ambiguous. Whereas there has been a pullback
because of the recession in Europe, Asian regions have driven up demand.
Therefore, in order to objectively assess the possible future development and
installation of new large-scale PV power plants, it is necessary to divide the
analysis according to the following classification:
8.1 European Stand-by Future in Large-Scale PV Power

Plants
The EU, which has been the major driving force behind the installation
of large PV power plants, has moved from an extraordinary boom, overde-
veloped according to some authors, mainly caused by a clear interest and
policy support from several national governments, to a stand-by or even
recessionary state in certain regions where there has been a reduction in
the development of new projects and even the revoking of some economic
support mechanisms.59 The uncontrolled expansion of these systems has
led to several measures at a national level to restrain their development. A
moratorium on new plants, extra fees and also the retroactive application of
some of these measures has not only meant a deceleration in the installing
of new PV power but has also led to instability and a lack of viability of
existing PV installations.60
Beyond those policy measures, the current trend in European PV sup-
port schemes is to move to net-metering and self-consumption scenarios,27
where rooftop small PV systems play a major role, thus promoting local
distribution grids.61 In 2013, around 10% of the installed PV capacity
in Europe was designed for self-consumption, and mid-term trends go in
this direction as well. Nevertheless, the segmentation in the European PV
market is quite varied depending on the country analyzed. The share of
ground-mounted systems is around 34% while the commercial and indus-
trial rooftop segments represent 44%24 altogether.
In this scenario, the future of large-scale PV plants in the European
market is uncertain in the short and mid-term, but is stable long term.
Some analysts assess that the EU will play only a minor role in the global
PV market capacity. The forecast in accumulating PV power is intended to
shift from around 80 GW in 201342 to around 229 GW by 2050.62
8.2 The Asia Pacific and Middle East and North Africa
(MENA) Countries Boosting Future in Large PV Plants
In 2013, Asia surpassed Europe in the annual increase in PV capacity, with
around 56% of the PV power installed worldwide. China and Japan were
the leaders, where 11.8 GW and 6.9 GW were installed respectively.24
In contrast, in the other regions of the world, centralized grid-connected
systems are by far the most common PV systems installed42 and short-
term future projects are expected to reinforce this large-scale grid-connected
tendency. The number of new projects forecast is large, on top of those
already being installed in China, India, Japan, Kazakhstan, Korea, and
UAE among others.63
Therefore, the forecast in all reports suggests an optimistic trend and
growing opportunity for the future installation of large PV plants, in which
China will retain the leadership gained in 2013. China is expected to
increase its global capacity from 13% in 201324 to around 40% by 2050,
producing around 21% of its electricity generation through PV sources.62
Despite the great position of China regarding the installation of large-
scale PV systems, India and the MENA countries are expected to play a
major role in the mid-term, as they represent an untapped potential.24 In
this sense, India, which now accounts for around 2% of the global capacity,
will experience, in a favorable scenario, an exponential growth up to 575

GW by 2050, reaching the third highest position in installed PV capacity,
just after the USA, and having similar figures to those of China in the
percentage contribution to its national electricity generation.62
In view of the above facts and trends, the most promising future for
large-scale PV systems in the short and mid-term seems to be located in
these regions.
8.3 North and South American Deployment of PV Plants

America has a great potential in large-scale PV systems, where Latin Amer-
ican countries are expected to lead the deployment of this technology.24
In 2013, the USA represented around 9% of cumulative PV systems,
but a slight slowdown has been detected in its growth, possibly caused by
the solar trade dispute between the USA and China.63
Nevertheless, the deployment of these systems is a reality and analysts
forecast a cumulative PV capacity or around 811 GW by 2050, positioning
the continent as the second largest PV power region.62 This may represent
around 14–15% of PV capacity worldwide.
8.4 Africa’s Increasing Development of Large PV Plant

Projects
Africa has great potential in the installation of large-scale PV power plants,
not only because of its favorable radiation conditions and the availability
of land area, but also because some countries are experiencing a rapid eco-
nomic growth. Energy consumption has risen around 45% in some African
countries and they are unlocking their huge renewable energy resources.
Therefore, the expectations are that half of the electricity generated by
2040 will be produced through renewable sources.64
The share of PV produced electricity in Africa is still low due to the lack
of access to an electric grid. In fact, most of the systems already installed
correspond to decentralized grid-connected ones.42 Some activity is taking
place in those regions through off-grid and mini-grid PV systems,62 where
a noticeable trend is the combination of diesel generators and solar PV
microgrid systems.64
Nevertheless, in order to absorb the rapid energy growth mentioned,
some countries like Nigeria, Uganda or Namibia, among others, are showing
great interest in large-scale plants and are aiming to produce several MWs
using large PV systems.63
In an optimistic scenario, the PV capacity estimated for Africa in 2030

will be around 85 GW, with 165 GW of accumulated PV energy planned
for 2050, which makes around 11% of share in the generation mix.62
Acknowledgments
We would like to thank our colleague Joaquı́n Cruz Trapero, from the Uni-
versity of Jaén, for his invaluable assistance in the translation and review
of the present chapter. We are also grateful to Pablo Valera, who has been
willing to provide us with data derived from his PhD thesis work.
References
1. A. Goodrich, T. James and M. Woodhouse, Residential, commercial, utility-
scale photovoltaic (PV) system prices in the united states: Current drivers and
cost-reduction opportunities, Tech. Rep. DE-AC36-08GO28308, Nat. Renew.
Energy Lab. (NREL), Golden, CO, USA (2012).
2. PVPS Report Snapshot of Global PV 1992–2013, IEA PVPS 2013, IEA–EU.
3. C. Winneker, EPIA Global market outlook for Photovoltaics 2013–2017. Euro-
pean PV Insdustry Assosiation (EPIA, Brussels, 2013).
4. P. Valera, O. Pereles, A. Trabant, A. Payán, A. Pastor, L. Almonacid, V. Salas
and G. Almonacid, State of the technique of the methods implemented in
independent technical advisory services, including the technical due diligences
(TDD), related with the project finance in photovoltaic energy projects, in
EUPVSEC, Amsterdam (2014).
5. P. Vidal, G. Almonacid, P. Pérez and J. Aguilera, Measures used to protect
people exposed to a PV generator: ‘Univer Project’, Prog. Photovolt. 9 (2001),
pp. 57–67.
6. J. Hernandez and P. Vidal, Guidelines for protection against electric shock
in PV generators, IEEE Trans. Energ. Conv. 24(1) (2009), pp. 274–283.
7. Ministerio de Industria, Real Decreto 413/2014, de 6 de junio, por el que se
regula la actividad de producción de energı́a eléctrica a partir de fuentes de
energı́a renovables, cogeneración y residuos (BOE, Madrid, 2014).
8. BDEW, Bundesverband der Energie-und Wasserwirtschaft e. V., Grid code —
extra high voltage, April (2009).
9. BDEW, Bundesverband der Energie- und Wasserwirtschaft e.V., Guideline
for generating plants’ connection to and parallel operation with the medium-
voltage network, June (2008).
10. Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers — IEEE, IEEE Standard
1547-2003 — IEEE Standard for Interconnecting Distributed Resources with
Electric Power Systems (2003).
11. ANSI C84.1-2006., American National Standard for Electric Power Systems
and Equipment — Voltage Ratings (2006).
12. EN 5160, Voltage characteristics of electricity supplied by public distribution

systems.
13. A. Notholt, Germany’s new code for generation plants connected to medium-
voltage networks and its repercussion on inverter control, Valencia (Spain)
(2009).
14. IEC 61724, Phtovoltaic system performance monitoring. Guidelines for mea-
suring, data exchange and analysis (1998).
15. T. Marwart and L. Castañer, Practical Handbook of Photovoltaics (Elsevier,
Amsterdam, 2003), pp. 543–565.
16. German Solar Energy Society, Planning and Installing Photovoltaic Systems
(Routledge, 2013), pp. 299–335.
17. European Commision — PVGIS, Joint Research Centre, [Online]. Available
at: http://re.jrc.ec.europa.eu/pvgis/. [Accessed 16 July 2014].
18. G. Stapleton and S. Neill, Grid-Connected Solar Electric Systems. The Earth-
scan Expert Handbook for Planning, Design and Installation (Earthscan, UK,
2012).
19. IEC 62446, Grid Connected Photovoltaic Systems — Minimum Requirements
for System Documentation, Commissioning Tests and Inspection (Interna-
tional Electrotechnical Commission, Switzerland, 2009).
20. Deutsche Gesellschaft für Sonnenenergie (DGS), Planning and Installing Pho-
tovoltaic Systems. A Guide for Installers, Architects and Engineers (Rout-
ledge, UK, 2013).
21. J. P. Dunlop, Photovoltaic Systems (American Technical Publishers, USA,
2010).
22. IEA — International Energy Agency, Review of Failures of Photovoltaic Mod-
ules (IEA, Photovoltaic Power System Programme, Parı́s, 2014).
23. J. Muñoz Dı́ez, Contribución a la evaluación de la calidad de sistemas foto-
voltaicos conectados a la red de medio y gran tamaño (Universidad de Jaén,
Jaén, 2012).
24. EPIA — European Photovoltaic Industry Association, Global Market Outlook
for Photovoltaics 2014–2018 (Brussels, 2014).
25. IRENA — International Renewable Energy Agency, Rethinking Energy:
Towards a new power system (2014).
26. P. del Rı́o and E. Cerdá, The policy implications of the different interpreta-
tions of the cost-effectiveness of renewable electricity support, Energy Policy
64 (2014), pp. 364–372.
27. EPIA — European Photovoltaic Industry Association, European PV support
schemes overview, Brussels, Q4 (2014).
28. T. D. Couture, K. Cory, C. Kreycik and E. Williams, A Policymaker’s Guide
to Feed-in Tariff Policy Design (NREL, USA, 2010).
29. IRENA — International Renewable Energy Agency, Evaluating Policies in
Support of the Deployment of Renewable Power (Abu Dhabi, United Arab
Emirates, 2012).
30. D. Pérez, V. Cervantes, V. Báez and J. González-Puelles, PV grid parity
monitor. Residential sector, Ecclareon 2 (2013).
31. D. Helm, The European Framework for energy and climate policies, Energy
Policy (2014), pp. 29–35.
32. T. Trainer, Can Europe run on renewable energy? A negative case, Energy
Policy 63 (2013), pp. 845–850.
33. T. Trainer, Can the world run on renewable energy? A revised negative case,
Humanomics 29(2) (2013), pp. 88–104.
34. S. Spiecker and C. Weber, The future of the European electricity system and
the impact of fluctuating renewable energy — a scenario analysis, Energy
Policy 65 (2014), pp. 185–197.
35. F. P. Vahl, R. Rüther and N. Casarotto, The influence of distributed gen-
eration penetration levels on energy markets, Energy Policy 62 (2013),
pp. 226–235.
36. P. del Rı́o and P. Mir-Artigues, Support for solar PV deployment in Spain:
Some policy lessons, Renew. Sust. Energ. Rev. 16 (2012), pp. 5557–5566.
37. A. Ciarreta, C. Gutiérrez-Hita and S. Nasirov, Renewable energy sources in
the Spanish electricity market: Instruments and effects, Renew. Sust. Energ.
Rev. 15 (2011), pp. 2510–2519.
38. IRENA — International Renewable Energy Agency, Evaluating renewable
energy policy: A review of criteria and indicators for assesment, UK (2014).
39. IRENA — International Renewable Energy Agency, Adapting renewable
energy policies to dynamic market conditions, Abu Dhabi (2013).
40. D. Talavera, J. de la Casa, E. Muñoz-Cerón and G. Almonacid, Grid parity
and self-consumption with photovoltaic systems under the present regulatory
framework in Spain: The case of the University of Jaén Campus, Renew. Sust.
Energ. Rev. 33 (2014), pp. 752–771.
41. E. Muñoz-Cerón, New Trends in Photovoltaic Economy and Development of
a Different Technological Spectral Approach in Concentrator Photovoltaics
(University of Jaen, Spain, 2014).
42. IEA — International Energy Agency, Trends 2014 in Photovoltaic Applica-
tions. Survey Report of Selected IEA Countries Between 1992 and 2013 (IEA.
Photovoltaic Power Systems Programme, 2014).
43. D. Feldman, G. Barbose, R. Margolis and N. Darghouth, Photovoltaic System
Pricing Trends: Historical, Recent and Near Term Projection (US Depart-
ment of Energy, 2013).
44. M. Mendelsohn, T. Lowder and B. Canavan, Utility-Scale Concentrating
Solar Power and Photovoltaics Projects: A Technology and Market Overview
(NREL, 2012).
45. D. Turney and V. Fthenakis, Environmental impacts from the installation
and operation of large-scale solar power plants, Renew. Sust. Energ. Rev. 15
(2011), pp. 3261–3270.
46. G. Nofuentes et al., Tools for the profitability analysis of grid-connected pho-
tovoltaics, Prog. Photovolt (2002), pp. 555–570.
47. D. Talavera et al., Sensitivity analysis on some profitability indices for photo-
voltaic grid–connected systems on buildings: The case of two top photovoltaic
European areas, J. Sol. Energy Eng. 135(1) (2012), p. 011003.
48. Centre for Social Impact Bonds (2013). [Online]. Available at: http://data.
gov.uk/sib knowledge box/discount-rates-and-net-present-value. Accessed 30
August 2014.
49. W. Short et al., A manual for the economic evaluation of energy efficiency
and renewable energy technologies (NREL, Golden, Co, USA, 1995).
50. E. Muñoz, Trends in the policy and economy of the PV technology, in PhD
Thesis, Universidad de Jaén (2014), pp. 11–25.
51. K. Branker, M. Pathak and J. Pearce, A review of solar photovoltaic levelized
cost of electricity, Renew. Sust. Energ. Rev. 15(9) (2011), pp. 4470–4482.
52. M. Campbell, J. Blunden, E. Smeloff and P. Aschenbrenner, Minimizing
utility-scale PV power plant LCOE through the use of high capacity factor
configurations, in Proc. 34th IEEE PVSC (2009).
53. C. Groobey, J. Pierce, M. Faber and G. Broome, Project Finance Primer
for Renewable Energy and Clean Tech Projects (Wilson Sonsini Goodrid &
Rosati, 2010).
54. M. Dailami and D. Leipziger, Infrastructure project finance and capital flows:
A new perspective, World Develop. 26(7) (1998), pp. 1283–1298.
55. G. Pollio., Project finance and international energy development, Energy Pol-
icy 26(9) (1998), pp. 687–697.
56. W. Lange, Bankability: The ticket for successful solar energy project business,
Global Photovoltaic Business & Resources (2011).
57. J. Morgenson, Defining bankability for utility-scale PV, Power Engineering
(2011).
58. P. Valera, J. Tejada, A. Payan, O. Pereles, A. Trabant, L. Almonacid, V.
Salas and G. Almonacid., Technical Aspects of Project Finance in Solar
Energy Projects — Methodology to Improve the Technical due Diligences,
in EUPVSEC, Paris (2013).
59. Foresight group, The bigger picture — What is the future of large-scale solar
in Europe? Green Power Conf., 11 September (2014). [Online]. Available at:
http://www2.greenpowerconferences.co.uk/EF/?sSubSystem=Prospectus&s
SessionID=utp67mlr3lvrka2rboeoudr0t5-19376809&sEventCode=SP1411IT&
sDocument=Webinar1 Download. Accessed on 18 November 2014.
60. EPIA — European Photovoltaic Association, Retrospective measures at
national level and their impact on the photovoltaic sector, Brussels (2013).
61. IEA — International Energy Agency, High Penetration of PV in Local Dis-
tribution Grids (IEA. Photovoltaic Power Systems Programme, Paris, 2014).
62. IEA — International Energy Agency, Technology Roadmap. Solar Photo-
voltaic Energy (IEA, Paris, 2014).
63. Photon International —The Solar Power Magazine, Markets (Photon Pub-
lishing GmbH, Germany, 2014).
64. IEA — International Energy Agency, Africa Energy Outlook. A focus on
Energy prospects in Sub-Saharan Africa (IEA. World Energy Outlook Special
Reports, Paris, 2014).

Chapter 5
Biomass
Anthony Turhollow
Environmental Sciences Division, Oak Ridge National Laboratory
P.O. Box 2008, Oak Ridge, TN, USA
[email protected]
Biomass resources and conversion technologies are diverse. Substantial biomass

resources exist including woody crops, herbaceous perennials and annuals,
forest resources, agricultural residues, and algae. Conversion processes avail-
able include fermentation, gasification, pyrolysis, anaerobic digestion, com-
bustion, and transesterification. Bioderived products include liquid fuels (e.g.
ethanol, biodiesel, and gasoline and diesel substitutes), gases, electricity, bio-
chemical, and wood pellets. At present the major sources of biomass-derived
liquid fuels are from first generation biofuels; ethanol from maize and sugar cane
(89 billion liters in 2013) and biodiesel from vegetable oils and fats (24 billion
liters in 2011). For other than traditional uses, policy in the forms of mandates,
targets, subsidies, and greenhouse gas emission targets has largely been driving
biomass utilization. Second generation biofuels have been slow to take off.
1 Introduction
Biomass is organic matter that can be directly utilized or transformed into
other forms of energy. It includes organic material of agricultural origin
(grains, crop residues, vegetable oils, sugar crops, manure and purpose
grown cellulosic crops and woody material (residues and thinnings, pulping
liquors, fuelwood and purpose grown short rotation woody crops). These
resources are substantial, with more than 1 billion metric tons (1 megagram,
Mg) estimated to be available in the United States alone.1–3 Biomass makes
up 10% of the world’s primary energy consumption.4
There are multiple methods of converting biomass into other forms of
energy. At present, most biomass is combusted in traditional fireplaces or
stoves. Biomass is composed of carbohydrates (sugars and starch), cellulose,
hemi-cellulose, lignin, lipids (vegetable oil), protein, ash and other minor
171
172 A. Turhollow
constituents. It may also contain significant amounts of water, up to 80%

(wet-weight basis) in fresh material. Starch from maize (corn) and other
grains and sucrose from sugar cane are converted on large scales into ethanol
by fermentation. The oils from oilseed crops and fats are converted into
biodiesel by transesterification and hydrotreating. These are first generation
biofuels. Second generation biofuels are just coming online.
2 Biomass Products
2.1 Ethanol
The primary liquid biofuel produced is ethanol, 88 billion liters (L) in 2013,
with the United States (57%) and Brazil (27%) accounting for the majority.
World ethanol production increased up until 2010 and then hit a plateau
(Table 1).
Presently ethanol is produced primarily from first-generation feed-
stocks — maize and sugarcane. Current ethanol yields from maize and
sugarcane in the United States and Brazil are 4000 and 7500 L per hectare
(ha), respectively. Ethanol yields are projected to increase to 5100 and
9800 L per ha in the United States and Brazil, respectively (Fig. 1).
2.1.1 Ethanol production in Brazil

Brazil is the second largest producer of ethanol in the world, producing
24 billion L in 2013, utilizing sugar from sugarcane. Production and use
of sugarcane-derived ethanol for fuel began in 1975 when Proálcool was
started in response to high oil prices and a crisis in the sugar market. Use
of ethanol as a fuel was stimulated by feedstock availability, a supportive
Table 1: Ethanol production (in billions of L)5,6 (USDOE/EIA 2014,

RFA 2014).
Region 2001 2003 2005 2007 2009 2011 2013
United States 6.68 10.61 14.78 24.68 41.40 52.72 50.34

Canada 0.23 0.23 0.26 0.8 1.16 1.74 1.98
Brazil 11.46 14.47 16.04 22.55 26.10 22.75 23.72
Europe 0.14 0.39 0.86 1.82 3.44 4.22 5.19
China 0 0.80 1.20 1.67 2.15 2.26 2.63
India 0.17 0.19 0.21 0.26 0.35 0.35 2.06
Rest of World 0.07 0.30 0.58 1.83 2.29 2.58 2.75
World 18.76 27.00 33.95 53.64 76.96 86.66 88.68
Biomass 173
12000
10000
Ethanol (L/ha)
8000
6000
4000
2000
0
Corn-United Sugar cane- Corn-United Sugar cane-
States 2012- Brazil States 2024 Brazil 2025
14 c.2012/13
Fig. 1. Per ha ethanol production from maize and sugarcane.

Source: Sugarcane Brazil: sugarcane.org,8 2025 de Cerqueira Leite et al.9 ; Corn: United
States, based on average 2012–2014 corn yield 9.55 Mg per ha10,11 and 420 L per Mg,12
Corn-United States-2014 based on USDA13 corn yield 11.52 Mg per ha and assume 447 L
per Mg.
government policy, and improvements in sugarcane production and ethanol

conversion processes.7
Based on Fig. 5 in Ref. 7, sugarcane yields have increased from about
50 tons per ha in 1970–1975 to 90 tons per ha in 2010 and ethanol yield
has increased from about 40 to 80 L per ton in the same timeframe.
[Note that the Valdes publication lists tonsa and it is not clear whether
this is metric tons or short tons.] Ethanol yield has increased from 2000 to
7200 L per ha from 1970–1975 to 2010. In São Paulo province, where the
majority of ethanol is produced, yields are even higher.14
In the early 1980s, vehicles that could use hydrous ethanol (using neat-
ethanol engines) became attractive to consumers because the government
ensured that the price of hydrous ethanol was 64.5% that of gasoline. Sales
of neat-ethanol vehicles and their market share increased to over 90%
of vehicle sales. However, there was not a guaranteed supply of hydrous
ethanol, and a shortage of ethanol in the early 1990s led to a crisis and
gradual abandonment of neat-ethanol vehicles. In 2003, flex-fueled vehi-
cles were introduced, which are capable of utilizing ethanol–gasoline blends
ranging from 0 to 100% ethanol.7,13
a1 ton = 1 metric ton = 1000 kg = 106 g = 1 megagram = 1 Mg = 2205 lbs.

1 long ton = 2240 lbs = 1.016 ton; This long ton was the pre-metric British system ton.
1 short ton = 2000 lbs = 0.907 ton.
174 A. Turhollow
The area planted to sugarcane has been increasing, with 4.273, 4.805,
and 9.191 million ha in 1990, 2000, and 2010, respectively, and is expected
to reach 10.045 million ha in 2020 (Table 10 in Ref. 7). USDA/FAS projects
sugar cane area at 9.9 million ha in 2014.15 About 60% of the sugarcane pro-
duced is used for ethanol production and this is expected to remain about
the same. Yields have been increasing over time and investments are being
made in higher-yielding varieties and practices. Brazil’s ethanol industry in
2014 is estimated to operate at 57% of installed capacity. The trajectory of
Brazilian ethanol capacity has changed since the Valdes estimates, which
he projected to reach 46.4 million L by 2018. Capacity reached a peak in
2011 at 41.4 million L, but has declined slightly to 39.7 million L in 2014
and the same is projected for 2015.16
2.1.2 Ethanol production in the United States

Maize is the dominant feedstock for first generation ethanol production in
the United States. Ethanol production took off in the mid-2000s, increasing
8-fold between 2001 and 2011 (Table 1). Most ethanol is now produced in
dry mills. Initially many facilities ground the corn, hydrolyzed the starch
fraction and fermented that to produce ethanol, and then the residual, the
distillers dried grain, was dried and sold as a by-product. These facilities
have become more efficient and sophisticated over time, with ethanol yields
increasing (to an average of 420 L per Mg in 2012) and many now removing
[distillers] corn oil. Oil extracted averaged 4.3 and 20.9 kg/Mg in 2008 and
2012, respectively.12 Depending on the processes and technologies utilized,
oil extracted can range from 31.5 to 50.4 kg/Mg.12 The corn oil is consid-
ered inedible and has a high free fatty acid content. It sells at a discount
compared to soybean oil. It is utilized to produce biodiesel and for live-
stock feed. Biodiesel production is now being integrated with some ethanol
facilities utilizing the corn oil.17 Technology to convert the cellulosic por-
tion in the corn to ethanol is beginning to be utilized. Quad County Corn
Processors is a 132 million L corn ethanol facility that is adding 7.6 million
L of ethanol production from the cellulosic portion, or approximately 24 L
per Mg of corn.18 ICM has a process called Generation 1.5 that also con-
verts the fiber portion of corn grain to ethanol at existing facilities which
increases overall ethanol yield by 7–10% over just converting the starch
portion, or about an increase of 30 to 40 L per Mg.19 These technologies
have the potential to increase ethanol production from the currently utilized
maize by 3.8 to 5.6 billion L without increasing maize input. The resulting
distillers dried grain is a higher protein feed.18,19
Biomass 175
2.1.3 Second-generation Ethanol production

A limited number of large-scale second generation ethanol facilities, based
on cellulosic feedstocks have recently, or are about to, come online. These
include four facilities in the United States (Abengoa’s Hugoton, Kansas
plant — 95 million L plus 18 MW electricity using corn stover, wheat
straw, and sorghum stover); DuPont’s Nevada, Iowa plant — 114 million
L using corn stover; IneosBio’s Vero Beach, Florida plant — 30 million L
plus 6 MW electricity using vegetative matter and municipal solid waste
(MSW), Poet-DSM’s Project Liberty in Emmetsburg, Iowa — 95 million
L using corn stover), 1 in Canada (Enerkem’s Edmonton, Alberta plant —
38 million L using sorted MSW), 1 in Europe (Beta Renewables Crescento,
Italy plant — 75 million L using primarily rice straw), and 1 in Brazil
(GranBio São Miguel dos Campos, Alagoas plant — 82 million L using
sugar cane bagasse and sugar cane trash).20–22
2.2 Biodiesel
The term biodiesel refers to diesel fuels and substitutes produced from
biomass. The primary process for producing biodiesel is transesterifica-
tion. Vegetable oils and animal fats (triglycerides) are reacted with an
alcohol (typically methanol) and a chemical catalyst (typically lye) to pro-
duce an ester (typically methyl ester) [hereafter referred to as a fatty acid
methyl ester (FAME)] and glycerin. Enzymatic transesterification is about
to become commercial.23 Advantages of enzymatic transesterification over
chemical transesterification include: ability to convert high free fatty acid
feedstocks (which are often lower in cost), lower energy consumption, pro-
duction of higher quality glycerin, no caustic chemicals required, reduces
final processing, little excess methanol, and lower capital cost.24 The major
disadvantage is the cost of enzymes. Another process that is now being
utilized is the hydrotreating of vegetable oils and animal fats to produce
hydrotreated vegetable oils (HVOs).
Biodiesel production increased rapidly from 2001 to 2009, increasing
by almost 15 fold. Biodiesel production was 24 billion L in 2011, with
the most produced in the European Union (45%), followed by the United
States (16%), Argentina (12%) and Brazil (11%) (Table 2). Asian coun-
tries in the aggregate produce 11% of world biodiesel production, and this
fraction is increasing as Indonesia, Thailand, and Malaysia increase produc-
tion. The countries with the highest production are Germany, the United
States, Brazil, Argentina, and Indonesia.25 In the United States, soybean
176 A. Turhollow
Table 2: Biodiesel production (in billions of L).
Region 2001 2003 2005 2007 2009 2011 2013
Canada 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.10 0.12 0.16 0.47

United States 0.03 0.06 0.35 1.90 2.00 3.75 5.14
Argentina 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.21 1.37 2.81 2.26
Brazil 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.41 1.65 2.74 2.92
Colombia 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.34 0.53 0.53
European Union 1.11 1.94 3.70 7.31 10.52 10.71 10.89
China 0.01 0.01 0.05 0.12 0.36 0.46 0.97
Indonesia 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.02 0.36 1.19 2.45
Malaysia 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.07 0.27 0.06 0.39
South Korea 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.10 0.30 0.37
Thailand 0.00 0.00 0.02 0.07 0.62 0.61 1.06
Rest of world 0.00 0.01 0.06 0.12 0.45 0.59
World 1.16 2.03 4.23 10.62 18.36 23.98
Note: Not all countries available for 2013 from USDA/GAIN reports.
Source: 2001–2011 — USDOE/EIA,25 2013 — USDA/FAS.16,26–34
oil accounts for slightly over half the feedstock, while in the EU rapeseed
oil is the most widely-used feedstock.26,27
Hydrotreating triglycerides (vegetable oils and fats) to produce HVOs
is an alternative to esterification. Hydrogen is used to remove oxygen from
triglycerides. HVOs have qualities superior to FAMEs, including better
cold temperature properties, higher cetane value [than either FAME or
petroleum-based diesel (hereafter referred to as diesel)], has an energy den-
sity similar to diesel, and better storage properties.35 Finland’s Neste Oil
has four facilities producing HVOs: 2 at Porvoo, Finland (capacity each
170,000 Mg/year of HVO), Rotterdam (800,000 Mg/year), and Singapore
(800,000 Mg/year).36 In Louisiana, USA, the Diamond Green Diesel facility
produces more than 500 million L per year utilizing animal fats and used
cooking oil.37
2.3 Electricity
In 2012, 370 TWh of electricity was produced from bioenergy, 1.5% of the
world’s electricity production, and IEA projects this will reach 560 TWh
in 2018.4 Electricity from biomass can be generated in a number of ways,
direct combustion in power plants, utilizing biogas, using gasification, and
co-firing with coal. In 2012, in the European Union (EU) and United States
production of biobased electricity was 27.9 and 57.6 TWh, respectively, and
increased in the United States to 59.9 TWh in 2013.38,39
Biomass 177
2.4 Biochemicals
Many chemicals can be derived from biomass. In 2010, 50 million Mg of
bio-based chemicals and polymers were produced.40 The OECD (2009)
estimated that bio-based chemicals contributed (in terms of value) 1.8%
of chemical production and are expected to contribute between 12 to 20%
of the value of the chemical market by 2015.41 Nexant (2014) estimated the
renewable chemical market potential in the United States for 2012, 2017,
and 2022 (Table 3).42
The primary output of chemicals is dominated by a small number of
chemicals: methanol, ethylene, propylene, butadiene, benzene, toluene, and
xylene. These are then converted to polymers and plastics and many other
specialty chemicals. Technically almost all petrochemicals could be replaced
by biochemicals, but bio-based chemicals are often more expensive and
they must prove equal in quality to their fossil-based counterparts. Poten-
tial platforms to produce biochemicals include: Syngas, biogas, C6/C5 sug-
ars, plant-based oils, algae oil, organic solutions, lignin, and pyrolysis oils.
Potential bioproducts can be characterized as compounds containing C1 ,
C2 , C3 , C4 , C5 , C6 , and Cn .40
A number of studies have tried to prioritize biochemicals from the
myriad of choices. These include Besson et al.,43 Gallezot,44 Bozell and
Petersen,45 Holladay et al.,46 and Elliot.47
Vegetable oils and animal fats (primarily triglycerides) are used to pro-
duce oleochemicals. Oleochemicals include lubricants, surfactants, paints,
detergents, soaps, and cosmetics. In 2004, 17 million Mg of oils and fats were
used for olechemical production (including fuels).48 Note that in 2004 fuel
use was relatively small, approximately 1.8 million Mg. One potential mar-
ket for vegetable oils is their use as lubricants (including motor oils). World
lubricant consumption was 34 million Mg in 2011 and biobased lubricants
Table 3: Biochemicals in the United

States 2012–2022 (1000 Mg) (Nexant).42
Chemical type 2012 2017 2022
C2 0 0 1000
C3 40 100 300
C4 100 150 400
Aromatics <10 100 500
Specialty oils 20 300 1000
Total 160 750 3200
178 A. Turhollow
accounted for less than 1% of this market. The advantages of biolubricants

over petroleum-based lubricants include lubricity, high viscosity, high flash
point, biodegradability, low aquatic toxicity, and low bioaccumulation. Dis-
advantages include poor thermal and oxidative stability.49
2.4.1 Nitrogen fertilizer produced from biomass

Nitrogen fertilizer is important for agricultural productivity and a major
world chemical. It is also a large source of greenhouse gases. Natural gas
is the primary feedstock for ammonia production, which can then be con-
verted into other forms of nitrogen (e.g. urea, ammonium nitrate). Ahlgren
et al. studied the environmental impacts of ammonium nitrate produced
from willow (Salix) and wheat straw and found greenhouse gas emissions
to be 22–30%, eutophication potential to be 50 to 150% higher and acidifi-
cation potential to be similar to those of the fertilizer using natural gas as
the feedstock.50 Ahlgren et al. studied the environmental impacts of using
biogas produced from maize and ley grass to produce ammonium nitrate,
and found the greenhouse gas impacts to be between 47 and 60%, eutoph-
ication potential to be 10 to 12 times higher and acidification potential to
be 2.5 to 4 times higher than those from using natural gas as the feedstock
for ammonium nitrate production.51 Andersson and Lungren modeled the
production of ammonia from biomass and found that to achieve an internal
rate of return of 10–20%, the selling price would have to be between 581–
882 and 509–774 Euro per Mg (approximately $725–1100 and $635–970 per
Mg assuming $1 = 0.80 Euro) for a standalone production facility and a
facility integrated with a pulp mill, respectively.52 The price of ammonia in
April 2014 in the United States was $938 per Mg.53 BioNitrogen is planning
to build facilities to convert biomass into urea via gasification and catalytic
conversion. Its planned facility in Taylor County, FL, USA has an expected
capacity of 160,000 Mg of urea and a capital cost of between $100 and $220
million.54,55
2.5 Wood Pellets

The use of wood pellets has increased over the past few years and is expected
to continue to do so in the near future. Pellets are not only used for home
heating but increasingly for power generation. The European Union is the
largest producer and consumer of wood pellets. The Food and Agriculture
Organization of the United Nations (FAO) began collecting statistics for
wood pellets starting with 2012 with world production of 19.8 and 21.6
Biomass 179
Table 4: Wood pellet production 2012 and

2013 (million Mg).
Region 2012 2013
Belarus 354 354

Bosnia and Herzegovina 83 184
Canada 2400 2400
China 100 100
Russian Federation 791 810
Serbia 82 167
South Africa 115 115
Switzerland 180 180
Ukraine 210 210
United States 4100 5000
Vietnam 50 170
European Union 11010 11513
Rest of world 327 426
World 19801 21629
Source: FAOSTAT.56
million Mg in 2012 and 2013, respectively (FAOSTAT).56 The EU produced

about 55% (c. 11 million Mg), and consumed about 75–80% of wood pellets
in 2012 and 2013. EU consumption is projected to be 21 million Mg in
2015, up from 17.5 million Mg in 2013.27 Other large producers [and major
exporters] are the United States (21–23%) and Canada (11–12% of world
production) (Table 4).
Wood pellets are seen as a means of reducing net carbon emissions. In
Canada, targeted proposals to reduce carbon emissions would require 14
million Mg of wood pellets to replace coal by 2020, which is far above esti-
mated 2014 production of 3.2 million Mg32 and is unlikely to be achieved.
In the United Kingdom, Drax Power plans to convert three of its six boil-
ers at the Drax Power Station from coal to biomass, which would require
7 million Mg of wood pellets, more than 25% of current world production.
Drax is investing $375 million in the United States in two pellet production
facilities (in Louisiana and Mississippi), with an annual combined capacity
of 900,000 Mg and port facilities in Baton Rouge, Louisiana.57 World wood
pellet production capacity will have to increase significantly to meet the
increased demands from power generation and home heating.
3 Thermal Processes
Thermal processes to convert biomass into biofuels and electricity include
pyrolysis, gasification and combustion. In thermal processes, all the
180 A. Turhollow
fractions of the biomass (excluding the ash) are converted into energy. In
the case of wood, this allows for up to 99% of the biomass to potentially be
utilized to make fuel products. A biological fermentation process might get
up to 460 L of ethanol per dry Mg of biomass, a thermal process utilizing
wood and fermentation of the syngas could get up to 530 L of ethanol per
dry Mg.58
3.1 Pyrolysis and Hydropyrolysis

Pyrolysis is heating in the absence of oxygen, while controlling temperature,
pressure, and residence time to determine the formation of gaseous, liquid
and solid products (Table 5). Fast pyrolysis sets conditions (short residence
time, lower temperature process (350–500◦C), rapid quenching) such that
mostly liquid fuel (referred to as pyrolysis- or bio-oil) (70 wt. %+) is pro-
duced. Pyrolysis takes place at atmospheric pressure and requires a low
moisture (<10%) content feedstock (to minimize moisture in the bio-oil)
and small particle size (c. 2–3 mm).59,60
There are issues associated with the acidity and stability of the bio-oil.
Bio-oil has a low pH (2.5), high water content (15–30%), and a heating value
of 16–19 MJ per kg (higher heating value).61 Using a pyrolysis process, wood
and herbaceous materials have the potential of producing 620 and 530 L per
dry Mg of ethanol equivalent, respectively.62
Wood has a higher output of product because of its higher carbon
(energy) content compared to herbaceous material. Wood is higher in lignin
than herbaceous materials and thermal processes take advantage of this.
Bio-oil can be utilized for a number of products — liquid boiler fuel;
petroleum-like fuels by direct utilization, upgrading via hydrotreating and
hydrocracking (Fig. 2), gasification, fermentation, reform to hydrogen; and
phenolics replacement. The solid produced (char) may be utilized as a
Table 5: Pyrolysis products (%) depending on conditions.59
Mode Conditions Liquid Solid (char) Gas
Fast 500◦ C, 1 s vapor residence 75 (12) 13

Intermediate 500◦ C, 10–20 s vapor residence 50 (25) 25
Gasification (slow) 400◦ C, long solids residence 30 (35) 35
Gasification 800◦ C, long vapor residence 5 10 85
Torrefaction (slow) ∼290◦ C, 10–60 min solid residence 0 80 20
Biomass 181
Fig. 2. Upgrading pyrolysis oil.58
soil amendment, activated carbon, and process heat or for energy for the
pyrolysis process. The gaseous product can also provide energy for the
pyrolysis process.
Jones et al. estimate a selling price for ethanol of $0.539/L of “fuel prod-
uct” ($0.354/L ethanol equivalent) (2007$) for a 2000 dry Mg per day facil-
ity yielding 417 L per dry Mg of hybrid poplar chips.63 Fuel product consists
of diesel and gasoline blendstocks. The process is: pretreatment (drying of
hybrid poplar to less than 10% moisture and grinding to 2–7 mm particle
size), fast pyrolysis, hydrotreating, hydrocracking and product (gasoline
and diesel blendstock) separation. Natural gas is steam reformed to pro-
vide hydrogen for hydrotreating. Hybrid poplar chips (50% moisture) have
a delivered price of $64.50 per dry Mg. The capital cost of a stand-alone
facility is $303 million. For a facility collocated (integrated) with an existing
petroleum refinery the capital cost is reduced to $188 million and product
price is reduced to $0.460 per L ($0.301 per L ethanol equivalent).63
Hydropyrolysis represents an alternative to pyrolysis. For use as trans-
portation fuels, pyrolysis oils have to be upgraded. Some of the undesirable
properties of pyrolysis oils include high acidity (high total acid number),
lower energy density than diesel, high oxygen content (c. 40%), chemical
instability, high water content, and meturgical incompatibility with metals
used in conventional transport containers and oil refineries. Using catalytic
hydropyrolysis or integrated hydropyrolysis, biomass can be directly con-
verted into a hydrocarbon product which is compatible with petroleum
refineries. In integrated hydropyrolysis and hydroconversion all the hydro-
gen needed for hydropyrolysis is provided by reforming the light gases pro-
duced within the process.64
182 A. Turhollow
Table 6: Two possible gasification to product pathways.
Step 1 Step 2 Step 3

(Biomass conversion) (Syngas conversion) (Product generation)
Gasification to syngas Synthesis into mixed alcohols Distill to pure alcohols

Catalytic conversion into Refining to diesel
hydrocarbon fuels and naphtha (for jet fuel)
fractions
3.2 Gasification
Gasification converts the carbon fraction in biomass into synthesis gas con-
sisting primarily of carbon monoxide and hydrogen. Synthesis gas has the
potential for a variety of uses: combustion, in gas engines, in gas turbines,
in fuel cells, upgraded to methane and methanol, fermented to ethanol
and utilized in Fischer–Tropsch processes to produce liquid fuels including
diesel. Major research challenges include cost-effective hot gas cleaning and
improved catalysts for liquid fuel production.65 Two potential gasification
conversion pathways are shown in Table 6.
Worley and Yale66 estimate capital costs (2011$) for three gasification
technologies for a 1,000 dry Mg per day facility utilizing wood chips and
bark. Technology 1 consists of an oxygen-blown partial oxidation bubbling
fluidized bed and a tar reformer (reactor vessel filled with solid catalyst
block to crack tars. The cost is $70.6 million. Technology 2 uses an indirect
heating circulating fluidized bed with heating of the bed occurring in a
separate combustor utilizing char combustion air and the tar reformer with
a bubbling fluidized bed design. The cost is $59.7 million. Technology 3
consists of an oxygen-blown partial oxidation bubbling fluidized bed with
an unknown (not revealed by the vendor) technology used for tar reforming.
Its cost is $70.7 million.
3.3 Combustion
Combustion of biomass is generally not energy efficient, with conversions
in the 20–25% range for electricity generation (i.e. 20–25% of the energy in
the biomass is converted into electricity). There are two primary reasons for
this: (1) the scale of the electricity generation facility is usually small, less
than 25 MWe , which makes investments that can make the process more
energy efficient uneconomic and (2) the moisture content of the biomass
is usually high, which makes the conversion less efficient (Fig. 3). First
Biomass 183
Fig. 3. The effect of moisture content on conversion efficiency.58
gasifying the biomass and then generating electricity, or utilizing pellets

(c. 10% moisture) would be more energy efficient.
4 Biological Processes
4.1 Anaerobic Digestion
For anaerobic digestion, microorganisms break down biodegradable organic
material in the absence of oxygen, producing a mixture of gases, primarily
methane and carbon dioxide. Compared to natural gas (higher heating value
of around 38,200 kJ per m3 ) biogas has a medium heat value that ranges
from 19,000 to 29,000 kJ per m.3 However, biogas can be upgraded to
natural gas quality. IEA Task 37 lists 347 upgrading facilities in the world,
with 279 in Europe, 144 in Germany alone.67
Anaerobic digestion is used at sewage treatment and industrial facilities
to treat organic wastes and on farms to treat animal wastes. India and China
make widespread use of anaerobic digesters in rural areas to provide fuel.
According to Burns, there were 37 million anaerobic digesters in China
(of which only 16,000 were large scale) and 4 million in India in 2009.68
There are many more small-scale than large-scale anaerobic digesters. The
Anaerobic Digestion China Working Group estimated that at the end of
2012 there were over 20,000 large-scale (over 300 m3 ) anaerobic digesters
in China, over 30% of the world’s total.69
In the United States, USDA/USEPA/USDOE estimate that at present
there are 2,116 currently operating biogas facilities (livestock manure, land-
fill gas, and water resource recovery facilities), with a potential of 13,008
184 A. Turhollow
facilities generating 370 PJ per year of biogas. Building the additional

11,000 systems would require a capital cost of $33 billion.70
While on-farm digesters are typically used to treat livestock manure,
other organic feedstocks such as crop residues or off-farm food processing
wastes can also be utilized. After processing, the remaining organic matter
now has reduced odor pollution, reduced pathogens, and reduced biological
oxygen demand, while retaining most of its nutrient value for possible use
as a fertilizer. Most anaerobic digesters in the United States supply biogas
to an engine that produces electricity.
The main on-farm digester designs are: Covered lagoons; plug-flow; and
mixed or stirred.71 Crenshaw72 reports costs for two covered lagoons as,
$778,586 for 496 cows and $1,265,194 for 1,600 cows, and Lazarus71 reports
regression equations for costs based on Crenshaw’s analysis72 (see Table 7).
At the Poet-DSM cellulosic ethanol facility in Emmetsburg, IA, USA,
an anaerobic digester will supply the thermal needs of not only the cellulosic
ethanol facility, but also the thermal load of the collocated corn-to-ethanol
facility.73
4.2 Fermentation
Fermentation is the main process currently used to produce liquid trans-
portation fuel in the form of ethanol from maize in the United States
and sugarcane in Brazil. Fermentation converts carbohydrates into ethanol,
although other products can be produced as well. The lignin fraction is not
converted in fermentation processes and is a byproduct.
Table 7: Anaerobic digester costs.71
Digester type
Plug flow Mixed
700 cow 2,800 cows

Digester cost ($) 678,064 + 563/cow 354,866 + 61/cow
Ancillary items 13%
Cost ($) 1.2 million 2.5 million
Operating & maintenancea 5%
Output (m3 /cow-day) 0.71–3.82
Electrical output (kWh/cow-year)b 1000
Breakeven electricity price ($/kWh) 0.22 0.12
a Digesterwith electrical generation.
b 1.98m3 per cow-day, 60% methane, 27% thermal conversion to electricity, 90% engine
run time.
Biomass 185
Feedstock Size Soli

Solid/liquid
reduction Pretreatment SSF
separation
Fermentation Ethanol
Distillation
beer
Xylose
Conditionin
Conditioning
fermentation
fe
Fig. 4. One possible pathway for biological ethanol production.58
Cellulosic feedstocks can utilize many pathways to be converted into

ethanol. Both grasses and hardwoods have xylose as their main hemi-
cellulosic sugar, whereas softwoods have mannose as their main hemi-
cellulosic sugar. The discussion that follows is geared toward xylose as the
main hemi-cellulosic sugar.
The main steps are: (1) size reduction, (2) pretreatment to release
xylose and cellulose, (3) solid (to simultaneous saccharification and fermen-
tation)/liquid (liquor to conditioning) separation, (4) conditioning prior to
xylose fermentation, (5) xylose fermentation, (6) simultaneous saccharifica-
tion and fermentation of glucose (SSF), and (7) distillation of the ethanol
product from the two fermentation processes (see Fig. 4). There are many
possible variations on this process, such as using the stream (or part of it)
from xylose fermentation to dilute the solids going into the SSF reactor.
There are a number of choices for the pretreatment step (e.g.
dilute acid, concentrated acid, steam explosion, ammonia fiber expansion
(AFEX), organosolvents).
Humbird et al. estimate a selling price for ethanol of $2.15 (2007$)
for a 2000 dry Mg per day facility and yielding 330 L per dry Mg of corn
stover.74 The process is dilute-acid pretreatment, enzymatic hydrolysis and
cofermentation of cellulose and hemicellulose. Lignin is combusted to pro-
vide steam and electricity. Enzymes are produced on site. The corn stover
is assumed to arrive at the facility in a milled state and costs $64.50 per
dry Mg.74
5 Dedicated Energy Crops

Included in dedicated energy crops are herbaceous (e.g. switchgrass,
sorghum, energy cane, Miscanthus) and short rotation woody crops (e.g.
hybrid poplar, willow, eucalyptus, pine). The major advantages dedicated
energy crops have over conventional food crops are the potential to produce
186 A. Turhollow
higher yields per unit land area and to utilize land that food crops can-
not use.
5.1 Switchgrass
Native to North America, switchgrass (Panicum virgatum) is a perennial,
thin-stemmed warm-season (C4 plant) grass. [The two main photosynthetic
pathways in plants are C3 and C4. C3 plants fix carbon dioxide through
photorespiration and require stomatal opening to acquire CO2 . C4 plants
acquire CO2 from malate and do not require open stomata, thus provid-
ing higher water use efficiency and produce more biomass in hotter, drier
climates than C3 plants. Under conditions of moderate temperatures and
available soil water, C3 plants typically have an advantage in CO2 fixation
and thus overall growth.75 ] Switchgrass has been targeted for development
as a potential energy crop.
Parrish and Fike76 and Mitchell et al.77 provide overviews of switch-
grass production. It is well adapted to low rainfall areas and is efficient in
nutrient use. It has two major ploidity levels (tetraploid and octaploid) and
two ecotypes — upland and lowland. The upland variety has finer stems
and a lower potential yield than lowland varieties, where lowland varieties
are adapted. Yield is linked to temperature and the timing of reproductive
growth and is connected to photoperiod. By moving lower latitude culti-
vars to higher latitudes, the length of the growing season can be extended
and hence the potential yield increased. However, frost tolerance can be
an issue. This is being addressed by breeding. Planting is done with seed.
Weed control is necessary for successful stand establishment. Full yield is
not expected until the third year of growth. For sustained optimum yield,
nitrogen fertilization is needed. If harvesting is carried out after a killing
frost, then 10 kg of nitrogen (N) per Mg of harvested yield is recommended,
otherwise 20 kg N per Mg is recommended.77 One harvest per year after
senescence and translocation of nutrients allows stands to persist for an
extended period. Two harvests per year can increase the yield in some
areas, but additional nutrients will need to be applied to compensate for
nutrients removed in the midseason harvest, and stand longevity may suffer.
In addition to its potential use as a biofuel, switchgrass can also be utilized
for soil erosion control and as a filter strip along streams to intercept soil,
nutrients, and pesticides.
Most of the switchgrass currently grown is from varieties developed for
forage. In the past few years, varieties specifically bred for bioenergy have
Biomass 187
Table 8: Switchgrass hybrid yield.78
Strain Yield (Mg per ha) relative to Kanlow
Kanlow 1.01
Sumner 0.94
Kanlow × Sumner F1 hybrid 0.67
been released. F1 hybrids of Kanlow (lowland variety) and Sumner (upland

variety) produced higher yields than either parent at Mead, Nebraska
(Table 8).78 In 2014, a lowland cultivar ‘Liberty’ that is adapted to plant
hardiness zones 4, 5, and 679 (most of the central and eastern United States
north of latitude 37◦ N) was released. It produces higher yields than lowland
or upland varieties and better winter survival than the lowland cultivars
‘Kanlow’ and ‘Alamo’ north of latitude 40◦ N. Yield averaged 18 dry Mg
per ha for 2009 to 2011 at Mead, NE, USA.80
5.2 Sorghum
Sorghum (Sorghum bicolor ) is a morphologically diverse C4 grass with
grain, forage, sweet, and energy varieties. Grain sorghum is short stemmed
and produces as much residue as grain. The grain from grain sorghum is
currently used for ethanol production and the residue can be collected for
use as a bioenergy feedstock. Forage sorghum is designed for use as livestock
feed. Sweet and energy sorghums have potential application as bioenergy
feedstocks.81 Sorghums, because they are annual and not perennial, can be
rotated with traditional food crops, allowing added flexibility to production
systems.
Sweet sorghum has a sweet stalk containing sugar. It also produces
a large amount of lignocellulosic biomass in the stalk and may also pro-
duce grain. The International Crops Research Institute for the Semi-Arid
Tropics (ICRISAT) is developing sweet sorghums adapted to Asia, Africa,
and the Americas. Two sorghum crops per annum are possible in areas
with longer growing seasons. ICRISAT is developing sweet sorghums that
not only produce sugar but also relatively large amounts of grains.82,83 It
has the potential to complement sugarcane by being harvested during the
period of the year when sugarcane is not being harvested. While sweet
sorghum sugar yields can equal those of sugarcane, its sugar is not used
for refined sugar production because its high starch content interferes with
sucrose crystallization and hastens the conversion of sucrose to glucose and
fructose.84
188 A. Turhollow
Energy sorghums are bred for high biomass yields. Energy sorghums are
photoperiod sensitive and will not flower in temperate climates, thereby uti-
lizing the entire possible growing season to accumulate maximum biomass,
primarily lignocellulose. Texas A&M University has a breeding program for
energy sorghum, with a yield goal of 34 to 45 dry Mg per ha-year.85
5.3 Miscanthus
Miscanthus (Miscanthus × giganteus) is a tall thick-stemmed C4 grass
related to sugarcane. It is a sterile triploid. It can be highly productive
and has the advantage over other herbaceous crops of being able to be har-
vested in the spring after overwintering. The yield will be about 1/3 lower
in the winter but the harvested plant matter will be drier than in the fall.
A major disadvantage of Miscanthus is that it is vegetatively propagated
(using rhizomes) and requires a specialized planter for mechanical planting.
Costs to establish Miscanthus were estimated by Aravindhakshan
et al.,86 Jain et al.87 and Khanna et al.88 at $705, $2,957, $613 per ha,
respectively. Jain et al. have a higher cost because they assume a cost of
$0.25 per rhizome and 10,000 rhizomes per ha, for a cost of $2,500 per
ha. Aravindhakshan et al. base their rhizome cost on Khanna et al., which
is a planting density of 10,000 rhizomes per ha at a cost of $335 per ha.
Two papers86,88 compared the economics of switchgrass and Miscanthus
production and come to different conclusions on the relative economics of
the two crops because of different assumptions. When harvested in spring,
Miscanthus has very low nutrient requirements because most of its nutri-
ents have been translocated back into its roots. Christian et al.89 reported
no response to nitrogen in a 14-year study in the United Kingdom, while
Ercoli et al.90 reported response to nitrogen in Italy. Rather than looking at
switchgrass and Miscanthus as competing crops, because of their differing
harvest windows, they can be seen as complementary crops by providing
fresh supplies of biomass at different times of the year and by diversifying
biomass supply sources.
5.4 Sugarcane and Energy Cane

Sugarcane (Saccharum spp.) is a thick-stemmed tall C4 grass that is culti-
vated as a perennial crop, primarily for its storage of sucrose (a disaccha-
ride consisting of glucose and fructose) in its stem. It is genetically complex
from interspecific hybridization efforts, primarily from Saccharum offici-
narum and Saccharum spontaneum. Sugarcane is grown as a monoculture
Biomass 189
and replanted every four to five years in the United States. It is vegetatively
propagated, with one acre of seedcane being able to plant 6 to 10 acres of
sugarcane. Vegetative planting is expensive both in materials and labor.
Energy cane is bred for higher biomass yields (and has lower stalk
sugar) than sugarcane. Stalk numbers and heights are higher than sug-
arcane, and as a result, one acre of energy cane can provide 13 acres of
seed cane. Energy cane is also expected to have at least two more harvests
than the four or five one gets from sugarcane. Annualized planting costs
are expected to be about $143 per ha, versus $309 per ha for sugarcane. In
Louisiana, United States, Salassi et al. (2014) report energy cane varieties
[wet (dry) Mg per ha] have yielded 65 to 99 (14 to 20) in the first year
(plant cane), 55 to 105 (14 to 20) in the second year (first stubble), 114
to 162 (29 to 37) in the third year (second stubble), and 61 to 111 (15
to 22) in the fourth year (third stubble) in a trial at St. Gabriel.91 They
assume that for the fifth year (fourth stubble), sixth year (fifth stubble),
and seventh year (sixth stubble), that yields are 85, 82, and 79% of the
average the yield of years one to four. For energy cane with 5, 6, or 7 years
of harvest they report costs ($ per dry Mg), based on sugarcane practices,
for variable costs of about 74, fixed costs of 21, overhead costs 4.50, land
rent of 25, and total costs of 125.91
Because of the need to get energy cane off the field before the next grow-
ing season and its thick stalks with a waxy coating, energy cane, like sug-
arcane, will be harvested green and dewatered or, for energy cane, ensiled
if it is to be stored for later use.
Sugarcane breeding begins with hybridization with the introgression
of desirable traits from the wild relative of sugarcane, Saccharum spon-
taneum. Early generation progeny from these crosses exhibit high levels
of hybrid vigor, including increased cold tolerance, better rationing abil-
ity (re-sprouting from the roots), increased tolerance of moisture extremes,
increased disease and insect tolerance, and more efficient nutrient utiliza-
tion.92 Early generation hybrids are ideal candidates for energy cane for
biomass.
5.5 Hybrid Poplar

Almost 30 species are included in the genus Populus. Hybrids of species
within and among Populus are referred to as “hybrid poplars.” Poplars are
planted at relatively dense spacing (e.g. 1,680 trees per ha) using cuttings
for energy purposes. Initially weed control is necessary, using herbicides
190 A. Turhollow
and/or mechanical cultivation. Insects and diseases can also be issues. Har-
vest utilizes either standard pulpwood harvest systems or purpose designed
machines that combine felling and chipping or bundling in one machine.
Yields of newly selected poplar genotypes in small plot experiments
have exceeded 15 dry Mg per ha on good agricultural soils in southern
Wisconsin and Iowa.93,94 Yields of 10, 13, and 20 dry Mg per ha, and
with appropriate research, yields possibly twice as high in the future, can
be expected in the midwestern, southern, and northwestern United States,
respectively. Production costs (to the forest landing) in the United States
are estimated at between $28 and $66 per dry Mg.2
5.6 Willow
Interest in shrub willow (Salix spp.) as an energy crop is focused in Europe
and North America, particularly in Sweden, the United States and Canada.
Trials began in Sweden in the mid-1970s and in the United States in 1986.
Characteristics that make willow a good candidate for biomass include:
(1) ease of propagation from dormant hardwood cuttings; (2) a broad under-
utilized genetic base; (3) ease of breeding for multiple characteristics and
(4) ability to re-sprout after multiple cuttings.2
To produce biomass from willow, genetically improved varieties are
planted in prepared fields where weeds have been controlled. Weed control
utilizes mechanical and chemical means and should begin in the fall before
planting if perennial weeds are present. Planting of willows takes place as
early in spring as feasible at 15,000 unrooted, dormant cuttings per ha using
mechanized planters attached to tractors, capable of planting 0.8 ha per
hour. After the first year of growth during the dormant season, the willows
are cut back to just above ground level to encourage coppice regrowth of
multiple stems. After 3 to 4 years of growth, the willows are mechanically
harvested during the dormant season after the leaves have been dropped,
utilizing forage harvesters with cutting heads specifically designed for willow
coppice material. The forage harvester produces uniform, consistently sized
chips that can be collected and delivered with no additional processing and
then additional size reduction and/or drying can take place at an end-user
facility.
Willow requires fertilizer, about 100 kg per ha, in the spring after each
harvest. There are three to four years between harvests. Seven harvests
may be possible before replanting is required because the willow stools
have expanded too much to allow harvesting.
Biomass 191
Fertilized, irrigated yields of unimproved willow varieties have exceeded

27 dry Mg per ha.95,96 On non-irrigated research-scale trials in central New
York (in the United States), yields ranged from 8.5 to 11.6 dry Mg per
ha.95,97,98 Second rotation yields of the five best producing unimproved
varieties showed yield 18% to 62% higher than first rotation.99 Breeding
and selection of willow in the United States began in the mid-1990s. New
varieties from the initial rounds of breeding in the late 1990s have produced
yields up to 40% and 70% greater than first and second rotations using
standard varieties used in the early yield trials.
The major costs of production are harvesting, establishment and land
rent.100 If the frequency of harvesting is reduced by increasing the rotation
length from three to four years, harvesting costs are reduced by $14 to $16
per dry Mg. Planting stock accounts for about two-thirds of establishment
costs. Reducing cost per cutting from $0.12 to $0.10, reduces establishment
costs by $262 per ha. Higher yields can also reduce costs.
5.7 Eucalyptus
There are over 700 species of eucalyptus, but fewer than 15 have commer-
cial significance. They are the most widely planted species in the world,
widely grown in the tropics and subtropics. They are bred for fast, uniform
growth, self-pruning, regrowing from the stump (coppicing) after harvest.
Eucalyptus are used for roundwood, pulp, and charcoal, and are a major
source of low-cost fiber. Brazil and other South American countries are
major producers. Eucalypts have great potential for use as an energy feed-
stock.
For conventional pulpwood production, stands are typically planted at
1,500–2,500 trees per ha and harvested every 6 to 10 years. For biomass
production eucalypts in Florida, USA would be planted more densely at
8,400 trees per ha and harvested every 3 to 4 years.101 Eucalyptus spp.
yielded 17–32 dry Mg per ha-year after 3 to 5 years of growth in central
Florida on a clay settling area, which is similar to the 20–31 dry Mg per
ha-year estimated for Florida.102
5.8 Oilseeds
Oilseeds can provide feedstock for biodiesel production. Different feedstocks
give very different per ha biodiesel yields (Fig. 5). There are some feedstocks
that may potentially give high per ha biodiesel yields, including jatropha
192 A. Turhollow
12000
10000
biodiesel (L/ha)
8000
6000
4000
2000
0
Soybeans - Rapeseed - Oil palm - Oil palm -
United States EU Malaysia Malaysia
2014/15 mature trees
average
Fig. 5. Per ha biodiesel production.

Sources: Soybeans-United States based on soybean yield of 2.92 Mg per ha (3 year
average 2012–2014)10,11 and 19.42% oil; Rapeseed-EU rapeseed yield of 3.12 Mg per ha
and 41.85% oil104 Oil palm Malaysia 2014/15 forecast average and mature trees based on
palm oil production of 20,350,000 Mg (100% oil) and palm kernel production of 4,790,000
Mg (45.68% oil) and 4,800,000 ha and 2,550,000 mature [tree] ha equivalents105 ; and
assuming 0.899 kg oil per L of biodiesel.
Table 9: Biodiesel yield of current and potential sources.
Crop Yield (L/ha) Data source
Soybeans — US current 630

Soybeans — US 2025a 870
Rapeseed — EU current 1,450
Jatropha — India estimate 1,890 Dar103
Oil palm — Malaysia mature current 9,830 Wahab105
Microalgae — projected 9,350–60,770 USDOE/EERE106
a United Soybean Board goal for 2025 is 60 bushels/acre (4.03 Mg/ha).
and algae (Table 9). Dar103 reports that in India, the National Biofuel Cen-
tre of the Petroleum Conservation Research Association estimates jatropha
seed yield of 1.5 Mg per ha, or an oil yield of about 540 L per ha, while
the Centre of Excellence for Jatropha Biodiesel Promotion in Rajasthan
estimates, for intensively managed plantations, a seed yield of 10 Mg per
ha or an oil yield of about 3,400 L per ha.
Many different vegetable oils and fats are used for biodiesel production.
In the United States, these include soybean, corn, canola, and palm oil, and
yellow grease, white grease, tallow, poultry fat, and other recycled fats and
Biomass 193
feeds. In 2014, soybeans made up 53% of the biodiesel feedstock in the

United States.26
5.9 Algae
Algae can potentially produce high amounts of biomass-derived fuels from
small areas of land and can utilize saline waters. However, algae have
harvest and handling challenges. Two methods of cultivating microalgae
and cyanobacteria are open ponds and closed photobioreactors. Macroal-
gae (seaweed) has different requirements and are grown in coastal facilities
or offshore and are not considered further.
Research on algae for fuels started in the 1950s with work on utilizing
algae to produce methane via anaerobic digestion. Interest was revived after
the oil crisis in the 1970s, and focused on methane and hydrogen. The U.S.
Government sponsored research on microalgae was centered at the Solar
Energy Research Institute in Colorado (later renamed the National Renew-
able Energy Laboratory) with the Aquatic Species Program (ASP), and
the focus turned to lipid oils and diesel replacement. There was still work
on hydrogen. The ASP started in 1978 and continued through 1996. Over
3,000 species were screened and 300 promising species selected primarily
green algae (Chlorophyceae) and diatoms (Bacillariophyceae). Choosing the
right starting species is important. While a foundation was laid, much work
remains to be done. There is a need to understand biosynthetic pathways
and regulatory mechanisms and to develop genetic strategies. Dewatering
and lipid extraction are significant technical and cost challenges.107,108
Davis et al. estimate the cost of producing diesel-equivalent from algae
of $4.92 per L.109 [The current price of diesel (refiner price to end users,
excluding taxes) is around $0.80 per L.110 ] Over half the cost is for ponds
and pond liners. The result is sensitive to the lipid fraction of the algae and
the algae growth rate.
6 Policies Affecting Biofuels

Much of biofuel use in the developed and developing world is driven by gov-
ernment policies. In the United States, much of first generation ethanol and
biodiesel production was the result of government subsidies in the form of
exemptions from taxes on diesel that are no longer available at the Federal
level, but are still available in a number of states. These fuels have become
established primarily as blends in the gasoline and diesel markets. As a
result of the Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS) set by the Environmental
194 A. Turhollow
Protection Agency (EPA), first effective in 2005 and then revised in 2007,
there are targets for ethanol (with a maximum ceiling of 56.8 billion L of
corn from ethanol) and biodiesel use. For 2014 (2022) the RFS set targets of
54.5 (56.8), 6.6 (60.6), 14.2 (79.1), 3.8 (minimum of 3.8), and 68.7 (136.3)
billion L of conventional biofuels (primarily corn ethanol), cellulosic bio-
fuels, advanced biofuels (includes cellulosic and biodiesel), biodiesel, and
total renewable fuels respectively.111
In the EU, the EU Energy and Climate Change Package (ECCP) was
adopted in April 2013 by the European Council and included the Renew-
able Energy Directive (RED). The ECCP included goals for 2020 of: a
20% reduction in greenhouse gases compared to 1990, a 20% improvement
in energy efficiency compared to the forecast made for 2020, and a 20%
share for renewable energy in the energy mix, with a minimum target
of 10% renewable energy in the transport sector. In January 2014, the
European Commission published its Communication on 2030 climate and
energy goals, which includes a 40% reduction in greenhouse gas emissions
compared to 1990 and renewable energy of at least 27%. Second gener-
ation biofuels (made from lignocellulosic, non-food cellulosic, and waste
and residue materials count double toward goals and renewable electricity
used by cars counts 2.5, meaning that the actual portion of renewable fuels
in the transport sector can be less than 10%.27 The European Industrial
Bioenergy Initiative was launched in October 2010, to promote and com-
mercialize second-generation biofuels. The amount of conventional biofuels
to be included in transport fuels is still fluid.27 The EU also has a coun-
tervailing duty on the import of biodiesel from Argentina of 24.6%. Europe
has imposed non-tariff trade barriers to the import of Indonesian biodiesel.
In Brazil the ethanol content of gasoline is 25% and there are tax
incentives for ethanol flex fuel vehicles; and for biodiesel there was a 5%
blend requirement until July 2014 that was scheduled to increase to 6%
on July 1, 2014 and 7% in November 2014.16 In Argentina, there is a
10% biodiesel mandate (including diesel used in power plants) and ethanol
is being blended at 7.5%. Argentina has export taxes on biodiesel.28
In Indonesia, the bioethanol mandate is currently 7% in transportation
and industry (3% for subsidized gasoline) and in 2015 this is scheduled to
increase to 10% (5% for subsidized gasoline) with further increases sched-
uled for 2020 and 2025. The biodiesel mandate is 7% for transportation
(5% for subsidized gasoline), and 10% for industry and electricity and in
2015 this is scheduled to increase to 10% (5% for subsidized gasoline) with
further increases scheduled for 2020 and 2025.29 In Malaysia, there is a
Biomass 195
biodiesel mandate of 5% as of July 2014, but the distribution capacity

is not in place, particularly in East Malaysia.30 In China, the mandatory
blend rate for ethanol in gasoline is 10% and there is a subsidy for ethanol
production which since 2012 stands at 6 cents per L ($79.4 per Mg). There
is no mandate for biodiesel. In its 5-year plan, China says it will increase
renewable energy use (which includes biofuels).31
Other countries have biofuels mandates in place. These were summa-
rized at the end of December 2013 in Biofuels Digest.112
7 Conclusions and Outlook

Biofuels contribute 10% of the world’s primary energy, much of it in the
form of traditional uses of the fuels such as cooking. In the last 10 years
the production of first generation liquid biofuels (primarily ethanol and
biodiesel) has increased greatly. Ethanol production has increased from 19
to 89 billion L from 2001 to 2013. Biodiesel production increased from 1.2
to 24 billion L from 2001 to 2011. First generation biofuels come from food
crops such as maize, sugar cane, soybeans, rapeseed (canola), and the oil
palm. Second generation biofuels from cellulosic sources are just starting to
come online in Europe, Brazil, and the United States, but their production
is small at present. The use of biomass to generate electricity has steadily
increased over time. Recently there has been a surge in the use of wood
pellets, especially for electricity generation to meet carbon emission policies
in the EU. In the OECD–FAO agricultural outlook, output of ethanol and
biodiesel are expected to increase by 50% from 2013 to 2023.113 Policy will
continue to be important for the production and use of biomass and biofuels.
Both conversion technologies and second-generation feedstock produc-
tion are advancing. There are many potential conversion technologies to
produce solid, liquid, and gaseous fuels. First-generation biofuels are lim-
ited by food production. Even though there will continue to be incremen-
tal changes in first-generation production and conversion technologies (e.g.
higher maize yields, higher conversion efficiencies), for much greater biofu-
els production higher yielding crops (e.g. sorghum, miscanthus, poplars)
and crops more suitable for more marginal lands are needed, and the
costs of conversion technologies must decline to produce fuels that are
economically competitive with fossil-based sources. Policy can drive the
production of second-generation biofuels, but the costs of those policies
cannot be too high.
196 A. Turhollow
Acknowledgments
This work was supported by the Biomass Energy Technologies Office of the
U.S. Department of Energy. Prepared by Oak Ridge National Laboratory,
managed by UT-Battelle for the U.S. Department of energy under contract
DE-AC05-00OR22725. I would like to thank Laurence Eaton for reviewing
this chapter. This chapter draws heavily from Chapter 11 (pp. 225–243)
in The World Scientific Handbook of Energy, Vol. 3 published in 2013 by
World Scientific Publishing Company.
References
1. R. Perlack, L. Wright, A. Turhollow, R. Graham, B. Stokes and D. Erbach,
Biomass as Feedstock for a Bioenergy and Bioproducts Industry: The Tech-
nical Feasibility of a Billion-ton Annual Supply, ORNL/TM-2005/66 (Oak
Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, TN, USA, 2005).
2. USDOE, Biomass as Feedstock for a Bioenergy and Bioproducts Industry:
An Update to the Billion-ton Annual Supply, R. Perlack, B. Stokes (Leads),
ORNL/TM-2010/224 (Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, TN,
USA, 2011).
3. A. Turhollow, R. Perlack, L. Eaton, M. Langholtz, C. Brandt, M. Downing,
L. Wright, K. Skog, C. Hellwinckel, B. Stokes and P. Lebow, The updated
billion-ton resource assessment, Biomass Bioenerg 70 (2014), pp. 149–164.
4. IEA, Renewables, International Energy Agency (2014). Available at:
http://www.iea.org/topics/renewables/subtopics/bioenergy/. Accessed 3
November 2014.
5. USDOE/EIA, International Energy Statistics, Renewable, Biofuels: Fuel
Ethanol Production (U.S. Department of Energy, Energy Information
Administration Washington, D.C., 2014). Available at: http://www.eia.gov/
cfapps/ipdbproject/iedindex3.cfm?tid=79&pid=80&aid=1 & cid = regions &
syid =2000&eyid=2011&unit=TBPD, Accessed 12 September 2014.
6. Renewable Fuels Association (RFA), Statistics (2011). Avail-
able at: http://www.ethanolrfa.org/pages/World-Fuel-Ethanol-Production.
Accessed 6 August 2014.
7. C. Valdes, Brazil’s Ethanol Industry: Looking Forward, BIO-02 (U.S.
Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service, 2011).
8. sugarcane.org, Answers to frequently asked questions, question 9 (2014).
Available at: http://sugarcane.org/media-center/faqs. Accessed 14 October
2014.
9. R. de Cerqueira Leite, M. Verde Leal, L. Barbosa Cortez, W. Griffin and M.
Gaya Scandiffio, Can Brazil replace 5% of the 2025 gasoline world demand
with ethanol? Energy 34 (2009), pp. 655–661.
10. USDA/NASS, Crop Production 2013 Summary (U.S. Department of Agri-
culture, National Agricultural Statistics Service, Washington, D.C., 2014).
Biomass 197
11. USDA/NASS, Crop Production, 10 October 2014, (U.S. Department of Agri-

culture, National Agricultural Statistics Service, Washington, D.C., 2014).
12. S. Mueller and J. Kwik, 2012 Corn Ethanol Emerging Plant Energy
and Environmental Technologies (University of Illinois at Chicago, Energy
Resources Center, 2013).
13. USDA/OCE-WAOB, USDA Agricultural Projections to 2023, Long-term
Projections Report OCE-2014-1 (U.S. Department of Agriculture, Office of
the Chief Economist and World Agricultural Outlook Board, Washington,
D.C., 2014).
14. J. Goldemberg, The Brazilian biofuels industry, Biotechnology for Biofuels
1 (2008), p. 6.
15. S. Barros, Sugar Annual, GAIN Report BR14001 (USDA Foreign Agricul-
tural Service, Sao Paulo, Brazil, 2014).
16. S. Barros, Brazil biofuels annual, GAIN Report BR14004 (USDA Foreign
Agricultural Service, Sao Paulo, Brazil, 2014).
17. Anon., Kansas ethanol plant to co-locate renewable diesel facility on-site,
Biodiesel Magazine, 13 (2014).
18. Anon., Quad County produces cellulosic ethanol, Ethanol Producer Maga-
zine, 24 (2014).
19. J. Javers, ICM generation 1.5 cellulose to ethanol, Presentation at Interna-
tional Fuel Ethanol Workshop & Expo 11 June (2013).
20. R. Janssen, A. Turhollow, D. Rutz and R. Mergner, Production facilities for
second-generation biofuels in the USA and the EU — current status and
future perspectives, Biofuels Bioprod. Bioref. 7 (2013), pp. 647–665.
21. Beta Renewables, Crescentino’s biorefinery grand opening, press release,
9 October (2013). Available at: http://www.betarenewables.com/press-
release-detail/2/crescentinos-biorefinery-grand-opening, accessed 22 Octo-
ber 2014.
22. Gran Bio, Gran Bio begins cellulosic ethanol production in Brazil, Biomass
Magazine, 24 September (2014). Available at: http://www.biomassmagaz-
ine.com/articles/10991/granbio-begins-cellulosic-ethanol-production-in-brazil.
23. J. Lane, Biodiesel 2.0-the next chapter for America’s favorite advanced bio-
fuel, Biofuels Digest 20 January (2014). Available at: biofuelsdigest.com/bdi-
gest/2014/01/20/biodiesel-2-0-the-next-chapter-for-americas-favoriteadvan-
ced-biofuel/. Accessed 27 August 2014.
24. R. Holden, Commercializing enzymatic biodiesel production, Biodiesel Mag-
azine, 3 January (2014). Available at: http://www.biodieselmagazine.com/
articles/9481/commercializing-enzymatic-biodiesel-production. Accessed 23
October 2014.
25. USDOE/EIA, International energy statistics, renewable, biofuels: Biodiesel
production (U.S. Department of Energy, Energy Information Administra-
tion Washington D.C., 2014). Available at: http://www.eia.gov/cfapps/ipdb
project/iedindex3.cfm?tid=79&pid=81&aid=1&cid=regions&syid=2000.
198 A. Turhollow
26. DOE/EIA, Monthly biodiesel production report, July (U.S. Department of

Energy, Energy Information Administration Washington D.C., 2014).
27. B. Flach, K. Bendz and S. Lieberz, EU biofuels annual, GAIN Report
No. NL4025 (USDA Foreign Agricultural Service, The Hague, The Nether-
lands).
28. K. Joseph, Argentina biofuels annual, GAIN Report (USDA Foreign Agri-
cultural Service, Buenos Aires, Argentina, 2014).
29. R. Wright and I Wiyono, Indonesia biofuels annual, GAIN Report
No. ID1420 (USDA Foreign Agricultural Service, Jakarta, Indonesia, 2014).
30. A. Wahab, Malaysia biofuels annual, GAIN Report No. MY4100 (USDA
Foreign Agricultural Service, Kuala Lampur, Malaysia, 2014).
31. R. Scott and J. Junyang, China — Peoples Republic of biofuels annual,
GAIN Report 13040 (USDA Foreign Agricultural Service, Beijing, China,
2014).
32. B. Evans, Canada biofuels annual, GAIN Report CA13034 (USDA Foreign
Agricultural Service, Ottawa, Canada, 2014).
33. A. Gilbert and L. Pinzon, Colombia biofuels annual, GAIN Report (USDA
Foreign Agricultural Service, Bogota, Colombia, 2014).
34. S. Preechajarn and P. Prasertsri, Thailand biofuels annual, GAIN Report
TH4057 (USDA Foreign Agricultural Service, Bangkok, Thailand, 2014).
35. H. Aatola, M. Larmi and T. Sarjovaara, Hydrotreated vegetable oil (HVO)
as a renewable diesel fuel: Trade-off between NOx, particulate emission,
and fuel consumption of a heavy duty engine, SAE international Paper No.
2008-01-2500 (2008).
36. H. Aatola, M. Larmi, T. Sarjovaara and S. Mikkonen, Hydrotreated veg-
etable oil (HVO) as a renewable diesel fuel: Trade-off between NOx ,
particulate emission, and fuel consumption of a heavy duty engine, presen-
tation (2008). Available at: http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&
esrc=s&source=web&cd=2&cad=rja&uact=8&sqi=2&ved=0CCcQFjAB&
url=https%3A%2F%2F2.gy-118.workers.dev/%3A443%2Fhttp%2Fwww.nesteoil.com%2Fbinary.asp%3FGUID%3D585D
B098-061A-4460-B43B-BC7BE431049D&ei= zBJVObKCoiZyATQiYHwD
Q&usg=AFQjCNGh86kJ2qBndBPKuhhPjhwrhe0xjg&sig2=Ri1ZX0e6x6-c
77hescpCug. Accessed 24 September 2014.
37. Diamond Green Diesel, Home. Available at: http://www.diamondgreendi-
esel.com/Pages/default.aspx. Accessed 23 October 2014.
38. Eurostat, Source data for tables and figures: renewable energy: Tables and
figures. Available at: http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/statistics explained/
images/6/61/Renewable energy YB2014.xlsx. Accessed 3 November 2014.
39. DOE/EIA, Monthly energy review October 2014 (U.S. Department of
Energy, Energy Information Administration, Washington, D.C., 2014).
40. E. de Jong, A. Higson, P. Walsh and M. Wallisch, Biobased chemicals: Value
added from biorefineries (IEA Bioenergy, Task 42 Biorefineies, 2011).
41. OECD, The bioeconomy to 2030, designing a policy agenda, main find-
ings and policy conclusions. Available at: http://www.oecd.org/futures/
longtermtechnologicalsocietalchallenges/42837897.pdf. Accessed 17 October
2014.
Biomass 199
42. Nexant, Renewable chemicals & materials opportunity assessment: Major

job creation and agricultural sector engine. Available at: http://www.usda.
gov/ oce /reports/energy / USDA RenewChems Jan2014.pdf. Accessed 20
June 2014.
43. M. Besson, P. Gallezot and C. Pinel, Conversion of biomass into chemicals
over metal catalysts, Chem. Rev. 114 (2014), pp. 1827–1870.
44. P. Gallezot, Conversion of biomass to slected chemical products, Chem. Soc.
Rev. 41 (2012), pp. 1538–1558.
45. J. Bozell and G. Petersen, Technology development for the production of
biobased products from biorefinery carbohydrates — the US Department of
energy’s “top 10,” Green Chem 12(4) (2010), pp. 539–554.
46. J. Holladay, J. Bozell, J. White and D. Johnson, Top value added chemi-
cals from biomass, Volume II — results of screening for potential candidates
from biorefinery lignin, PNNL-16983 (Pacific Northwest National Labora-
tory, Richland, WA, USA, 2007).
47. D. Elliott, Chemicals from biomass, in Encyclopedia of Energy, Vol. 1, ed.
C. Cleland (Elsevier, Oxford, United Kingdom, 2004), pp. 163–174.
48. J. C. Mol, Catalytic metathesis of unsaturated fatty acid esters and oils,
Top. Catal. 27(1–4) (2004), pp. 97–104.
49. B. Vijayendran, Biobased motor oils are ready for primetime, Ind. Biotech-
nol. 10(2) (2014), pp. 64–68.
50. S. Ahlgren, A. Baky, S. Bernesson, Å. Nordberg, O. Norén and P.-A. Hans-
son, Ammonium nitrate fertilizer production based on biomass — envi-
ronmental effects from a life cycle perspective, Biores. Technol. 99 (2008),
pp. 8034–8041.
51. S. Ahlgren, S. Bernesson, Å. Nordberg and P.-A. Hansson, Nitrogen fertilizer
production based on biogas — energy input, environmental impact and land
use, Biores. Technol. 101 (2010), pp. 7181–7184.
52. J. Andersson and J. Lundgren, Techno-economic analysis of ammonia
production via integrated biomass gasification, Appl. Energ. 130 (2014),
pp. 484–490.
53. USDA/NASS, Agricultural prices, April 2014. (U.S. Department of Agricul-
ture, National Agricultural Statistics Service, Washington, D.C., 2014).
54. BioNitrogen, Investor fact sheet Q3 2014. Available at: http://www.bio-
nitrogen.com/wp-
content/uploads/2014/04/BioNitrogen-Investor-Fact-Sheet. pdf. Accessed 3
November 2014.
55. Taco Times, Taylor County, FL|BioNitrogen closes on 55-acre land deal.
Available at: http://www.bionitrogen.com/plant construction updates/
taylor-county-fl-bionitrogen-closes-on-55-acre-land-deal/. Accessed 3
November 2014.
56. FAOSTAT, Forestry, forestry production and trade, wood pellets, Food and
Agriculture Organization of the United Nations — Statistics Division. Avail-
able at: http://faostat3.fao.org/download/F/FO/E. Accessed 22 October
2014.
200 A. Turhollow
57. T. Portz, Investing upstream, Pellet Mill Magazine, Q4 2014 (2014),

pp. 17–21.
58. M. Downing and A. F. Turhollow, Jr., Biomass, The World Scientific Hand-
book of Energy — Materials and Energy, Vol. 3, ed. G.M. Crawley (World
Scientific, Singapore, 2013), pp. 225–243.
59. A. V. Bridgwater, Review of fast pyrolysis of biomass and product upgrad-
ing, Biomass Bioenerg. 38 (2012), pp. 68–94.
60. R. C. Brown and J. Holmgren, Fast pyrolysis and bio-oil upgrading (2011).
Available at: http://www.ars.usda.gov/sp2UserFiles/Program/307/bioma-
sstoDiesel/RobertBrown&JenniferHolmgrenpresentationslides.pdf.
Accessed 24 October 2014.
61. E. Taylor, Coproducts and byproducts of woody biorefinery processing, in
Proceedings of the Role of Extension in Energy, eds. B. C. English, J. Menard
and K. Jensen, 30 June–1 July (Little Rock, AR, USA, 2009), pp. 62–
63. Available at: http://www.farmfoundation.org/news/articlefiles/1704-
Final% 20proceedings%209-14-09.pdf. Accessed 24 October 2014.
62. J. Scahill, Pyrolysis — a promising new path to liquid fuels, Presented at
Can forests meet our energy needs? The future of forest biomass, in Colorado,
21 February (Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO, USA, 2008).
Available at: http://digitool.library.colostate.edu///exlibris/dtl/d3 1/apa-
che media/L2V4bGlicmlzL2R0bC9kM18xL2FwYWNoZV9tZWRpYS80OT
I2.pdf. Accessed 24 October 2014.
63. S. Jones, J. Holladay, C. Valkenburg, D. Stevens, C. Walton, C. Kinchin,
D. Elliot, and S. Czernak, Production of gasoline and diesel from biomass
via fast pyrolysis, hydrotreating and hydrocracking: A Design Case, PNNL-
18284 (Pacific Northwest National Laboratory, Richland, WA, USA, 2009).
64. T. L. Marker, L. G. Felix, M. B. Linck and M. J. Roberts, Integrated
hydropyrolysis and hydroconversion (IH2 ) for the direct production of gaso-
line and diesel fuels or blending components from biomass, part 1: Proof of
principle testing, Environ. Prog. Sust. Energ. 31(2) (2012), pp. 191–199.
65. USDOE/EERE, Using heat and chemistry to make fuels and power: Ther-
mochemical conversion, U.S. Department of Energy, Energy Efficiency &
Renewable Energy, Biomass Program (2010). Available at: http://www1.
eere.energy.gov/library/asset handler.aspx?src=http://www1.eere.energy.
gov/biomass/pdfs/thermochemical four pager.pdf&id=4374. Accessed 24
October 2014.
66. M. Worley and J. Yale, Biomass gasification technology assessment: Consol-
idation report, NREL/SR-5100-57085 (National Renewable Energy Labora-
tory, Golden CO, USA, 2012).
67. IEA Task 37, Up-grading plant list. Available at: http://www.iea-biogas.
net/plant-list.html?file=files/daten-redaktion/download/Up-grading Plant
List.xls. Accessed 14 October 2014.
68. R. Burns, Current state of manure anaerobic digestion in the U.S. and
beyond, presentation at: Energy production from anaerobic digestion of
dairy manure, Madison, WI, USA 28–29 September 2009 as cited in: J. Arogo
Ogejo, J. Ignosh, S. Lansing, G. Felton, Anaerobic digesters an overview.
Biomass 201
Available at: http://www.epa.gov/agstar/documents/meeting 120210 lans-

ing.pdf. Accessed 10 November 2014.
69. Anaerobic Digestion China Working Group, International Water Associa-
tion, Background. Available at: http://www.iwahq.org/213/communities/
specialist-groups/list-of-groups/anaerobic-digestion/ad-china-wg.html. Acc-
essed 14 October 2014.
70. USDA, USEPA, USDOE, Biogas opportunities roadmap (2014).
71. W. F. Lazarus, Anaerobic digester technology. In Proceedings of the Role of
Extension in Energy, eds. B. C. English, J. Menard, and K. Jensen, 30 June–
1 July (Little Rock, AR, USA, 2009), pp. 42–45. Available at: http://www.
farmfoundation.org/news/articlefiles/1704-Final%20proceedings%209-14-09.
pdf. Accessed 10 November 2014.
72. J. Crenshaw, What’s a digester cost these days? Presented at the 2009
AgSTAR National Conference, 24–25 February 2009, Baltimore, MD, USA.
Available at: http://www.epa.gov/agstar/documents/conf09/crenshaw di-
gester cost.pdf. Accessed 10 November 2014.
73. K. Fletcher, NABCE 2014 comes to an end with Poet-DSM fantasy
fuel plant tour, Ethanol Producer Magazine 16 October (2014). Available
at: http://www.ethanolproducer.com/articles/11554/nabce-2014-comes-to-
an-end-with-poet-dsm-fantasy-fuel-plant-tour. Accessed 4 November 2014.
74. D. Humbird, R. Davis, L. Tao, C. Kinchin, A. Aden, P. Schoen, J. Lukas,
B. Olthof and M. Worley, Process design and economics for biochemical
conversion of lignocellulosic biomass to ethanol: Dilute-acid pretreatment
and enzymatic hydrolysis of corn stover, NREL/TP-5100-47764 (National
Renewable Energy Laboratory, Golden CO, USA, 2011).
75. C. S. Byrt, C. P. L Grof and R. T. Furbank, C4 plants as biofuel feedstocks:
Optimising biomass production and feedstock quality from a lignocellulosic
perspective, J. Integrative Plant Biol. 53(2) (2011), pp. 120–135.
76. D. J. Parrish and J. H. Fike, The biology and agronomy of switchgrass for
biofuels, Crit. Rev. Plant Sci. 24 (2005), pp. 423–459.
77. R. Mitchell, K. Vogel and M Schmer, Growing switchgrass for biofuels (Iowa
State University Extension and Outreach, Ames, IA, USA, 2013).
78. K. P. Vogel and R. B. Mitchell, Heterosis in switchgrass: Biomass yield in
swards, Crop Science 48(2008) (1983), pp. 2159–21641.
79. USDA/ARS, USDA plant hardiness zone map. Available at: http://plan-
thardiness.ars.usda.gov/PHZMWeb/. Accessed 15 October 2014.
80. K. Vogel, R. Mitchell, M. Casler and G. Sarath, Registration of ‘Liberty’
switchgrass, J. Plant Registrations 8 (2014), pp. 242–247.
81. A. F. Turhollow, E. G. Webb and M. E. Downing, Review of sorghum
production practices: Applications for bioenergy, (ORNL/TM-2010/7, Oak
Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, TN, USA, 2010).
82. V. S. Belum Reddy, S. Ramesh, P. Sanjana Reddy, B. Ramaiah, P. M. Sali-
math and R. Kachapur, Sweet sorghum — A potential alternative raw mate-
rial for bio-ethanol and bio-energy, Sorghum Millets Newslett. 46 (2005),
pp. 79–96.
202 A. Turhollow
83. V. S. Belum Reddy, Willaim D. Dar, P. Parthasarathy Rao, P. Srinivasa Rao,

A. Ashok Kumar and P. Sanjana Reddy, Sweet sorghum as a bioethanol
feedstock: Challenges and opportunities, International Conference on
Sorghum for Biofuel, 19–22 August (Houston, TX, USA, 2008). Available
at: http://www.ars.usda.gov/meetings/Sorghum/presentations/Reddy.pdf.
Accessed 2 May 2011.
84. T. L. Tew, R. M. Cobill and E. P. Richard, Jr., Evaluation of sweet sorghum
and sorghum x sudangrass hybrids as feedstocks for ethanol production,
Bioenergy Res. 1 (2008), pp. 147–152.
85. S. R. Schill, Tall Texas sorghum, Ethanol Producer Magazine, November
2007. Available at: http://www.ethanolproducer.com/articles/3424/tall-
texas-sorghum. Accessed 4 November 2014.
86. S. C. Aravindhakshan, F. M. Epplin and C. M. Taliafarro, Economics of
switchgrass and Miscanthus relative to coal as feedstock for generating elec-
tricity, Biomass Bioenerg. 35(1) (2011), pp. 308–319.
87. A. K. Jain, M. Khanna, M. Erickson and H. Huang, An integrated biogeo-
chemical and economic analysis of bioenergy crops in the Midwestern United
States, Global Change Biol. Bioenerg. 2(5) (2010), pp. 217–234.
88. M. Khanna, B. Dhungana and J. Clifton-Brown, Costs of producing Miscant-
hus and switchgrass for bioenergy in Illinois, Biomass Bioenerg. 32 (2008),
pp. 482–493.
89. D. G. Christian, A. B. Richie and N. E. Yates, Growth, yield and min-
eral content of Miscanthus x giganteus grown as a biofuel for 14 successive
harvests, Ind. Crop. Prod. 28 (2008), pp. 320–327.
90. L. Ercoli, M. Mariotti, A. Masoni and E. Bonari, Effect of irrigation and
nitrogen fertilization on biomass yield and efficiency of energy use in crop
production of Miscanthus, Field Crops Res. 63 (1999), pp. 3–11.
91. M. Salassi, K. Brown, B. Hilburn, M. Deliberto, K. Gravois, T. Mark and
L. Falconer, Farm-scale cost of producing perennial energy cane, Bioenerg.
Res. 7 (2014), pp. 609–619.
92. B. L. Legendre and D. M. Burner, Biomass production of sugarcane cultivars
and early-generation hybrids, Biomass Bioenerg. 8(2) (1995), pp. 55–61.
93. D. E. Riemenschneider, H. E. Stelzer and G. S. Foster, Quantitative genetics
of poplars and poplar hybrids, in Biology of Populus and its Implications
for Management and Conservation, eds. R. F. Stettler, H. D. Bradshaw,
Jr, P. E. Heilamn and T. M. Hinkley, Part I, Chapter 7 (NRC Research
Press, National Research Council of Canada, Ottawa, ON, Canada, 1996),
pp. 159–181.
94. R. S. Zalesny Jr., R. B. Hall, J. A. Zalesny, B. G. McMahon, W. E. Berguson
and G. R. Stanosz, Biomass and genotype x environment interactions of
Populus energy crops in the Midwestern United States, Bioenergy Res. 2
(2009), pp. 106–122.
95. H. G. Adegbidi, T. A. Volk, E. H. White, R. D. Briggs, L. P. Abraham-
son and D. H. Bickelhaupt, Biomass and nutrient export by willow clones
in experimental bioenergy plantations in New York, Biomass Bioenerg. 20
(2001), pp. 389–398.
Biomass 203
96. M. Labrecque and T. I. Teodorescu, High biomass yield achieved by

Salix clones in SRIC following two 3-year coppice rotations on aban-
doned farmland in southern Quebec, Canada, Biomass Bioenerg. 25 (2003),
pp. 135–146.
97. H. G. Adegbidi, R. D. Briggs, T. A. Volk, E. H. White and L. P. Abra-
hamson, Effect of organic amendments and slow-release nitrogen fertilizer
on willow biomass production and soil chemical characteristics, Biomass
Bioenerg. 25 (2003), pp. 389–398.
98. T. A. Volk, L. P. Abrahamson, C. A. Nowak, L. B. Smart, P. J. Tharakan and
E. H. White, The development of short-rotation willow in the northeastern
United States for bioenergy and bioproducts, agroforestry and phytoreme-
diation, Biomass Bioenerg. 30 (2006), pp. 715–727.
99. T. A. Volk, B. D. Kiernan, R. Kopp and L. P. Abrahamson, First- and
second-rotation yields of willow clones at two sites in New York State,
Fifth Biomass Conference of the Americas, 17–21 September (Orlando,
FL, USA, 2001). Available at: http://www.brdisolutions.com/pdfs/bcota/
abstracts/22/z146.pdf.
100. T. Bucholz and T. A Volk, Improving the profitability of willow biomass
crops — identifying opportunities with a crop budget model, Bioenergy Res.
4(2) (2011), pp. 85–95.
101. M. Langholtz, D. R. Carter, D. L. Rockwood and J. R. R. Alavalapati. The
economic feasibility of reclaiming phosphate mined lands with short-rotation
woody crops in Florida, J. Forest Economics 12(4) (2007), pp. 237–249.
102. M. Rahmani, A. W. Hodges, J. Stricker and C. F. Kiker, Economic analysis
of biomass crop production in Florida, in Making a business from biomass
in energy, environment, chemical, fibers and materials, eds. R. P. Overend
and E. Chornet, Third Biomass Conference of the Americas, 24–29 August
(Elsevier Science, New York, NY, USA), pp. 91–99.
103. W. Dar, Research needed to cut risk to biofuel farmers, Science and
Development Network (2007). Available at: http://www.scidev.net/en/
opinions/research-needed-to-cut-risks-to-biofuel-farmers.html. Accessed 4
November 2014.
104. R. Krautgartner, X. Audran, L. E. Rehder, M. Boshnkova, M. Dobrescu, B.
Flach, J. Wilson, O. Bettini, M. Guerrero and K. Bendz, EU-28 oilseeds and
products annual, GAIN Report Number: AU1407 (USDA, Foreign Agricul-
tural Service, Vienna, Austria, 2014).
105. A. G. Wahab, Malaysia oilseeds and products annual, GAIN Report Num-
ber: MY4006 (USDA Foreign Agricultural Service, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia,
2014).
106. USDOE/EERE, National algal biofuels technology roadmap, U.S. Depart-
ment of Energy, Energy Efficiency & Renewable Energy, Biomass Program,
2010. Available at: http://www1.eere.energy.gov/biomass/pdfs/algal biofu-
els roadmap.pdf. Accessed 4 November 2014.
107. E. D. Jarvis, Aquatic species program: Lessons learned, Presentation
at the AFSOR Workshop on Algal Oil for Jet Fuel Production, 19–21
204 A. Turhollow
February (Washington, DC, USA, 2008). Available at: http://www.nrel.gov/

biomass/pdfs/43232.pdf. Accessed 29 April 2011.
108. J. Sheehan, T. Dunahay, J. Benemann and P. Roessler, A look back at
the U.S. Department of Energy’s Aquatic Species Program — Biodiesel
from algae, NREL/TP-580-24190 (National Renewable Energy Laboratory,
Golden, CO, USA, 1998).
109. R. Davis, D. Fishman, E. Frank, M. Wigmosta, A. Aden, A. Coleman,
P. Pienkos, R. Skaggs, E. Venteris and M. Wang, Renewable diesel from
algal lipids: An integrated baseline for cost, emisions, and resource potential
from a harmonized model, ANL/ESD/12-4, NREL/TP-5100-55431, PNNL-
21437 (Argonne National Laboratory, Argonne, IL, USA; National Renew-
able Energy Laboratory, Golden CO, USA; Pacific Northwest National
Laboratory, Richland, WA, USA, 2012).
110. USDOE/EIA, Monthly energy review October, DOE/EIA-0035(2014/10)
(U.S. Department of Energy, Energy Information Administration Washing-
ton D.C., 2014).
111. U.S. Congress, Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007, 110th
Congress, 1st session HR 6.4, January (2007).
112. J. Lane, Biofuels mandates around the world, Biofuels digest 31 Dec. (2013).
Available at: http://www.biofuelsdigest.com/bdigest/2013/12/31/biofuels-
mandates-around-the-world-2014/. Accessed 16 October 2014.
113. OECD-FAO, OECD-FAO Agricultural outlook: Biofuels, see all data for bio-
fuels, (2014). Available at: http://stats.oecd.org/viewhtml.aspx?QueryId=
58648&vh=0000&vf=0&l&il=&lang=en. Accessed 18 November 2014.
Chapter 6
Artificial Photosynthesis
Nathan Skillen∗ and Peter K. J. Robertson

Centre for the Theory and Application of Catalysis (CenTACat),
School of Chemistry and Chemical Engineering, Queen’s University Belfast,
David Keir Building, Stranmillis Road, Belfast, BT9 5AG, UK
∗[email protected]
Photosynthesis is a natural mechanism which is capable of not only converting

solar energy to a potential food stock but also reducing atmospheric CO2 lev-
els. The process of artificial photosynthesis attempts to mimic this mechanism
through the development of materials and technology that can harvest solar
energy for high energy conversion to renewable fuel. The potential of using
a hugely sustainable source of energy such as solar with H2 O and CO2 , as
the only feedstock’s, is very desirable in the current global energy situation. A
number of approaches have been developed in an attempt to achieve this includ-
ing; dye sensitized solar cells (DSSCs), photocatalytic H2 O oxidation and CO2
reduction and nanobiocatalytic complexes. Due to the complexity and intricacy
of the interaction between the compounds and structures involved in photo-
synthesis, replicating the process is faced with a number of challenges; har-
vesting solar light whilst maintaining a high yield of product, electron transfer
and charge separation, carbon fixation and high turnover number. Moreover,
photosynthesis is capable of proceeding under a range of varying environmen-
tal conditions such as diffuse light conditions. While significant challenges are
faced, impressive breakthroughs and advancements have been made in the
past decade which contributes towards the development of an artificial photo-
synthetic system. Discussed herein is the research that has been conducted in
artificial photosynthesis covering a range of applications, emerging technologies
and the work of dedicated Artificial Photosynthesis System (APS) institutes.
1 Introduction
The chemical process of photosynthesis, in which CO2 is converted to car-
bohydrates while H2 O is oxidized to O2 and H+ , is a desirable mechanism
to be replicated in view of the current global energy concerns. The process
205
206 N. Skillen & P. K. J. Robertson
of photosynthesis has provided the majority of stored energy available on

the planet. The overuse of stored energy, primarily through the burning of
fossil fuels, has resulted in the depletion of fuel stocks to the point that
natural resources are unable to replenish that which has been used. Fur-
thermore, the levels of CO2 emissions have long surpassed the level at which
nature is capable of keeping a safe balance. Therefore, a significant chal-
lenge remains in not only developing renewable fuels that do not further
elevate CO2 emissions but also the capping and potential decreasing of
current anthropogenic CO2 levels.
The concept of utilizing solar light for not only CO2 sequestration but
solar fuel generation is the basis for artificial photosynthesis systems (APS)
currently under development. The potential of artificial photosynthesis con-
tinues to grow with significant advances being made during the past decade.
In recent years, the development of novel heterogeneous catalysts for solar
light harvesting, H2 O oxidation and CO2 reduction along with advances
in photoelectrochemical cells have contributed to the growth of the field.
Furthermore, increasing atmospheric CO2 concentrations coupled with the
demand for renewable energy and the staggering potential of solar energy
(4.3 × 1020 J hr−1 reaching earth’s surface) have been the primary driv-
ing forces. Currently there are a broad range of approaches that are being
developed for APS including chemical and photocatalytic,1–4 bimetallic5
and biomimetic6,7 and nanobiocatalytic.8
The chemistry involved in the process of photosynthesis has been well
studied and the mechanisms are understood at a precise and detailed level.
With the discovery of the Photosystem II (PS II) crystal structure in 2004
by Ferriera et al., the photo-induced electron transfer chain was published
which gave an explanation for the high yield of photosynthesis.9 This cas-
cade effect, in conjunction with efficient light harvesting compounds, are
examples of both chemical and mechanistic challenges that must be over-
come by APS. Kalyanasundaram and Graetzel10 stated that artificial pho-
tosynthesis is an ‘approach wherein the important structural elements and
reaction features of natural photosynthesis are used in conceptually sim-
pler systems to achieve results of natural photosynthesis’. The chemical and
structural complexity of photosynthesis is challenging to replicate in any
artificial system and it is a noteworthy point that the natural process is one
which is utilized for plant growth and as such the rate of photosynthesis
varies greatly depending on the species of plant. Despite this, solar energy
conversion efficiency in natural photosynthesis is only ∼2–3%. APS will
also aim to improve upon this.
Artificial Photosynthesis 207
This chapter will present an insight into artificial photosynthesis, cover-

ing the areas of current applications including heterogeneous and homoge-
nous systems, emerging technologies and novel materials. A comprehensive,
although not exhaustive, review has been compiled to provide the reader
with an understanding of the fundamentals of this field of research. As
a useful starting point, the natural process is reviewed to identify the key
areas that need to be replicated including light harvesting, electron transfer
and carbon fixation. The chapter will then discuss approaches deployed for
artificial photosynthesis, encompassing photocatalytic systems, H2 O oxida-
tion, CO2 reduction and conversion to fuels, solar energy conversion and
dye sensitized solar cells (DSSCs). Focus shall also be given to key dedicated
institutes that have been developed, specifically focusing on artificial pho-
tosynthesis, such as the work conducted by the Joint Centre for Artificial
Photosynthesis (JCAP) and the Swedish consortium for artificial photosyn-
thesis.
2 Natural Photosynthesis
When discussing the topic of artificial photosynthesis it is important to
review the natural process and highlight the areas which can be reproduced.
This section will provide the reader with an overview of the natural pro-
cess including the chemistry involved and the mechanistic pathways which
generate high value products. Key areas of the process will be identified
along with areas which are capable of being mimicked and these areas will
be further discussed in subsequent sections. Photosynthesis can be subdi-
vided into a number of key areas which require consideration. Generally,
the mechanism consists of two processes referred to as the ‘light ’ and ‘dark ’
reactions. Despite the names, these systems are linked and regulated by a
series of enzymes to ensure the operation of an energy efficient system (see
Fig. 1).
The light reactions are those dependent on the presence of light as the
source of energy in the photolysis of H2 O to molecular O2 and H+ (see
Eq. (1)).
2H2 O −−−→ 4H + + O2 + 4e− . (1)

light
The dark reaction, or Calvin cycle, operates independently of illumination

and results in the fixation of CO2 to produce carbohydrates. On a more
specific level, it is possible to split photosynthesis into four key processes;
energy absorption, electron transfer, ATP generation and carbon fixation.
Fig. 1. Schematic representation of photosynthesis.
This section will discuss photosynthesis under these four headings with a
view towards their replication in artificial systems.
Firstly, it should be acknowledged that the arrangement of chemicals
and organelle structures at the microscopic level within the plant, is criti-
cal to the efficiency of the natural process. The chloroplast is the ‘working’
part of the plant cell in relation to photosynthesis. Within the chloroplast
an array of ‘antennas’ and ‘reaction centers’ can be found organized into
flattened disks known as thylakoids. An assembly of these flattened disks
are referred to as grana. The thylakoid is surrounded by the thylakoid mem-
brane and contains a single continuous compartment known as the thylakoid
lumen. Specifically, it is the thylakoid membrane within the chloroplast that
is the site of photosynthesis. Figure 2 shows the basic structure of the thy-
lakoids.
2.1 Key Features

2.1.1 Energy absorption
The absorption of light energy is the initial stage of the photosynthetic
process. The light energy absorbed is utilized to remove electrons from
unwilling donors, which in plants is H2 O, in order to form O2 . The energy
supply is then used for the transfer of electrons to a primary electron accep-
tor. Numerous molecules are located in the thylakoid structure, which are
capable of absorbing light from the visible portion of the solar spectrum
(see Fig. 3). Chlorophyll (Chl) a is the primary molecule for photon capture
in green plants, absorbing light in the blue–violet and orange–red regions of
the spectrum. Also present are a number of accessory pigments, including
xanthophylls, carotenoids and Chl b, which are capable of absorbing light
within the yellow–green–orange section of the spectrum. The arrangement
Fig. 2. Stacked thylakoids as a granum.
Fig. 3. Electromagnetic spectrum.
of Chl and additional light absorbing molecules provides the plant with an
antenna system which is the first key area artificial systems must mimic.
The antenna is not only capable of capturing photons, it also relays them
onto reaction centers as part of electron-transfer processes. The highly sig-
nificant feature of this process is the ability of the plant to carry this out
under varying light intensities, thus photosynthesis efficiencies are compa-

rable under direct and diffuse light conditions.
2.1.2 Electron transfer and ATP generation

Following energy absorption, electron transfer occurs through a series of
reaction centers. After the initial electron acceptor, the transfer process
occurs through a chain of electron transport molecules in the thylakoid
membrane until the final acceptor is reached. Typically the final acceptor
in natural photosynthesis is NADP+ , which subsequently becomes NADPH.
In plants, the transport of electrons is coupled to the movement of protons
from the stroma to the thylakoid lumen, forming a pH gradient across the
thylakoid membrane (pH lumen <pH stroma).
Figure 4 shows an overview of the light dependant stage in the natural
process, while Eq. (2) shows the overall equation for light absorption and
Fig. 4. Schematic representation of the ‘light’ reaction in photosynthesis.

electron transfer.
2H2 O + 2NADP + −−−→ 2H + + 2NADPH + O2 . (2)

light
The mechanism in Fig. 4 shows the capturing of light by Chl in PS II

resulting in a series of electron transfer reactions through the thylakoid
membrane. Upon absorption of photons, excitation of Chl a (P680) occurs
which initiates the photo-induced electron transfer process. As shown in
Fig. 4, the process of ‘Chl’ becoming ‘Chl*’ is the driving force for the
oxidation of H2 O to occur. Electrons are extracted from H2 O at the calcium-
manganese center to form O2 and H+ . The electron transfer mechanism
occurs through a chain of acceptors including plastoquinone, cyctochrome
complex and plastocyanin before being delivered to PS I.
Similar to PS II, PS I excited electrons (P700) are transferred to an
acceptor, ferrodoxin, before being utilised for the reduction of NADP+ to
NADPH, a reaction which is facilitated by the enzyme ferredoxin-NADP
reductase. In conjunction with the transfer of electrons, protons are trans-
ported through the system also. Protons from the oxidation of H2 O at the
calcium-manganese center along with those that travel across the mem-
brane via plastoquinone are used for the conversion of ATP from ADP and
Pi via ATPase. The final products of this mechanism, NADPH and ATP
are transported to the Calvin cycle where they are used in the fixation
of carbon. This mechanism was one of the most important discoveries in
research into natural photosynthesis. The mechanism involving the move-
ment of electrons through a number of acceptors allows for very efficient
charge separation which explains the high turnover number observed in
photosynthesis. The replication of this process is fundamental to the devel-
opment of an energy efficient APS.
2.1.3 Carbon fixation

The second stage of photosynthesis (Calvin cycle) involves the fixation of
CO2 to facilitate sugar production. The ATP and NADPH generated in the
light reaction supply the energy and electrons which drive the Calvin cycle.
The cycle can be considered as three phases; carbon fixation, reduction
and ribulose-1,5-bisphosphate (RuBP) regeneration. A schematic represen-
tation of the cycle is summarized in Fig. 5. The initial stage of the cycle
is the incorporation of CO2 into RuBP to 3-phosphoglycerate (3-PGA), a
carboxylation reaction catalyzed by the enzyme RuBisCo. Following this, 3-
PGA is phosphorylzed to 1,3-bisphosphoglycerate by ATP and the catalyst
Fig. 5. Flow diagram of the Calvin cycle.
phosphoglycerate kinase, which in turn produces ADP and Pi. During the
carbon fixation phase, 1 molecule of CO2 , which enters the cycle, will yield
2, 3-PGA molecules. The ‘energy cost’ of this fixation stage is two molecules
of ATP per CO2 molecule fixed. During phase 2, 1,3-bisphosphoglycerate
is reduced to G3P by G3P dehydrogenase and NADPH, which itself under-
goes oxidation to NADP+ . As was observed with ATP, two molecules of
NADPH are required per CO2 molecule fixed. The final phase is the com-
pletion of the cycle in order to regenerate RuBP. This phase involves a series
of enzyme controlled reactions and a number of intermediates during which
five molecules of G3P are converted into three molecules of RuBP at a cost
of three molecules of ATP. As only five of the six molecules of G3P gener-
ated from three molecules of CO2 are required, there is a net gain of one
molecule of G3P. The one molecule of G3P will contribute towards the pro-
duction of the carbohydrate products of photosynthesis which requires two
molecules of G3P in order to yield one molecule of C6 H12 O6 . The overall
equation for the process is shown in Eq. (3).
6CO 2 + 18ATP + 12NADPH + 12H2 O → C6 H12 O6 + 18ADP + 18P i

+ 12NADP + + 6H + . (3)
The stages discussed here are those that are key to the natural pro-
cess of photosynthesis and those that must be mimicked in an artificial
system. Replicating the complexity of the natural process is not a feasi-
ble approach. Moreover, direct replication of photosynthesis may yield a
system with an equally low solar energy conversion efficiency (∼2–3%).
There is, therefore, a great need to develop systems which can replicate the
core chemical process occurring in natural photosynthesis while increas-
ing the yield of product from solar photonic activation. Light absorption
and electron transfer are the first stages which should be considered in
an artificial system. The light absorbing pigments, antennae and reaction
complexes of the natural system are highly efficient and proceed under
varying environmental conditions such as light intensity. The development
of materials that are capable of absorbing light over a broad range of wave-
lengths and efficiently transferring electrons to excited states while prevent-
ing any form of recombination is a significant challenge. The generation of
ATP in the natural system is one which perhaps does not have to be pre-
cisely replicated. However, the process by which ATP is generated is one
of interest. The photolysis of H2 O to yield H2 /H+ and O2 has received
significant attention in the field of photocatalysis and photoelectrochem-
istry with a view towards potential solar energy conversion and renewable
fuel generation. Finally, carbon fixation in the Calvin cycle is perhaps the
most appealing and significant area where attempts are being made to
replicate the process. The utilization and potential sequestration of atmo-
spheric CO2 in a system which can also generate energy has become a
global goal.
3 Artificial Photosynthesis
This area of research is becoming densely populated with published articles
that investigate new and alternative approaches to achieving artificial pho-
tosynthesis. Generally, the aim of APS is the capturing and converting of
light energy into fuels. Therefore, this chapter shall attempt to discuss the
most significant approaches that are currently being developed. The reader
is also directed to a number of excellent review papers which will give a
broad appreciation of the scope of work being conducted in this area.1–4,11
3.1 Light Harvesting

A key stage in both natural and artificial photosynthesis is light harvesting
and the process of ‘capturing photons’. Nature achieves this by using light
harvesting complexes within an organized array of pigments located within
the chloroplasts. A range of pigments allows for a broad spectrum of light

to be absorbed. The structure and chemical properties of the pigments and
chloroplasts ensure both the movement of photons to the correct location
and avoid any issues of overloading at high light intensities. In order to
mimic this system, it is essential to first look at the nature of the solar elec-
tromagnetic spectrum. While the proportion of solar energy which reaches
the surface of the Earth is sufficient for the photosynthesis process, there are
advantages in concentrating the direct portion of the sunlight that falls on
the earth to use in artificial photosynthesis. Diffuse sunlight is also available
both for natural photosynthesis and APS.
A range of chemical compounds can be utilized for photon capture
including modified photosynthetic pigments, dye molecules along with
metal oxide and nitride semiconductors. This section shall focus on the
use of photosensitizers that can be applied to APS including DSSC’s and
photocatalysts.
3.1.1 Photosensitizers
3.1.1.1 Dye sensitized solar cells
The dye sensitized solar cell comprises a photoelectrode constructed usu-
ally from glass coated with a conducting layer such as indium tin oxide
(ITO) onto which a semiconductor photocatalyst film is deposited, most
commonly titanium dioxide. A photosensitizing dye is adsorbed onto the
semiconductor photocatalyst and the counter electrode, such as platinum,
is separated from the photoelectrode by an electrolyte containing suitable
redox system such as I− −
3 /I system. When irradiated with light of a suitable
wavelength, the photoexcited dye injects an electron into the semiconductor
material which is then transported around the circuit to the counter elec-
trode. At the counter electrode the tri iodide is reduced by two electrons to
iodide. The iodide in the electrode subsequently donates an electron to the
oxidised dye, regenerating the parent dye molecule (scheme 1 and Fig. 6).
An excellent review on photosensitizers for dye sensitised solar cells has
been prepared by Basheer et al.12
Dye + hν → Dye∗ (1)
∗ − +
Dye + PC → PC + Dye (2)
I−
3
−
+ 2e → 3I −
(3)
+ −
Dye + 3/2I → Dye + 1/2I−
3 (4)
Scheme 1
Fig. 6. Dye sensitized solar cell.
O’Regan and Graetzel13 reported the development of the first DSSC

in their seminal Nature paper in 1991. They reported the use of a ruthe-
nium bipyridyl dye adsorbed to a 10-µm-thick, optically transparent film
of titanium dioxide coated ITO glass photoelectrode. A conversion yield of
light to electric current of 12% was obtained under diffuse daylight. Fur-
thermore, the turnover number of the unit was reported to be over 5 million
demonstrating the robustness of the overall system.
Since Graetzel’s first report, research on ruthenium based dyes has
probably been one of the most active and fruitful areas of research into pho-
tosensitizers for DSSCs. The most effective materials are the N3, N749, and
N719 dyes which are all ruthenium organometallic materials based around
the RuLx Ly SCN2 . The ligands L and L are polypyridyl compounds.12 The
efficiencies of the N3, N719 and N749 dyes are reported as 8.2, 10.1, and
10.4 respectively under AM 1.5 irradiation.12
The use of the Chl derivatives and natural porphyrins, as photosensi-
tizers on colloidal TiO2 photoelectrodes was subsequently reported by Kay
et al.14 Energy conversions of 2.6% were obtained for copper Chl under
simulated solar irradiation. In a study of different Chl derivatives it was
found that free carboxyl groups were necessary for both adsorption and
sensitization on TiO2 photoelectrodes.
Campbell et al.15 investigated the use of six porphyrin dyes as photosen-

sitizers in DSSCs. Unfortunately, these proved to be less effective compared
to ruthenium bipyridyl based dyes with overall efficiencies of less than 5%
under AM1.5 solar conditions.
The development of four novel ruthenium based heteroleptic photo-
sensitizers was reported by Lagref et al.16 The most effective dye was the
[Ru(H2 dcbpy)(bhcbpy)(NCS)2 ] derivative which demonstrated a conversion
efficiency of 74% under AM1.5 solar irradiation.
Twenty natural dyes extracted from materials including leaves, fruits
and traditional Chinese medicines, were assessed as photosensitizers for dye
sensitised solar cells by Zhou et al.17 The overall performance however was
rather disappointing with incident photon to current conversion efficiencies
(IPCE) ranging between 0.3 and just over 1% efficiencies. The most effective
material was extracted from the rind of the mangosteen fruit but only
demonstrated an IPCE of 1.17%.
The efficiency of natural dyes was also assessed by Hug et al.18 They
also concluded that the dyes extracted from natural materials had a signif-
icantly poorer performance than that obtained for synthetic dyes. While
the best performing dyes were Chl derivatives extracted from spinach,
they still only achieved an IPCE of around 4% under AM1.5 solar
irradiation.
Park and Han described the application of a mixed TiO2 /Nb2 O3 layer
coated on the surface of nanoporous TiO2 photoelectrodes using Ruthenizer
535-bisTBA (N719 dye) as a photosensitizer.19 A conversion efficiency of
10.7% was obtained for this electrode compared to 7.9% which was obtained
for the dye sensitized electrode which contained no over-layer. The enhanced
efficiency was proposed to a number of factors including reduced recombi-
nation, enhanced light harvesting and electron collection efficiency.
Despite the extensive research on a broad range of dye sensitisers, to
date the ruthenium based dyes remain the most efficient materials with
conversion efficiencies of just over 10%.12
3.1.1.2 Photocatalysts
Photocatalysis is one of the primary methods adopted for artificial photo-
synthesis, especially as photosynthesis can be considered as oxidation and
reduction half reactions; the initial photooxidation of H2 O to O2 and H+ ,
followed by the reduction of CO2 via carbon fixation. Researchers there-
fore have attempted to develop catalysts and reactor technology that can
Fig. 7. Schematic representation of photocatalysis for artificial photosynthesis.
either split H2 O or reduce CO2 along with a combined system which can
completely replicate photosynthesis.
The chemical process of photocatalysis is shown in Fig. 7. The process
of photocatalysis is initiated by the absorption of light energy and thus
dictated by the electronic structure of the material. As the schematic shows,
upon absorption, excitation occurs resulting in the formation of electron-
hole pairs and subsequently redox reactions with adsorbed species on the
surface. The Ebg indicates the level of energy required to initiate excitation
with a wide band gap (>∼3.0 eV) requiring UV light and a narrow band
gap (<∼3.0 eV) suited to the visible portion of the spectrum.
The challenge faced by researchers is maintaining the level of efficiency
and stability observed in UV based catalysts, when using a visible catalyst
where typically photocorrosion (CdS) and redox potentials are a significant
issue. The typical catalyst engineering approaches adopted to narrow the
band gap and increase solar photon absorption include; adjustment and
modification to the conduction band (CB) and/or the valence band (VB)
along with modulation of the CB/VB.
Despite high levels of H2 O oxidation achieved by a range of catalysts,
a major limitation is often the requirement of UV photoactivation. The
requirements for a visible light catalyst capable of stoichiometric H2 O oxi-

dation are stringent and as such there are limited examples. Whilst there
are examples of H2 production under visible irradiation, the presence of a
sacrificial electron donor (SED) is often required. This section shall discuss
some promising catalysts that possess characteristics suitable for efficient
photon capture in an APS.
While a great deal of focus has always been on metal oxides with a d0
electron configuration, potentially of more interest for APS is the recent
development of metal nitrides with a d10 electron configuration. The VBs
of metal nitrides are composed of N2p, which has a higher energy level
than that of O2p in metal oxides. Therefore the energy band gap (Ebg ) is
narrower, presuming the CB remains the same, which allows for excitation
by photons with a wavelength >400 nm. Examples of metal nitrides being
used include β-Ge3 N4 ,20 doped GaN and (Ga1−x Zn)(N1−x Ox ).20–24 Maeda
et al.22 reported their samples of (Ga1−x Zn)(N1−x Ox ) to have an Ebg in
the range of 2.6–2.8 eV, which is lower than that of the individual catalysts
ZnO (3.2 eV) and GaN (3.4 eV) and low enough to permit excitation by
absorbed visible photons. More recently, Lee et al.24 have further reduced
the Ebg to 2.2 eV by increasing the value of x to 0.87 to produce the catalyst
(Ga0.13 Zn)(N0.13 O0.87 ), which they concluded can significantly increase the
absorption of solar photons. The catalyst was found to be active when used
with both RuO2 and Rh doped with lanthanides, producing stoichiometric
quantities of H2 and O2 under visible illumination.22,23
3.2 Electron Separation and Transfer

Focus has been placed on single catalysts and Z-scheme mechanisms which
are capable of converting light energy, particularly the solar spectrum, to
chemical energy that can be harvested as fuel. Furthermore, this section
will discuss materials that are deployed for H2 O oxidation, CO2 reduction
and combined systems.
As discussed previously, photocatalysts can be deployed as light captur-
ing units. However upon excitation, charge separation becomes the primary
consideration. Discussed here is work conducted towards increasing charged
species mobility and electron transfer with a view to APS.
3.2.1 Single oxide photocatalysts

Since Fujishima and Honda’s findings on the H2 O splitting capability of
TiO2 in 1972,25 there has been a surge of publications on not only TiO2
based materials but a range of photocatalysts. The breakthroughs in pho-

tocatalytic materials for APS have predominantly been achieved for the
oxidation of H2 O, however more recently this has stimulated development
also into CO2 reduction. While TiO2 remains a starting material for many
novel catalyst materials, a range of oxide and nitride materials have been
developed that show activity in both H2 O splitting and CO2 reduction
along with activation by solar photons.
Beginning with the work conducted into H2 O oxidation, a significant
amount of catalyst engineering is focused on achieving the key features
of natural photosynthesis; solar absorption and electron transfer through
charge separation. While there are excellent examples of engineered mate-
rials capable of increasing efficiency through suppressed recombination,
increased charge separation and the presence of separated active site, there
remain a limited number of single catalysts capable of achieving this as a
result of solar excitation.
In the field of photocatalytic H2 O splitting, compounds with a vacant
d orbital (d0 ) and filled d orbital (d10 ) have been shown to be effective.26–31
Specifically titantes, tantalates, niobates, vanadates and tungstanates with
d0 electronic configurations have been extensively researched along with
metal oxides and nitrides with a d10 configuration.26,27 The majority
of these catalysts have shown increased efficiency as a result of crystal
structure and bandgap engineering. Efficient catalyst structures for H2 O
oxidation have included anatase, perovskite, layered structure, tunnel struc-
ture and cubic pyrochlore and within this a varied range of novel catalyst
materials have been published. Despite the difference in crystal phase and
chemical composition, the efficiency of these catalysts is often dependent on
the presence of a metal oxide corner unit in the structure.32 The incorpo-
ration of an MO6 and MO4 (M = transition/typical metal) octahedral and
tetrahedral unit and moreover, the distortion, metal cation and the ratio of
corner units present, lead to increased mobility and separation of charged
particles.33–35 The result is increased activity towards stoichiometric evolu-
tion of H2 and O2 . The increased mobility is a result of the catalysts high
electrochemical conductivity, allowing charged particles to reach an active
site located on the catalyst surface.36
Research published by Inoue27 and Sato et al.33 also showed that
the dipole moment could indicate the level of M–O–M bond distortion
and found that non-active catalysts had a dipole moment of 0 and were
distortion free. Inoue27 suggested that the length of metal-oxygen bonds
impacts photoexcitation. The poor symmetry formed as a result of distorted
Table 1: Increased H2 O splitting over catalysts with a distorted structure and metal
cation corner unit.
Distortion Activity (µmol hr−1 )
M–O–M Dipole
Catalyst Corner unit angle (◦ C) moment (D) H2 O2 Refs.
MgGa2 O4 GaO6 — 0 ∼0.8 0 27

SrGa2 O4 GaO4 — 0.8, 1.2 ∼7.5 ∼3.5 27
BaGa2 O4 GaO4 — 1.7, 1.1, 2.58 ∼3.5 ∼2 27
SbNbO4 NbO6 150 — 2.5 — 33
SbTaO4 TaO6 130 — 5.8 — 33
Y2 TiO2 TiO6 — — 850 420 26
Gd2 Ti2 O7 TiO6 — — 400 198 26
La2 TiO7 TiO6 — — 307 152 26
La3 TaO7 TaO6 — — 4 0 26
Gd3 TaO7 TaO6 /GdO6 — — 2 0 26
Y3 TaO7 TaO8 — — Trace 0 26
octahedral and tetrahedral structures results in isolated orbitals, which

gives rise to different photoexcitation efficiencies. Inoue also suggested that
the local internal fields of the compounds, as a result of the dipole moment,
could increase electron–hole separation and suppress recombination.
For the convenience of the reader, Table 1 shows a selection of catalysts
that highlight the increased activity resulting from the presence of metal
cation corner units and structure distortion.
While discussing photocatalysis, it is noteworthy to cover catalysts
which are capable of both H2 O oxidation and CO2 reduction with a view
towards solar excitation. The development of such a catalyst would be a
significant step towards the aims of APS. While a number of H2 O oxida-
tion and CO2 reduction catalysts have been reported separately, there are
very few examples of a single catalyst capable of facilitating both reactions.
This is primarily due to the significant challenges faced by a single photo-
catalyst, namely suitable band positioning, reaction competition and CO2
solubility. Moreover, there is the added challenge of conducting this reac-
tion under solar irradiation for use in APS. To date only two catalysts have
been reported to achieve this under UV irradiation. Sayama and Arakawa
in 199337 showed that with ZrO2 , H2 , O2 , and CO were generated at rates
of 19.5, 10.8, and 2.5 µmol h−1 respectively while BaLa4 TiO15 produced
H2 , O2 , CO, and HCOOH at rates of 10, 7, 4.3, and 0.3 µmol h−1 . Sayama
and Arakawa37 suggested that the highly negative flat-band potential of
ZrO2 coupled with the wide band gap increased the activity. There are
obvious limitations to both these systems beyond the low yield of products,
including large band gaps between 4 and 5 eV which are not suitable for
solar excitation and the presence of NaHCO3 additives.
In 2011, a communication in the Journal of the American Chemi-
cal Society (JACS) from Cao et al.38 detailed the potential of carbon
nanoparticles for CO2 reduction and H2 generation. Functionalized car-
bon nanoparticles coated with either Ag or Pt showed absorption within
the solar spectrum with a distinct peak at 550 nm. Using Ag-coated nano
particles and under visible irradiation (425–720 nm), CO2 reduction was
achieved forming formic acid with a quantum yield of ∼0.3%. In a separate
experiment (with no CO2 present), Pt coated nanoparticles were found to
be active for H2 generation, although no H2 quantification had been done
at the time of the publication.
Recently one of the most promising single catalysts to be developed
for potential applications in APS is KTaO3 ‘nanoflakes’.39 The authors
reported both the oxidation of H2 O and reduction of CO2 simultaneously,
with the corresponding products of O2 , H2 , and CO detected in a sys-
tem that contained no electron donor (other than H2 O) and no electrical
bias. The authors found that particle size and morphology were critical
to photoactivity and specifically product selectivity. These factors were
controlled through three synthesis routes including the solid-state reaction
(SS-KTO), solvothermal methods in hexane–water (Hex-KTO) and pure
ethanol (Eth-KTO). This catalyst, while still primarily requiring UV exci-
tation, addresses a number of the key challenges faced in this field. Firstly,
potassium tantalate possesses desirable band potentials for the reactions
with a bottom CB edge at −0.7 eV and top VB edge at 2.9 eV versus NHE
at pH 0, giving a band gap of 3.6 eV. This provides a balance between util-
ising a minor proportion of solar photons, while maintaining the potential
required for H2 O oxidation and CO2 reduction in the absence of a sacri-
ficial electron donor. Secondly, proton reduction is the major competing
reaction to CO2 /CO conversion. Proton reduction, while proceeding in a
similar reaction mechanism to CO2 reduction, is a more favorable reac-
tion due to the redox energies involved; −0.41 V versus NHE at pH 7 for
H2 /H2 O, while −0.51 V versus NHE at pH 7 for CO/CO2 . Moreover, the
localized concentration of H2 O molecules is high in comparison to CO2 as a
result of low CO2 solubility. Previously, Handoko and Tang40 demonstrated
that altering the facet of Cu2 O modified product selectivity. The low index
facet {100} was found to exhibit higher CO2 reduction activity over that of
high index facets {111} due to the presence of active sites that favor CO2
reduction. In their more recent work, Li and colleagues39 found loading a

co-catalyst (Ag) introduced CO2 favorable reduction sites, while prevent-
ing recombination. The results indicated that in the presence of Ag-KTaO3,
CO2 reduction doubled with a decrease in H2 also noted.
3.2.2 Z-scheme photocatalysts

The alternative approach to a single catalyst mechanism is the Z-scheme
system which is capable of mimicking photosynthesis more closely,41–44
Fig. 8. The presence of both an oxidizing and reducing catalyst means
the challenging requirements faced by a single catalyst are alleviated. This
dual catalyst approach allows the utilization of a wider range of visible light
materials as the change in Gibbs free energy required to drive each photo-
catalyst is reduced when compared to the one step system.31 In order for
this system to operate, an electron mediator is required. Typical mediators
that are reported include IO− 3 /I
−45
and Fe3+ /Fe2+ 46,47 which act as redox
shuttles to facilitate the reactions.
A number of Z-scheme systems have been reported in relation to H2 O
oxidation to generate the production of O2 and H2 under irradiation by
Fig. 8. Schematic representation of Z-scheme photocatalysis for artificial photosynthesis

(reproduced from Ref. 31, with kind permission of Springer).
UV and visible light; Sayama and colleagues reported the production of O2

and H2 over WO3 and Cr/Ta-SrTiO3 respectively using an iodate/iodide
redox couple under visible illumination.43,44 Using the electron mediator
Fe3+ /Fe2+ , the splitting of H2 O was also achieved under visible irradiation
using BiVO4 and Rh-SrTiO3 for O2 and H2 generation respectively.46 In
addition to solely utilizing Z-scheme for water splitting, the combined reduc-
tion of CO2 with this approach is now also being reported.48 Of particular
interest is the deployment of a ‘twin’ reactor that shows great potential for
APS.48–50 The twin reactor utilizes a modified Z-scheme approach, where
an oxidizing and reducing catalyst are located in two reactor compartments
separated by a nafion membrane (see Fig. 9). A number of papers have been
published which utilise this reactor for H2 O splitting due to the fact that
it allows for separate evolution of both O2 and H2 .49 For a more detailed
insight into membrane reactors, a number of designs for H2 production have
recently been reviewed by Molinari et al.48 More recently, a twin membrane
reactor was deployed for H2 O oxidation and CO2 reduction.50
In ‘compartment 1’, the oxidizing catalyst photocatalytically splits H2 O
to generate O2 and H+ in the presence of an electron mediator. The O2 can
be safely removed from the compartment while the H+ travels across the
Fig. 9. Schematic representation of ‘Z-scheme’ reactor for H2 O splitting and CO2 reduc-
tion (reproduced from Ref. 50, with kind permission of Elsevier).
membrane to ‘compartment 2’ to act as a source of H2 for the hydrogenation

of CO2 in the presence of a CO2 reducing catalyst. In compartment 2
products such as CO, CH4 , CH3 OH, and H2 can be generated. This Z-
scheme approach and reactor design have a number of advantages; separate
evolution streams of O2 and H2 are generated preventing any back reactions,
no ‘extra’ H2 is required to be injected into the system as H2 produced from
H2 O splitting can be used directly in CO2 hydrogenation and the removal
of O2 from the systems prevents any oxidation of hydrocarbon products.
Lee et al. recently found that the combination of Pt-CuGaAlO4 and Pt-
SrTiO3 :Rh for photo reduction along with WO3 for photo oxidation was
effective. The efficiency of the system was a result of increased H2 evolution
from Pt-SrTiO3 which further increased the photo reduction of CO2 over
Pt-CuGaAlO4 . The photocatalytic quantum efficiency (PQE) of the system
was calculated to be 0.0051%, which is still low in comparison to natural
photosynthesis. However, the authors concluded that with optimization of
the system, the PQE could be significantly increased.
3.2.3 Nanobiocatalytic assemblies

An interesting area of artificial photosynthesis is the application of
nanobiocatalytic assemblies to achieve an efficient system. While previous
approaches discussed are focused on a single key process e.g. photocatalysis,
nanobiocatalytic assemblies can be considered as a hybrid approach to APS
which often combines biocatalysis and photocatalysis. Such systems have
recently been reviewed by Kim et al.,8 in which a number of approaches
combine a range of biological and chemical processes. The key parameter
to be achieved in such a system is sufficient charge separation between key
components. In view of this, the following section briefly discusses key pub-
lications of nanobiocatalytic assemblies that have been developed to mimic
PS I and II.
3.2.3.1 Mimicking PS I
Primarily, both PS I and II are reaction centers which allow efficient elec-
tron transfer along an electron transport chain. Upon excitation in PS I,
photoexcited P700 will transfer electrons to ferredoxin which eventually is
picked up by NADP/NADPH. This process is conducted through a num-
ber of electron acceptors to enhance the rate of charge separation. The
fundamental step here is the initial excitation of P700 which allows for rapid
electron transfer. In order to mimic this, APS have investigated the coupling
of sensitisers to electron acceptors to encourage rapid transfer of charged

species. This has been achieved through a number of designs published in
the literature including; graphene based systems, CdS quantum dot-TiO2
nanotube arrays, synthetic woods and diphenylalanine self-assemblies.8
CdS quantum dot sensitized TiO2 nanotubes were investigated in 2011
by Ryu and colleagues who presented a number of interesting findings.51
Various scenarios were investigated including the use of Al2 O3 as nanotube
arrays and nanoparticle in place of nanotubes. Ryu et al. found that a high
electron–hole recombination rate resulted in CdS–Al2 O3 showing minimal
activity towards NADH regeneration. In contrast, under optimum condi-
tions CdS–TiO2 nanotubes achieved ∼50% NADH regeneration which Ryu
et al. proposed was due to rapid charge separation at the CdS–TiO2 inter-
face. Upon electron injection from CdS to TiO2 , electrons were transferred
to mediators, which acted as a redox cycle, resulting in NADH regener-
ation. In the CdS–Al2 O3 system, however, the injection of electrons into
the CB of Al2 O3 was suppressed due to the unfavorable thermodynam-
ics and thus recombination increased. Using a nanoparticle film in replace
of nanotubes showed a four-fold reduction in NADH regeneration. It was
found that the morphology and structure of nanotubes over nanoparticles
is optimal for electron collection and transfer. The rate of reaction species
diffusion through the nanotube assemblies was also proposed to be greater
than that of the nanoparticles, which would increase NADH regeneration.
Another study of particular interest is the one conducted by Yadav
et al.52 which deployed a graphene based photocatalyst coupled with an
enzyme in order to mimic photosynthesis. The electrochemical properties
of graphene are well known. However, there are two key features which make
it an excellent material for APS; a large surface area and high carrier mobil-
ity, which permits multiple electrons to be transported. Graphene, a single-
layered sheet of sp2 -bonded carbon atoms, was used in the form of graphene
oxide and coupled to multi-anthraquinone substituted porphyrin to demon-
strate excellent charge separation and mobility along with CO2 reduction
for the production of solar fuel. A major challenge in any photocatalyst–
biocatalyst system is the efficient harvesting of visible light that can trigger
electron transfer, resulting in the desired enzymatic reaction taking place.
Yadav et al. showed that graphene oxide is an excellent visible light catalyst
which allows for NADH regeneration, thus initiating the enzymatic reduc-
tion of CO2 to formic acid. The performance of the catalyst was measured
in comparison to a previous photocatalyst used by the same group, namely
W2 Fe4 Ta2 O17 . In relation to both yield of NADH and formic acid the
graphene-based system outperformed the previous catalyst; 45.54% NADH

yield and 110.55 µmol of formic acid in comparison to 14.50% NADH yield
and 14.25 µmol of formic acid for the W2 Fe4 Ta2 O17 system. The properties
of graphene allowed for increased electron movement along the photoexcited
chain which accelerated the NADH regeneration process. The authors also
concluded that the graphene acted as an electron reservoir, which aided in
the transport of multiple electrons.
3.2.3.2 Mimicking PS II
PS II is the initial stage in the electron transfer process in photosynthesis
and ultimately provides the electrons for the process to occur. The excita-
tion of electrons from light absorption initiates the transfer of electrons to
the first acceptors in the transport chain. Coupled with PS II is the oxy-
gen evolving center (OEC), which replenishes the loss of excited electrons
through the splitting of H2 O. As discussed previously the replication of
an OEC has been a focus point for many areas in an attempt to replicate
photosynthesis and generate H2 as a solar fuel. Efficient electron trans-
fer in this aspect of artificial photosynthesis is a key parameter as often
low quantum yields are reported as a result of charge species recombina-
tion occurring at a faster rate than the catalytic four-electron oxidation
of H2 O. This issue was addressed by Zhao and colleagues in their study
in 2012,53 focusing on DSSCs coupled with a biomimetic electron media-
tor. The electron transport assembly constructed by Zhao et al. included
the anchoring of benzimidazole-phenol (BIP) to IrO2 nanoparticles by 2-
carboxyethylphosponic acid (CEPA), which was then linked to a TiO2 pho-
toelectrode. The presence of the 3p-Ru dye linked to the TiO2 electrode
acted as the sensitiser. The purpose of BIP in this assembly was to mimic
the tyrosine–histidine pairing in the natural process. The PS II system has
two redox active amino acids, tyrosine and histidine, which aid the move-
ment of electrons and protons from the CaMn4 O5 catalyst in the OEC to
the photo excited electron P680. This process occurs through the deproto-
nation and protonation of the phenyl and imidazole groups of tyrosine and
histidine. In this instance, the BIP-IrO2 assembly accelerated the rate of
electron injection by increasing electron transfer between Ir (IV) and Ru
(III). The results showed that in the absence of the BIP mediator, the quan-
tum yield was less than half that of the BIP based system. Under optimum
conditions the system produced an internal quantum efficiency of ∼2.3%
under blue light.
An interesting approach to light harvesting and charge separation was

presented by Nam et al. in 201054 using a virus template assembly of
porphyrins. The use of biological material as a template or ‘scaffold’ is
advantageous due to pre-existing chemical bonds, electrostatic interactions
and precise nanoscale organization. Of particular interest as a scaffold are
viruses which posses a highly organized protein coat structure. Nam et al.
found that the M13 viruses were suitable for use in an APS, as the proteins
present in the coat are easily modified chemically. The research group chose
the porphyrins Zn(II) deuteroporphyrin IX 2,4-bis(ethylene glycol) (ZnD-
PEG) as the model pigment for light absorption and were conjugated to the
M13 virus coat via a carbodimide coupling reaction. Using inductively cou-
pled plasma-atomic emission spectrometry, it was found the between ∼1564
and 2900 porphyrins were conjugated per virus sample. The results indi-
cated that the photons absorbed by the pigments were transported through
long range dipole-dipole interactions and were quenched in trap sites that
were generated as a result of the pigment binding to the virus coat. Fur-
thermore, the group hypothesized that the insertion or deletion of amino
acids on the virus coat would alter the distance of interactions and could
further increase electron transport and thus energy transfer.
In another paper Nam et al.55 applied the virus templated system to
H2 O splitting, by the addition of a co-assembly on the M13 coat of zinc
pyrophyrins and IrO2 nanoparticle clusters. During their work, the group
found the turnover number increased to ∼796 for H2 O oxidation under
visible light. The incorporation of an immobilization matrix improved the
structural integrity of the nanoscale construct, producing not only a robust
light harvesting unit but a catalyst capable of being recycled.
3.3 Carbon Fixation

The ‘dark’ reactions that occur in photosynthesis result in the fixation of
CO2 from the atmosphere to produce a usable source of energy, C6 H12 O6 .
The driving force for this aspect of the process arises from H+ carried
by NADPH and an energy source produced by ATP via ATPase in the
‘light’ reactions. The reduction of CO2 can be broadly divided into hetero-
geneous and homogenous systems. In a similar approach to H2 O oxidation,
heterogeneous systems in APS are frequently photocatalytic based. How-
ever, despite significant advances in H2 O oxidation, the reduction of CO2
over single or dual system catalysts remains a great challenge in artificial
photosynthesis. CO2 reduction faces a number of challenges which limit
the overall conversion efficiency; the inability of photocatalyst materials to

absorb the visible portions of the solar spectrum, insufficient charge sepa-
ration, low solubility of CO2 in H2 O (∼33 µmol in 1 mL of H2 O at 100 kPa
and room temperature),56 CO2 back reactions and competitive H2 produc-
tion from H2 O. Furthermore, as a range of products are generated from
CO2 reduction, with a number of multi-electron steps, the kinetic problem
is significant.
In addition to the use of heterogeneous photocatalysts such as semicon-
ductor materials, the photocatalytic reduction of carbon dioxide has also
been achieved with a range of homogeneous photocatalysts. Some of the
most extensively researched materials derive from ruthenium or rhenium
bipyridyl complexes which act as either direct or indirect photosensitizers
for the photocatalytic reduction of carbon dioxide.
3.3.1 Heterogenous catalysts

Since Inoue et al.57 demonstrated the photoreduction of CO2 with various
catalysts using an electrical bias in 1979, a range of metal and mixed metal
oxides have been tried as catalysts.56–59 The mechanism of CO2 reduction
by heterogenous catalysis was discussed by Eggins et al. in 199860 and is
summarized in Figs. 10 and 11. The one electron step (Fig. 10) involves
the formation of a CO2 radical anion that is capable of undergoing dispro-
portionation, protonation and dimerization to produce CO, carbonate and
oxalate respectively.
The 2 electron mechanism (Fig. 11) demonstrates the additional prod-
ucts formed from further reduction of oxalate. These products include gly-
oxylate, glycolate, tartrate and malate.
The three crystal phases of Ti-based materials, anatase, brookite and
rutile, have received considerable interest. Work conducted by Liu et al.61
Fig. 10. Scheme showing the 1 electron CO2 reduction mechanism (reproduced from
Ref. 60, with kind permission of Elsevier).
Fig. 11. Scheme showing the 2 electron CO2 reduction mechanism (reproduced from
Ref. 60, with kind permission of Elsevier).
concluded that the brookite phase of TiO2 showed the highest activity
of CO2 reduction to CO and CH4 . In comparison, anatase showed mini-
mal activity. However, anatase possessed a far more suitable band gap for
visible light excitation. The most promising material was the mixed-phase
TiO2 which showed desirable properties for artificial photosynthesis; namely
increased visible light harvesting and CO2 reduction potential along with
increased charge separation as a result of the rutile-anatase junction.
The deposition of a co-catalyst on a Ti-based catalyst has also showed
both increased levels of CO2 reduction along with product selectivity. A
range of co-catalysts have been reported including Ag, Au, and Pt,56,62,63
which are primarily deployed as a method for suppressing electron-hole
recombination. Zhang et al. along with Vijayan and colleagues both demon-
strated the impact of Pt on titania nanotubes (TNT) for use within visi-
ble light photocatalysts. Recently, Collado et al.64 described the synergetic
effect of Ag nanoparticles deposited onto TiO2 for CO2 reduction. The sys-
tem used water vapour as an electron donor and found that upon the bare
catalyst surface only CO and H2 were produced, while CO, H2 and a series
of short chain hydrocarbons were formed by the addition of Ag nanoparti-
cles. Under optimum conditions CH4 , C2 H6 , C3 H8 , and C3 H6 were formed
as a result of photo-excited electrons being injected into Ag particles on
the catalyst surface. The increased hydrocarbon production was the result
of the scavenging properties of Ag which prevented electron–hole recombi-
nation. Furthermore, the authors found that the coupling of TiO2 and Ag
shifts the apparent Fermi level, making the catalyst more reductive. The
catalyst also showed a favored approach to the multi-electron mechanism
for hydrocarbon formation, which is likely a result of the initially produced

CO and H2 forming –CH2 – species that become building blocks for the fur-
ther hydrocarbon chain formation. A similar observation was discussed by
Ohno et al.65 when using a hybrid composition of g–C3 N4 and WO3 that
also used Ag as a co-catalyst.
A favorable approach to Ti based catalysts is the construction of TNT,
due to the large surface area, reduced grain boundaries and facile charge
transport paths of 1D nanomaterials.66,67 The use of TNT can also increase
the adsorption of CO2 which is a major limiting factor in CO2 reduction.
Pt loaded TNT was found to increase CO2 adsorption ability as a result of
the synergetic effect of tubular morphology and mixed-valence states from
the Pt.68 TNT has also shown activity towards visible light harvesting as a
result of increasing annealing temperature. Upon increasing the annealing
temperature from 550 to 680◦C, the rate of CH4 production increased from
0.26 to 0.79 µmol m−2 hr−1 respectively. Varghese et al.69 also showed visi-
ble light activation of TNTs under solar irradiation, as a result of N-doping.
The results of the reduction, which produced a range of hydrocarbons, con-
cluded that the presence of both Pt and Cu on the TNT surface was required
to produce the optimum rate of 111 ppm cm−2 h−1 . N-doped mesoporous
TiO2 was also found to be active under visible light when loaded with noble
metals such as Pt, Au and Ag. The higher work function of Pt, which facil-
itated the transfer of electrons from TiO2 to Pt particles, generated a CH4
yield of 2.9 µmol m−2 h−1 .
The search for a photocatalyst that posses a suitable band gap for vis-
ible and solar light harvesting is challenging, as the majority of catalysts
which meet this criteria are unstable. Examples include CdS (2.5 eV) and
Cu2 O (2.14 eV), both of which are subject to photocorrosion as a result of
oxidation and reduction by the photogenerated charge carriers. The pro-
duction of hydrocarbons from these photocatalysts has been found to reach
maximum concentrations after a short time period and then decline due
to the decreasing stability of the catalyst. Despite attempts to introduce
a protective heterostructure layer to these catalysts using Al-doped ZnO,
TiO2 and RuO2 , the practical applications of using such catalysts in APS
are limited.
A small number of non-Ti based visible light activated catalysts have
also been reported to be photoactive; namely BiVO4 , LaCoO3 , InTaO4 ,
and N-doped Ta2 O5 . Jia et al.70 reported a maximum yield of 19 and 128
µmol g−1 h−1 for formaldehyde and formic acid respectively over C and Fe
co-doped LaCoO3, under irradiation from a 125 W Xe lamp equipped with
a 400 nm cut off filter. While a number of authors report the formation

of CO and hydrocarbon products using these catalysts, it is often in the
presence of an electron donor, which in itself presents a potential issue. It is
favorable to use alcohols as hole scavengers, due to their ability to extract
the photoinduced holes. Subsequently, however, the scavengers may oxi-
dise themselves into CO2 , CO and other hydrocarbon products. Therefore,
the formation and origin of photocatalytic products in these reactions is
debatable.
An interesting bio-photocatalytic approach to CO2 photoreduction is
the coupling of dye sensitised TO2 particles to a CO2 reducing enzyme.71
The CO2 reducing enzyme CODH I from the anaerobic microbe Carboxy-
dothermus hydrogenoformans (Ch) was selected due to its unique Ni4 Fe–4S
active site which is capable of catalysing CO2 in both directions (oxida-
tion and reduction). The RuP sensitized TiO2 nanoparticles functional-
ized with Ch CODH I were capable of generating CO from CO2 using a
two electron mechanism which is more thermodynamically favorable (E =
−0.46 V versus SHE at pH 6) than the one electron radical mechanism (E
= −1.90 V versus SHE). Under visible light (cut off filter at 420 nm) the
system produced ∼5 µmol of CO after 4 h irradiation. Experiments con-
ducted under solar irradiation also generated promising results, with CO
production reaching ∼60% of the system under artificial visible light. The
movement and injection of electrons from one component to another in this
system suppressed recombination and ensured sufficient charge separation
which is fundamental for CO2 reduction to occur.
Previously mentioned in this chapter was the growing focus on
graphene-based compounds for use in artificial photosynthesis assemblies.
The attractive properties of graphene such as accelerated electron trans-
fer and suitability for solar absorption make it a viable option for photo-
catalytic CO2 reduction. The increased electron mobility increases charge
separation, which increases the chances of trapping electrons at active sites
allowing for maximum interaction with CO2 . Robust hollow spheres with
alternating ultrathin sheets of titania (Ti0.91 O2 ) and graphene were devel-
oped by Tu et al.72 In comparison to TiO2 and P25, a nine-fold improve-
ment in CO2 reduction (transformation to CO and CH4 ) was recorded
for G-Ti0.91 O2 which is due to a number of properties. These include the
rapid movement of charge carriers across the nanosheet structures along
with injection into the graphene to increase charged species lifetime which
in turn facilitates their participation in the CO2 reduction mechanism.
Furthermore, the authors also stated that the hollow spheres may act as
‘photon trap-wells’ that encourages the multiple-scattering of incident light

to increase absorption. Graphene-TiO2 thin films were synthesised for the
reduction of CO2 to CH4 in H2 O by Liang et al.,73 and showed a seven-fold
improvement over bare TiO2 films under visible light illumination.
3.3.2 Homogenous catalysts

There has been an extensive amount of research on the application of a num-
ber of homogeneous photocatalysts for conversion of CO2 to potential fuel
products. These fall into two main categories; the type I catalysts in which a
dye such as a ruthenium bipyridine compound absorbs light and accepts an
electron from a SED such as triethanolamine (Scheme 1). The reduced dye
transfers an electron to a catalyst material that then reduces the CO2 to
subsequent products including carbon monoxide, methanol, formaldehyde
and methane. With the type II mechanism on photoexcitation the sensitiser
again reacts with a SED but this time the reduced photosensitiser directly
transfers the electron to CO2 (Scheme 2).74
PS + hν → PS∗
PS∗ + SED → PS−
PS− + Cat → PS + Cat−
Cat− + CO2 → Cat + CO.−
2 → Products
Scheme 1 — Type I Mechanism
PS + hν → PS∗
PS∗ + SED → PS−
PS− + CO2 → CO.−
2 → Products
Scheme 2 — Type II Mechanism
The use of Rh bipyridyl complex as a photosensitizers and C0 (II) ions as

catalysts for the reduction of CO2 to CO under visible light irradiation in
acetonitrile was reported by Hawecker et al. in 1983.75 They also reported
the use of a Re (bipy)(CO)3 X (where X = halide) systems as a so called
“single component” photosensitizer and catalyst system for the reduction
of CO2 to CO. The latter system was demonstrated to have a high level of
selectivity for CO production over H2 generation, with virtually no hydro-
gen being detected.
Matsuoka et al.76 reported the reduction of CO2 to CO, HCO− 2 and H2

using electron mediation of cobalt macro cycle complexes, such as Cyclam,
with p-Terphenyl photocatalysts in methanolic acetonitrile in the presence
of tertiary amine SED. Under UV irradiation at 313 nm a maximum yield of
24 µmol of CO was obtained after 1 h reaction time using triethylamine as
the SED. The effect of seven different amines as SEDs on the product yield
was investigated. It was found that different amines as SEDs had a marked
effect on the CO yield with 63 µmol of CO being generated when Tri-2-
propanolamine was employed compared to 21 µmol of CO being generated
in the presence of a Tri-n-butylamine electron donor.76
The use of cobalt-cyclam complexes as catalysts for carbon dioxide
reduction has also been reported by Ogata et al.77 They described the
use of this complex in combination with a phenazine photosenstizers and
also generated CO, HCO− 2 and H2 as photoreduction products. In each
−
case HCO2 was the predominant photoproduct with up to 28 µmol being
generated compared to 1.6 and 0.15 µmol of CO and H2 respectively being
produced using a 2-ethylphenazine photocatalyst under UV irradiation at
313 nm.77
p-Terphenyl has also been used as a photosensitizer with cobalt corrin
catalysts for CO2 reduction. In the presence of a triethylamine SED, cobi-
namide produced an initial rate of formation of 0.48 and 0.30 µmol L−1 h−1
of CO and H2 respectively in a 9/1 MeCN/MeOH solvent. In this case the
rate of CO production was over 10 times higher than that obtained when
cobalt tetra-m-tolylporphyrin was used as a catalyst.78
The photocatalytic reduction of CO2 to CO in a high pressure system
has been reported by Hori et al.79 using a Rhenium bipyridyl complex.
When CO2 was irradiated for 24 h in the presence of [fac-Re (bpy)(CO)3 P
(Oi Pr)3 ]+ at 1.36 MPa in a DMF/triethanolamine solvent, 348.3 µmol of
CO were generated compared to 90.5 µmol CO at a pressure of 0.1 MPa.
It was proposed that at higher pressures there was a greater dissolution of
CO2 into the solvent which increased the likelihood of an interaction with
the catalyst.79
The utilization of supramolecular photocatalysts based on Ru/Re bin-
uclear complexes combined with a 1,3-bis(4 -methyl-[2,2 ]bipyridinyl-4-yl0-
propan-2-ol (or bpyC3bpy for short) bridging ligand were reported to
demonstrate a high level of efficiency for the reduction of CO2 under visible
light >500 nm. Using a [Ru-ReP(OEt)3 ]3+ photocatalyst a quantum yield
of 0.21 and turnover number of 232 was obtained for the photoreduction of
CO2 to CO.80
4 Artificial Photosynthesis Institutes

The drive to establish an artificial photosynthetic system has led to the
development of dedicated institutes which conduct research into various
aspects of APS. Two such institutes highlighted in this chapter are the
Swedish consortium for artificial photosynthesis and the JCAP.
4.1 Swedish Consortium for Artificial Photosynthesis

The Swedish Consortium for Artificial Photosynthesis was established
in 1994 and over the past 20 years has conducted research into a
broad range of fields including; molecular biology, biophysics, biochemistry
along with organometallic and physical chemistry. The objective of the
multi-disciplinary institute is the development of alternative fuels (H2 and
hydrocarbon based fuels) from solar energy via two approaches; artificial
photosynthesis and photobiological systems.
Of particular interest within this consortium is the work conducted
into charge separation through the development of an accumulative elec-
tron transfer81 and a proton-coupled system.82 Karlsson and colleagues81
addressed the significant challenge of combining the initial photo adsorption
process that generates a single electron–hole pair with the multi-electron
steps involved with H2 O splitting and fuel production. Their method of
charge accumulation was based around the coupling of a dye to TiO2 nano
particles; oligo(triarylamine)ruthenium(II) polypyridine anchored to TiO2
(OTARu-TiO2 ). The regenerative molecular system was capable of absorb-
ing two photons for the production of two electron hole pairs. This attribute
allows for a high yield accumulation of redox equivalents in a single linked
system.
4.2 Joint Centre for Artificial Photosynthesis (JCAP)

JCAP is a dedicated research institute with the goal of developing cost-
effective technology for solar fuel generation. The institute was established
in 2010 as an Energy Innovation Hub under the U.S. Department of Energy
(DOE) with a view towards utilizing only natural light, H2 O and CO2 to
produce a sustainable fuel. The group has dedicated research into light
capture and conversion, heterogenous and molecular catalysis, molecular
and nanoscale interfaces along with membrane and mesoscale assembly.
Furthermore, while the majority of work conducted in this field is on a
small lab scale, JCAP are also actively researching the potential scale up
and prototyping of APS.
The volume of research and published output by JCAP is extensive and

covers a broad range within artificial photosynthesis. The work conducted
by Nate Lewis and his group at CalTech continues to be at the forefront of
APS technology. Recent noteworthy publications include the use of cobalt
complexes for electrocatalytic CO2 reduction83 stabilization of semicon-
ductor photoanodes for H2 O oxidation84 and the catalytic engineering of
ZnSnx Ge1−x N2 from 2.0 to 3.1 eV.85 Nitride based catalysts have received
a great deal of interest in both H2 O splitting and APS due to the desir-
able band structure they posses which is favorable towards solar photon
absorption.20–24
Of particular interest was the use of Si, GaAs and GaP as photoanodes
by Hu et al.84 These catalysts typically have a more favorable Ebg and
VB potential than metal oxides for solar activated H2 O oxidation. How-
ever, they are susceptible to photo corrosion which limits their use. Hu and
colleagues grew TiO2 coatings by atomic layer deposition that not only sta-
bilized these compounds but created electronic defects that increased hole
conduction thus preventing recombination.
5 Future Outlook and Challenges

This chapter has attempted to provide a concise overview of artificial pho-
tosynthesis and the recent developments made in the field. Upon review,
it is clear that while significant progress has been made in key areas such
as light harvesting, charge separation and nanoscale system construction,
there remain a number of crucial challenges yet to be overcome.
Challenges faced by research groups in this field include the develop-
ment of robust light harvesting constructions, synthesis of efficient H2 O
splitting catalysts and electron mediators along with improved CO2 reduc-
ing catalysts. The efficiency of photosynthesis is credited to a number of
processes but the photoexcited chain which carries electrons is key and must
not be overlooked in artificial systems. Improving H2 O splitting to ensure a
supply of electrons into PS II along with preventing recombination through
efficient electron mediators and acceptors will drastically improve the over-
all performance of APS.
In the view of the authors an area which shows high potential is that
of nanobiocatalytic research and the combination of biological and chem-
ical processes. The requirements to achieve a reproducible photosynthetic
system over a single compound are too demanding and therefore hybrid sys-
tems present a potentially more energy efficient system. This is mirrored
by the work from institutes such as JCAP and the Swedish Consortium for
Artificial Photosynthesis where the coupling of regenerative photosensitiz-

ers to catalysts that can increase charge separation can be achieved.
References
1. A. C. Benniston and A. Harriman, Artificial photosynthesis, Materials Today
11(12) (2008), pp. 26–34.
2. T. J. Meyer, Chemical approaches to artificial photosynthesis, Acc. Chem.
Res. 22(5) (1989), pp. 163–170.
3. D. Gust, T. A. Moore and A. L. Moore, Solar fuels via artificial photosyn-
thesis, Acc. Chem. Res. 42 (2009), pp. 1890–1898.
4. N. S. Lewis and N. D. Nocera, Powering the planet: Chemical challenges in
solar Energy utilization, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 103 (2006), pp. 15729–
15735.
5. K. Arifin, E. H. Majlan, W. R. W. Daud and M. B. Kassim, Bimetallic
complexes in artificial photosynthesis for hydrogen production: A review, Int.
J. Hydrogen Energ. 37 (2012), pp. 3066–3087.
6. M. Lee, J. H. Kim, S. H. Lee, S. H. Lee and C. B. Park, Biomimetic artificial
Photosynthesis by light-harvesting synthetic wood, ChemSusChem. 4 (2011),
pp. 581–586.
7. A. Magnuson, M. Anderlund, O. Johansson, P. Lindblad, R. Lomoth, T.
Polivka, S. Ott, K. Stensjo, S. Styring, V. Sundstrom and L. Hammarstrom,
Biomimetic and Microbial approaches to solar fuel generation, Acc. Chem.
Res. 42(12) (2009), pp. 1899–1909.
8. J. H. Kim, D. H. Nam and C. B. Park, Nanobiocatalytic assemblies for arti-
ficial photosynthesis, Curr. Opin. Biotechnol. 28 (2014), pp. 1–9.
9. K. N. Ferreira, T. M. Iverson, K. Maghlaoui, J. Barber and S. Iwata, Architec-
ture of the photosynthetic oxygen-evolving center, Science 303(5665) (2004),
pp. 1831–1838.
10. K. Kalyanasundaram and M. Graetzel, Artificial photosynthesis: Biomimetic
Approaches to solar energy conversion and storage, Curr. Opin. Biotechnol.
21(3) (2010), pp. 298–310.
11. D. G. Nocera, The artificial leaf, Acc. Chem. Res. 45(5) (2012), pp. 767–776.
12. B. Basheer, D. Mathew, B. K. George and C. P. Reghunadhan Nair, An
overview on the spectrum of sensitizers: The heart of dye sensitized solar
cells, Solar Energ. 108 (2014), pp. 479–507.
13. B. O’regan and M. Gratzel, A low-cost, high-efficiency solar cell based on
Dye-sensitized colloidal TiO2 films, Nature 353(6346) (1991), pp. 737–740.
14. A. Kay and M. Graetzel, Artificial photosynthesis. 1. Photosensitization of
Titania solar cells with chlorophyll derivatives and related natural porphyrins,
J. Phys. Chem. 97(23) (1993), pp. 6272–6277.
15. W. M. Campbell, K. W. Jolley, P. Wagner, K. Wagner, P. J. Walsh, K. C.
Gordon, L. Schmidt-Mende, M. K. Nazeeruddin, Q. Wang, M. Grätzel and D.
L. Officer, Highly efficient porphyrin sensitizers for dye-sensitized solar cells,
J. Phys. Chem. C 111(32) (2007), pp. 11760–11762.
16. J. Lagref, M. K. Nazeeruddin and M. Grätzel, Artificial photosynthesis based

on dye-sensitized nanocrystalline TiO2 solar cells, Inorg. Chim. Acta 361(3)
(2008), pp. 735–745.
17. H. Zhou, L. Wu, Y. Gao and T. Ma, Dye-sensitized solar cells using 20 Nat-
ural dyes as sensitizers, J. Photochem. Photobio. Chem. 219(2–3) (2011),
pp. 188–194.
18. H. Hug, M. Bader, P. Mair and T. Glatzel, Biophotovoltaics: Natural pig-
ments in dye-sensitized solar cells, Appl. Energ. 115 (2014), pp. 216–225.
19. S. K. Park and Y. S. Han, Efficient dye-sensitized solar cells with Surface-
modified photoelectrodes, Solar Energ. 110 (2014), pp. 260–267.
20. K. Maeda, K. Teramura, N. Saito, Y. Inoue and K. Domen, Improvement of
Photocatalytic activity of (Ga1−xZnx)(N1−xOx) solid solution for overall
water Splitting by co-loading CR and another transition metal, J. Catalysis
243(2) (2006), pp. 303–308.
21. K. Maeda, T. Takata, M. Hara, N. Saito, Y. Inoue, H. Kobayashi and
K. Domen, GaN:ZnO solid solution as a photocatalyst for visible light driven
overall water splittin, J. Am. Chem. Soc. 127 (2005), pp. 8286–8287.
22. K. Maeda, K. Teramura, T. Takata, M. Hara, N. Saito, K. Toda, Y. Inoue,
H. Kobayashi and K. Domen, Overall water splitting on (Ga1-xZnx)(N1-xOx)
solid Solution photocatalyst: Relationship between physical properties and
Photocatalytic activity, J. Phys. Chem. B 109(43) (2005), pp. 20504–20510.
23. M. Yoshida, K. Maeda, D. Lu, J. Kubota and K. Domen, Lanthanoid oxide
layers on rhodium-loaded (Ga1-xZnx)(N1-xOx) photocatalyst as a modifier
for overall water splitting under visible-light irradiation, J. Phys. Chem. C
17 (2013), pp. 14000–14006.
24. K. Lee, B. Tienes, M. Wilker, K. Schnitzebaumer and G. Dukovic, (Ga1-
xZnx)(N1-xOx) nanocrystals: Visible absorbers with tunable composition
and Absorption spectra, Am. Chem. Soc. Nano Lett. 12 (2012), pp. 3268–
3272.
25. A. Fujishima and K. Honda, Lectrochemical photolysis of water at a semi-
conductor electrode, Nature 238 (1972), pp. 37–38.
26. A. Kudo and Y. Miseki, Heterogeneous photocatalyst materials for water
splitting, Roy. Soc. Chem. 38 (2009), pp. 253–278.
27. Y. Inoue, Photocatalytic water splitting by RuO2-loaded metal oxides and
nitrides with d0- and d10-related electronic configurations, Energy Environ-
mental Science 2 (2009), pp. 364–386.
28. Y. Moriya, T. Takata and K. Domen, Recent progress in the development of
(oxy)nitride photocatalysts for water splitting under visible-light irradiation,
Coord. Chem. Rev. 257(13–14) (2013), pp. 1957–1969.
29. K. Maeda, Photocatalytic water splitting using semiconductor particles: His-
tory and recent developments, J. Photochem. Photobio. C 12(4) (2011),
pp. 237–268.
30. R. Abe, Recent progress on photocatalytic and photoelectrochemical water
Splitting under visible light irradiation, J. Photochem. Photobio. C 11(4)
(2010), pp. 179–209.
31. N. Skillen, C. McCullagh and M. Adams, Photocatalytic Splitting of Water

(Springer, Berlin-Heidelberg, 2014), pp. 1–42.
32. R. Abe, M. Higashi, K. Sayama, Y. Abe and H. Sugihara, Photocatalytic
activity of R3MO7 and R2Ti2O7 (R = Y, Gd, La; M = Nb, Ta) for water
splitting into H2 and O2, J. Phys. Chem. B 110(5) (2006), pp. 2219–2226.
33. J. Sato, N. Saito, H. Nishiyama and Y. Inoue, Photocatalytic water decompo-
sition by RuO2-loaded antimonates, M2Sb2O7 (M = Ca, Sr), CaSb2O6 and
NaSbO3, with d10 configuration, J. Photochem. Photobio. 148(1–3) (2002),
pp. 85–89.
34. S. H. Kim, S. Park, C. W. Lee, B. S. Han, S. W. Seo, J. S. Kim, I. S. Cho and
K. S. Hong, Photophysical and photocatalytic water splitting performance
of Stibiotantalite type-structure compounds, SbMO4 (M = NB, Ta), Int. J.
Hydrog. Energ. 37(22) (2012), pp. 16895–16902.
35. H. Kato and A. Kudo, Photocatalytic water splitting into H2 and O2 over
various tantalate photocatalysts, Catalysis Today 78 (2003), pp. 561–569.
36. C. Zheng and A. West, Compound and solid-solution formation, phase equi-
libria and electrical properties in the ceramic system ZrO2-La2O3-Ta2O5, J.
Mater. Chem. 1(2) (1991), pp. 163–167.
37. K. Sayama and H. Arakawa, Photocatalytic decomposition of water and pho-
tocatalytic reduction of carbon dioxide over zirconia catalyst, J. Phys. Chem.
97(3) (1993), pp. 531–533.
38. L. Cao, S. Sahu, P. Anil Kumar, C. E. Bunker, J. Xu, K. A. S. Fernando, P.
Wang, E. A. Guliants, K. N. Tackett and Y. Sun, Carbon nanoparticles as
visible-light photocatalysts for efficient CO2 conversion and beyond, J. Am.
Chem. Soc. 133(13) (2011), pp. 4754–4757.
39. K. Li, A. D. Handoko, M. Khraisheh and J. Tang, Photocatalytic reduction of
CO2 and protons using water as an electron donor over potassium tantalate
nanoflakes, Nanoscale 6(16) (2014), pp. 9767–9773.
40. A. D. Handoko and J. Tang, Controllable proton and CO2 photoreduction
over Cu2O with various morphologies, Int. J. Hydrog. Energ. 38(29) (2013),
pp. 13017–13022.
41. A. J. Bard, Photoelectrochemistry and heterogenous photocatalysis at Semi-
conductors, J. Photochem. Photobio. 11 (1979), pp. 59–75.
42. R. Abe, K. Sayama, K. Domen and H. Arakawa, A new type of water splitting
system composed of two different TiO2 photocatalysts (anatase, rutile) and
a IO−3 /I
−
shuttle redox mediator, Chem. Phys. Lett. 344(3) (2001), pp. 339–
344.
43. K. Sayama, K. Mukasa, R. Abe, Y. Abe and H. Arakawa, A new photo-
catalytic water splitting system under visible light irradiation mimicking a
Z-scheme Mechanism in photosynthesis, J. Photochem. Photobio. 148(1–3)
(2002), pp. 71–77.
44. K. Sayama, K. Mukasa, R. Abe, Y. Abe and H. Arakawa, Stoichiometric
water Splitting into H2 and O2 using a mixture of two different photocatalysts
and an IO3-/I- shuttle redox mediator under visible light irradiation, Chem.
Commun. 7(23) (2001), pp. 2416–2417.
45. R. Abe, T. Takata, H. Sugihara and K. Domen, Photocatalytic overallwater

splitting under visible light by taon and WO3 with an IO3-/I- shuttle redox
mediator, Chem. Commun. (2005), pp. 3829–3831.
46. H. Kato, Y. Sasaki, A. Iwase and A. Kudo, Role of iron ion electron Mediator
on photocatalytic overall water splitting under visible light irradiation Using
Z-scheme systems, Chem. Soc. J. 80(12) (2007), pp. 2457–2464.
47. Y. Sakata, Y. Matsuda, T. Yanagida, K. Hirata, H. Imamura and K. Ter-
amura, Effect of metal ion addition in a Ni supported Ga2O3 photocata-
lyst on the photocatalytic overall splitting of H2O, Catal. Lett. 125 (2008),
pp. 22–26.
48. R. Molinari, T. Marino and P. Argurio, Photocatalytic membrane reactors for
hydrogen production from water, Int. J. Hydrog. Energ. 39 (2014), pp. 7247–
7261.
49. S.-C. Yu and C.-W. Huang, C.-H. Liao, J. C. S. Wu, S.-T. Chang, K.-H.
Chen, A novel membrane reactor for separating hydrogen and oxygen in pho-
tocatalytic water splitting, J. Membrane Sci. 382 (2011), pp. 291–299.
50. W. Lee, C. Liao, M. Tsai, C. Huang and J. C. S. Wu, A novel twin reactor
For CO2 photoreduction to mimic artificial photosynthesis, Appl. Catal. B
132–133 (2013), pp. 445–451.
51. J. Ryu, S. H. Lee, D. H. Nam and C. B. Park, Rational design and engineering
of Quantum-dot-sensitized TiO2 nanotube arrays for artificial photosynthesis,
Adv. Mater. 12 (2011), pp. 1883–1888.
52. R. K. Yadav, J. O. Baeg, G. H. Oh, N. J. Park, K. J. Kong, J. Kim, D. W.
Hwang, S. K. Biswas, A photocatalyst-enzyme coupled artificial photosyn-
thesis system for solar energy in production of formic acid from CO2, J. Am.
Chem. Soc. 134 (2012), pp. 11455–11461.
53. Y. Zhao, J. R. Swierk, J. R. J. D. Megiatto, B. Sherman, W. J. Youngblood,
D. Qin, D. M. Lentz, A. L. Moore, T. A. Moore, D. Gust, T. E. Mallouk,
Improving the efficiency of water splitting in dye-sensitised solar cells by using
biometric electron transfer mediator, PNAS 109(39) (2012), pp. 15612–15616.
54. Y. S. Nam, T. Shin, H. Park, A. P. Magyar, K. Choi, G. Fantner, K. A.
Nelson and A. M. Belcher, Virus-templated assembly of porphyrins into light-
harvesting Nanoantennae, J. Am. Chem. Soc. 132 (2010), pp. 1462–1463.
55. Y. S. Nam, A. P. Magyar, D. Lee, J.-W. Kim, D. S. Yun, H. Park,
T. S. Pollom, D. A. Weitz and A. M. Belcher, Biologically templated pho-
tocatalytic nanostructures for sustained light-driven water oxidation, Nat.
Nanotechnol. 5 (2010), pp. 340–344.
56. K. Li, X. An, K. H. Park, M. Khraisheh and J. Tang, A critical review of
CO2 photoconversion: Catalysts and reactors, Catalysis Today 224 (2014),
pp. 3–12.
57. T. Inoue, A. Fujishima, S. Konishi and K. Honda, Photoelectrocatalytic
reduction of carbon dioxide in aqueous suspensions of Semiconductor pow-
ders, Nature 277 (1979), pp. 637–638.
58. S. Das and W. M. A. Wan Daud, Photocatalytic CO2 transformation into
fuel: A review on advances in photocatalyst and photoreactor, Renew. Sust.
Energ. Rev. 39 (2014), pp. 765–805.
59. M. Anpo, Photocatalytic reduction of CO2 with H2O on highly dispersed

Ti-oxide catalysts as a model of artificial photosynthesis, J. CO2 Utilization
1 (2013), pp. 8–17.
60. B. R. Eggins, P. K. J. Robertson, E. P. Murphy, E. Woods and J. T. S.
Irvine, Factors affecting the photoelectrochemical fixation of carbon dioxide
with semiconductor colloids, J. Photochem. Photobio. 118(1) (1998), pp. 31–
40.
61. L. Liu, H. Zhao, J. M. Andino and Y. Li, Photocatalytic CO2 reduction
with H2O on TiO2 nanocrystals: Comparison of anatase, rutile and brookite
polymorphs and exploration of surface chemistry, ACS Catalysis 2(8) (2012),
pp. 1817–1828.
62. B. K. Vijayan, N. M. Dimitrijevic, J. Wu and K. A. Gray, The effects of Pt
Doping on the structure and visible light photoactivity of titania nanotubes,
J. Phys. Chem. C 114(49) (2010), pp. 21262–21269.
63. Q. Zhang, W. Han, Y. Hong and J. Yu, Photocatalytic reduction of CO2
with H2O on Pt-loaded TiO2 catalyst, Catalysis Today 148(3–4) (2009),
pp. 335–340.
64. L. Collado, P. Jana, B. Sierra, J. M. Coronado, P. Pizarro, D. P. Serrano
and V. A. De La Pena O’Shea, Enhancement of hydrocarbon production via
artificial photosynthesis due to synergetic effect of Ag supported on TiO2 and
ZnO semiconductors, Chem. Eng. J. 224 (2013), pp. 128–135.
65. T. Ohno, N. Murakami, T. Koyanagi and Y. Yang, Photocatalytic reduction
of CO2 over a hybrid photocatalyst composed of WO3 and graphic carbon
nitride (g-C3N4) under visible light, J. CO2 Utilisation 6 (2014), pp. 17–25.
66. K. L. Schulte, P. A. Desario and K. A. Gray, Effect of crystal phase compo-
sition on the reductive and oxidative abilities of TiO2 nanotubes under UV
and visible light, Appl. Catalysis B 97(3–4) (2010), pp. 354–360.
67. R. S. Devan, R. A. Patil, J. Lin and Y. Ma, One-dimensional metal-oxide
nanostructures: Recent developments in synthesis, characterization and appli-
cations, Adv. Funct. Mater. 22(16) (2012), pp. 3326–3370.
68. K. Yu, W. Yu, M. Kuo, Y. Liou and S. Chien, Pt/titania-nanotube: A
potential catalyst for CO2 adsorption and hydrogenation, Appl. Catalysis
B 84(1–2) (2008), pp. 112–118.
69. O. K. Varghese, M. Paulose, T. J. Latempa and C. A. Grimes, High-rate
solar photocatalytic conversion of CO2 and water vapour to hydrocarbon
fuels, Nano Lett. 9(2) (2009), pp. 731–737.
70. L. Jia, J. Li and W. Fang, Enhanced visible-light active C and Fe co-doped
LacoO3 for reduction of carbon dioxide, Catalysis Commun. 11(2) (2009),
pp. 87–90.
71. T. W. Woolerton, S. Sheard, E. Relsner, E. Pierce, S. W. Ragsdale, F. A.
Armstrong, Efficient and clean photoreduction of CO2 to CO by enzyme-
modified TiO2 nanoparticles using visible light, J. Am. Chem. Soc. Commun.
132 (2010), pp. 2132–2133.
72. W. Tu, Y. Zhou, Q. Liu, Z. Tian, J. Gao, X. Chen, H. Zhang, J. Liu and
Z. Zou, Robust Hollow spheres consisting of alternating titania nanosheets
and graphene nanosheets with high photocatalytic activity for CO2 conver-
sion into renewable fuels, Adv. Funct. Mater. 22(6) (2012), pp. 1215–1221.
73. Y. T. Liang, B. K. Vijayan, K. A. Gray and M. Hersam, Minimizing graphene
defects enhances titania nanocomposite-based photocatalytic reduction of
CO2 for improved solar fuel production, Nanoletters 11(7) (2011), pp. 2865–
2870.
74. A. J. Morris, G. J. Meyer and E. Fujita, Molecular approaches to the Photo-
catalytic reduction of carbon dioxide for solar fuels, Acc. Chem. Res. 42(12)
(2009), pp. 1983–1994.
75. J. Hawecker, J. Lehn and R. Ziessel, Efficient photochemical reduction of CO2
to CO by visible light irradiation of systems containing Re(bipy)(CO)3X or
Ru(bipy)32+-Co2+ combinations as homogeneous catalysts, J. Chem. Soc.
Chem. Commun. 9 (1983), pp. 536–538.
76. S. Matsuoka, K. Yamamoto, T. Ogata, M. Kusaba, N. Nakashima, E. Fujita
and S. Yanagida, Efficient and selective electron mediation of cobalt complexes
with cyclam and related macrocycles in the p-terphenyl-catalyzed photore-
duction of Carbon dioxide, J. Am. Chem. Soc. 115(2) (1993), pp. 601–609.
77. T. Ogata, Y. Yamamoto, Y. Wada, K. Murakoshi, M. Kusaba, N. Nakashima,
A. Ishida, S. Takamuku and S. Yanagida, Phenazine-photosensitized reduc-
tion of CO2 mediated by a cobalt-cyclam complex through electron and
hydrogen transfer, J. Phys. Chem. 99(31) (1995), pp. 11916–11922.
78. J. Grodkowski and P. Neta, Cobalt Corrin catalyzed photoreduction of CO2,
J. Phys. Chem. A 104(9) (2000), pp. 1848–1853.
79. H. Hori, K. Koike, Y. Suzuki, M. Ishizuka, J. Tanaka, K. Takeuchi and
Y. Sasaki, High-pressure photocatalytic reduction of carbon dioxide using
[fac-Re(bpy)(CO)3p(OiPr)3]+ (bpy = 2,2 -bipyridine), J. Mol. Catalysis A
179(1–2) (2002), pp. 1–9.
80. S. Sato, K. Koike, H. Inoue and O. Ishitani, Highly efficient supramolecular
photocatalysts for CO2 reduction using visible light, Photochem. Photobiol.
Sci. 6(4) (2007), pp. 454–461.
81. S. Karlsson, J. Boixel, Y. Pellegrin, E. Blart, H. Becker, F. Odobel and M.
L. Hammarstrã, Accumulative charge separation inspired by photosynthesis,
J. Am. Chem. Soc. 132(51) (2010), pp. 17977–17979.
82. M. Zhang and M. L. Hammarstrã, Proton-coupled electron transfer from
tryptophan: A concerted mechanism with water as proton acceptor, J. Am.
Chem. Soc. 133(23) (2011), pp. 8806–8809.
83. D. C. Lacy, C. C. L. McCrory and J. C. Peters, Studies of Cobalt-mediated
electrocatalytic CO2 reduction using a redox-active ligand, Inorg. Chem.
53(10) (2014), pp. 4980–4988.
84. S. Hu, M. R. Shaner, J. A. Beardslee, M. Lichterman, B. S. Brunschwig and
N. S. Lewis, Amorphous TiO2 coatings stabilize Si, GaAs and GaP photoan-
odes for efficient water oxidation, Science 344(6187) (2014), pp. 1005–1009.
85. P. Narang, S. Chen, N. C. Coronel, S. Gul, J. Yano, L. Wang, N. S. Lewis
and H. A. Atwater, Bandgap tunability in Zn(Sn,Ge)N2 semiconductor alloys,
Adv. Mater. 26(8) (2014), pp. 1235–1241.

Chapter 7
Small-Scale PV Applications in Home and Business
Estefanı́a Caamaño-Martı́n, Miguel Ángel Egido

and Jorge Solórzano
Instituto de Energı́a Solar, Universidad Politécnica de Madrid
(Solar Energy Institute, Technical University of Madrid)
ETSI de Telecomunicación, Avda. Complutense 30, 28040 Madrid (Spain)
This chapter presents the main technical and non-technical aspects of dis-
tributed photovoltaic systems, both grid-connected and stand-alone. In par-
ticular, after an introduction where the main typologies and configurations
are described, fundamentals on solar resource and operational parameters are
presented. Photovoltaic (PV) applications in built areas and stand-alone PV
applications will be then covered, including design, sizing, operation and main-
tenance, business models, policies and international experience.
1 Introduction
Photovoltaics (PV) is by far the world’s fastest-growing electricity gener-
ation technology over the last century. With terrestrial use starting in the
mid 1970’s in water-pumping applications,1 nowadays PV provides clean
electricity for a diversity of uses ranging from small portable devices (e.g.
mobile phones, portable computers) to buildings, public urban spaces and
rural communities. As a consequence, PV has become the paradigm for
“Distributed Generation” (DG), a term for which no consistent definition
exists although it is generally considered as “electric power generation units
connected directly to the distribution network or connected to the net-
work on the customer site of the meter”.2 The inherent modular nature of
PV technology, combined with the wide availability of its primary energy
resource (solar radiation) allows expanding the DG concept to areas isolated
from national electricity grids, where stand-alone PV systems (SAPVS) can
be used to provide reliable electricity services to rural populations.
In this chapter, the main technical and non-technical aspects of PV
systems designed for and installed next to consumers will be covered. They
243
244 E. Caamaño-Martı́n, M. Á. Egido & J. Solórzano
are grouped under the heading of “small-scale PV systems” to differentiate

from the so-called “large-scale PV power plants” that are typically designed
for maximizing the electricity production and installed relatively far from
consumers (see Chapter 4). In particular, two main types of PV applications
will be considered, the main characteristics of which are described next.
1.1 PV Applications in the Built Environment

With a PV generator with nominal power typically in the range of kW’s
(although examples of up to a few MW can also be found), PV applications
are typically characterized by the following:
• The PV modules are integrated, in one way or another, in buildings and

urban infrastructures (street equipment, barriers, shelters, aerial struc-
tures for lighting and advertising, etc.).
• The PV system outputs are connected to low-voltage electricity distri-
bution grids or to the buildings’ own electrical installations. (Note: an
exception exists if, due to local grid codes, the PV system must be con-
nected to a medium-voltage electricity distribution grid, in which case a
conventional transformer substation is required).
The closeness between generation and consumption entails power and

energy exchanges with the distribution grid, as shown in the following exam-
ples. Consider a single family house with a PV system installed on the roof
that is connected to the low voltage electricity grid independently from the
house electrical installation, both connections being physically very close.
A block diagram of both electrical installations is shown in Fig. 1(a), where
the PV generator and power conditioning equipment (DC/AC converter or
inverter) are represented by the conventional symbols presented previously
in this book (see Chapter 2). Figure 1(b) shows the daily development of
the PV power fed into the distribution grid and the electrical power taken
from such a grid on a sunny day, where the demand profile reflects the
behavior of a user who consumes most electricity at the evenings. Note
that there are two areas under the PV power and house power demand
curves with striped diagonal patterns representing, respectively, the daily
PV generation and house electrical consumption that would be registered
by the corresponding electricity meters (EPV and EL ). In addition, due to
the physical proximity between both installations connection points to the
distribution grid, whenever local generation and consumption coincide, the
Small-Scale PV Applications in Home and Business 245
(a) Electrical block diagram (b) Development of power flows

in a sunny day
Fig. 1. Example of a PV system in a single family house connected to the distribution
grid independently from the consumer’s electrical installation.
(a) Electrical block diagram (b) Development of power flows

in a sunny day
Fig. 2. Example of a PV system in a single family house connected to the consumer’s
electrical installation.
PV system will supply the local demand, shown in the figure by the area
filled with a striped vertical pattern.
Consider now a different situation where the PV system is connected
to the house electrical installation before the consumption meter, in the
so-called “self-consumption” mode (see Fig. 2(a)). Note that in this case
the PV system supplies the same amount of electrical demand as in the
previous example, but now only the generation surplus (excess over the
local demand) is fed into the distribution grid. This is shown in Fig. 2(b),
where the white area represents the daily self-consumed PV generation.
The implications of both examples are different both in technical and
economic terms: whereas from a technical point of view the demand experi-
enced by the distribution grid is the same, in the second example the house
would reduce the kWh going through the utility meter and, consequently its
expenses in commercial electricity. Another important aspect is the value
assigned to the PV electricity surplus that is fed into the grid, which is
defined by the local electrical market and/or energy policies. These aspects
will be covered in Sec. 4.4 of this chapter.
1.2 Stand-Alone PV Applications

Terrestrial PV applications started in the 1970’s for SAPVS, mainly for
water pumping and health centers managed by UNICEF. In fact, low power
SAPVS are apparently very easy to install and operate: a PV module with
36 series-connected crystalline solar cells, plugged in parallel with a car bat-
tery and an electrical generator can be built for direct current charges (in
further sections the low reliability of such a configuration will be explained).
As a practical exercise, consider that we have to supply electricity for a ser-
vice which requires some kWh per day in a location several kilometers away
from the electrical grid, what is the best engineering solution? In compari-
son with diesel engines, SAPVS do not require fossil fuel, (its “fuel” is solar
radiation) is well distributed at latitudes lower than 50◦ and predictable
with enough confidence. (The wind resource, in comparison, is less exten-
sively distributed and less predictable). In solar power generation there are
no elements in motion, unlike other technologies (combustion engines, wind
generators or hydropower), which improves the reliability and decreases
maintenance costs. Also, time for implementation of a SAPVS is very low.
Despite these advantages, the main disadvantage of PV technology has
been the cost, but this is changing. Thanks to the PV grid connected market
evolution, which has exponentially increased in the last decade, PV module
prices have dramatically decreased. For instance, in the budget share for
a recent hybrid diesel PV stand-alone system of 3.6 kWpa in the Bolivian
Amazon (December 2014), the PV generator cost is 26.1% (33.9%, if the
support structure cost is also considered), electrical cables and protections
and installation costs are 28.2% and transport cost is 6.9%. Definitively,
a The definition of Wp is in Chapter 2, Sec. 4.3.1.

the cost of isolated electrical generation is a consequence of this isolation.

The cost per Wp is also interesting viz. 8.1 $/Wp.
A SAPVS is composed of a PV generator connected to an energy stor-
age device; it requires always electrical control and power conditioning and
can supply DC and/or AC electricity. PV technology has an additional
property: the range of power generation could be from mW to MW with
good cost efficiency.b For this reason the potential applications for SAPVS
are huge: parking meters, safety signals, street lights, kiosks, etc., in urban
environments; but in isolated locations is where the possibilities are even
bigger: solar lanterns, solar home systems, solar villages, health centers,
electricity supply for telecommunications, water pumping, and all kind of
productive applications such as grain mill, drip irrigation, internet tele cen-
ter, electricity shops for mobile phones, milk refrigeration, etc. All these
and many more are part of the current landscape of PV applications. Even,
more experimental engines such as solar cars or solar airplanes can be fully
supplied by SAPVS, although are not yet economically viable.
While PV grid connected systems are designed to feed green electricity
to local loads and/or the grid, SAPVS design focuses on supplying elec-
tricity to local loads autonomously. Consequently, the objective is not to
maximize the electricity production on a yearly basis, but to guarantee the
fulfillment of the electrical service, i.e. to minimize the loss of load prob-
ability. This reliability is not only related to PV modules and Balance of
System (BOS) components failures, the variability of solar irradiation and
the daily load are key factors. The design of a SAPVS requires sizing the
peak power of PV generator and the storage capacity to supply a load in a
location characterized for its solar irradiation and temperature. This task
has to include general rules for electrical engineering: safety protections,
cabling design, efficiencies, etc.
2 Solar Resource Availability

2.1 Meteorological Resources and Modeling
Meteorological resources data (solar radiation, ambient temperature)
required for the design of small-scale PV applications depends on the accu-
racy of design required:
• In SAPVS, a guarantee of electrical service in the worst operational

conditions is usually the main design goal. Therefore, monthly averages
b In 2014, a SAPVS of 5 MWp was inaugurated in a Chilean mine without subsidies.

of daily global solar radiation over the horizontal plane are required;
monthly averages of daily maximum and minimum ambient temperature
are also recommended, which allows calculating thermal losses of the PV
generator (see Sec. 3.1).
• In grid-connected PV systems that are connected to public distribution
grids, maximization of annual generation is usually the main goal. Con-
sequently, the input data from the previous example is also commonly
used, from which hourly values can be derived and used in the subsequent
modeling phase.
• In grid-connected PV systems connected in the “self-consumption” mode
where the interaction with the grid is a relevant aspect, hourly data that
incorporate the natural variability of local solar radiation are recom-
mended. The same applies to PV systems where the PV modules are
architecturally integrated so that they influence the building’s thermal
behavior. In these cases, the preferable data are the so-called Typical
Meteorological Years (TMYs), which are annual datasets that include
natural diurnal and seasonal variations, representing typical climatic con-
ditions for a given location over a long period of time (typically 30 years3).
They have been frequently used in building simulation, in order to assess
the heating and cooling demand. Specific variables depend on the activity
domain and include solar radiation, air temperatures (mean, maximum,
minimum), relative humidity, precipitation, etc.
Concerning the availability of solar radiation data, an increasing num-
ber of resources exist, ranging from historical datasets of national networks
of weather stations to satellite-derived data.4–6 Meteorological input data
must then be processed in order to calculate the solar resource available on
the PV module’s plane:
• When monthly averages of daily horizontal global solar radiation are
used, the best approach is to synthesize a full year of daily values from
which hourly values can be estimated, following for example the Aguiar
and Collares-Pereira methodologies.7,8 TMYs already provide hourly
solar radiation data.
• From the hourly values of horizontal global solar radiation the corre-
sponding direct and diffuse components can be calculated using diffuse
fraction or quasi-physically based models.9,10
• From the previous results the direct, diffuse and reflected components
of hourly solar radiation can be derived. Particularly relevant is mod-
eling of the diffuse component, for which the different approaches vary
from an isotropic model where solar radiation is considered to be evenly

distributed throughout the sky hemisphere to more complex models that
include anisotropic effects.11,12 Direct and reflected components are more
straightforward to calculate.13
• From these hourly components of global solar radiation, daily, monthly
and/or annual values can be easily obtained.
Besides solar radiation, other meteorological variables that influence the

operation of PV generators are; surroundings, ambient temperature and,
at a lesser extent, wind speed. Particularly, when the ventilation of PV
modules cannot be guaranteed (for example, when they constitute part or
all of highly insulated envelopes), high solar cells’ operating temperatures
can occur leading to thermal losses (more than 85◦ C have been measured
in central Europe14 ). Also to be considered is the PV modules composition:
where the solar cells are laminated between two sheets of glass (glass–glass
PV modules), their operation temperature is typically 2–3◦ C higher than
in conventional glass-film PV modules where the solar cells are laminated
between glass and the insulation film (usually PVF-polyvinyl fluoride). This
is reflected in higher values of the “Nominal Operating Cell Temperature”
(NOCT) parameter that characterizes the thermal performance of PV mod-
ules under natural convectionc : it is typically around 45◦ C for glass-film PV
modules and closer to 50◦ C for glass–glass PV modules.
2.2 On the Positioning of PV Modules

While it might be thought that the ultimate design goal of any grid con-
nected PV system is to produce the maximum amount of electricity, this is
not always the case, particularly in building integration where available sur-
faces for the PV modules may differ from ideal ones. But first, what is the
optimal position for a PV module at a given location, in terms of azimuth
and tilt angles? Several recommendations can be found in the literature,
which can be summarized as:
• Grid-connected PV applications. Since a very common design objective

of these PV systems is to maximize generation, the “optimal” position
usually corresponds to maximum annual solar gains for fixed surfaces. To
this aim, the optimal orientation is towards the Equator (to the south
c Measuredwith normal in-plane irradiance of 800 W·m−2 , ambient temperature of 20◦ C

and wind speed 1 m·s−1 .
for locations in the northern hemisphere, to the north otherwise), and

the optimal tilt angle lies relatively close to the value of the local lati-
tude (φ).13,15,16
• Stand-alone PV applications. The previous recommendations also apply
if the solar resource and loads are (more or less) evenly distributed
throughout the year, which is in fact quite unusual. In general, to opti-
mize the tilt angle is equivalent to maximize the ratio between mean
daily solar irradiation and mean daily load on a monthly basis. How-
ever, under the assumption of constant electricity demand, the optimal
position is the one that maximizes solar gains in the “worst month” (the
one with minimum solar irradiation). For locations at mid-latitudes and
with constant demand, this usually leads to tilt angles around |φ| + 10◦
facing to the equator. If this methodology is applied to locations in the
inter-tropical belt, the result could be that the best tilt is horizontal, but
a minimum of 5◦ should be used to facilitate PV modules self-cleaning
by rain. In general, when the mean monthly load is variable, the opti-
mization should be focused in the month most affected. As an example,
many crops require more water in summer, near to solstice. The optimal
tilt is that to minimize the incidence angle of the sun at noon in this
period; it can be easily estimated as the local latitude, in absolute value,
minus 23.5◦ .17
Going back to the issue of surface availability, a common question

amongst architects and engineers willing to incorporate PV in buildings
is about the appropriateness of the buildings’ envelopes in terms of the
solar resource. In this respect, it is useful to evaluate the theoretical solar
potential of a surface with azimuth α and tilt β relative to the maximum
potential at the same location, by means of the “Irradiation factor”, FI :
Ga (α, β)
FI = , (1)
Ga (αopt , βopt )
where Ga (α, β) is the annual global solar radiation incident on the surface
and Ga (αopt , βopt ) is the maximum annual global solar radiation incident
on the optimal surface (maximum solar gains for fixed surfaces). Obviously,
FI ≤ 1.
Particularly interesting is the development of the Irradiation Factor for
different tilt and azimuth angles and different locations, as shown in Fig. 3.
In the figure, the results for two locations representative of the European
Fig. 3. Irradiation factor for two locations representative of European solar resource.
solar resource are shown viz.:

• Madrid (latitude 40◦ 27 North), representative of Southern Europe, with
a temperate warm climate characterized by minimum summer rains and
hot summers.
• Paris–Trappes (latitude 48◦ 46 North), representative of Central Europe
with a temperate humid climate characterized by uniform rains and cool
summers.
In both cases solar radiation data considered are from the corresponding
Typical Meteorological Years, together with the best performing models
mentioned in Sec. 2.1.
It is worth mentioning the similarity between the curves correspond-
ing to the same azimuth angle, with differences below 0.05 between both
locations. It can be demonstrated that similar results are obtained when
different locations of mid latitudes (ranging from 30 to 55◦ ) are considered.
Consequently, the results corresponding to Madrid can be used as represen-
tative of the relative solar potential of fixed surfaces. From these results, it
is implicit that a horizontal surface (left end of the curves) receives more
than 85% of the maximum solar potential (FI > 0.85), whereas vertical sur-
faces (right end of the curves) receive more than 65% of the maximum solar
potential if south oriented (α = 0, FI > 0.65) and about 55% if east or west
oriented (α = ±90◦, FI ∼ 0.55). Even more interesting is the fact that for
optimally oriented surfaces the solar potential is very high for a wide range
of tilt angles (α = 0, |β −βopt | ≤ 20◦ ⇒ FI > 0.95 ↔ losses smaller than 5%
compared to the local maximum solar gains). For south-east and south-west
surfaces, although the potential is slightly lower, it can still be considered
quite high (α = 40, |β − βopt | ≤ 20◦ ⇒ FI > 0.9 ↔ annual losses lower
than 10%). Obviously, the optimal position for a fixed surface varies with
the location, as well as the corresponding annual solar potential, Ga (αopt ,
βopt ). For instance, for the two representative locations considered, using
solar radiation data and appropriate models8,12 the results are:
Ga (αopt , βopt )|Madrid = Ga (0◦ , 34◦ ) = 1940 kWh/m ,

2
Ga (αopt , βopt )|Paris = Ga (0◦ , 36◦ ) = 1230 kWh/m .

2
It should be noted that the results could differ with different initial
solar radiation data and models used. However, the fact that many surfaces
commonly used in building envelopes are suitable for solar PV use has been
clearly demonstrated.
2.3 Shading Losses

The calculation procedures described in Sec. 2.1 that allow estimating the
theoretical solar resource available on a given surface, assume that no obsta-
cles exist that cast shadows over the PV modules. However, with an increas-
ing integration of PV technologies in built areas, shadows have become a
frequent phenomenon that have to be considered from the early stages of
the PV generator design, in order to minimize their effect on the PV sys-
tem’s electricity production.
To achieve this aim, several methods exist to quantify the effect of the
surroundings on the solar gains of a static surface.18 They usually con-
sist of representing the obstacles profile affecting the potential PV genera-
tor surface together with the band of the sun’s trajectory and calculating
how much the resulting solar resource is affected. It should be noted that
not all components of solar radiation are equally affected by shadows: in
fact, only those with directional characteristics (the beam component and
the circumsolar part of the diffuse component) will be intercepted by the
obstacles profile. In addition, the effect of a given obstacles profile will also
depend on the receiving surface characteristics. In order to illustrate this
aspect, Fig. 4 shows the sun trajectory diagrams of three locations with lat-
itudes ranging from 19 to 51◦ , where the daily trajectories of the December
solstice, equinoxes and June solstice are shown (in continuous, long-striped
and short-striped lines respectively), together with two additional ones that
allow defining “bands” denoted as A, B, C, and D in the figure. Table 1
(a) Madrid (latitude 40.45°N) (b) Astaná (latitude 51.17°N)
(c) Mexico D.F. (latitude 19.20°N) (d) Brasilia (latitude 15.77°S)
Fig. 4. Sun’s trajectory diagrams for locations with different latitudes.
shows, for different surfaces — (α, β) combinations, the importance of each

band in terms of interceptable solar radiation, expressed as a percentage of
the annual global solar resource.
As an example, let us consider a typical distribution of PV modules
in parallel rows, with a distance between rows that guarantees no shad-
ows at noon. Under the assumption of rows constituted of 11 PV modules
of dimensions 1.5 m × 1 m each (the shorter dimension being parallel to
the horizontal plane) optimally oriented and tilted, Fig. 5 shows the corre-
sponding obstacles profile “seen” by the most affected points of each row
(central PV module, central point of lower profile). Table 2 summarizes the
corresponding annual global irradiation losses.
Note that quantification of these losses requires identifying, from the
obstacles profile, the adjacent celestial region affected by shadows, in this
case the one with elevation angles below the obstacles profile (area with
vertical stripes).
Table 1: Sun’s trajectory bands relevance for the interception of

solar radiation by different surfaces in the locations of Fig. 4.
Receiving Energy relevance

surface position (% of Ga (α, β))
Location
(latitude) α (◦ ) β (◦ ) A B C D
Madrid (40.45◦ N) 0 5 14 12 16 41
0 38 (βopt ) 21 14 16 32
0 90 30 15 12 14
Astaná (51.17◦ N) 0 5 10 11 16 44
0 47 (βopt ) 19 14 16 33
0 90 26 15 14 20
Mexico D.F. (19.2◦ N) 0 5 27 15 15 28
0 25 (βopt ) 32 15 14 23
0 90 42 13 6 1
Brasilia (15.77◦ N) 180 5 23 12 16 30
180 24 (βopt ) 19 11 15 34
180 90 <1 3 11 43
(a) Madrid (latitude 40.45°N) (b) Astaná (latitude 51.17°N)
(c) Mexico D.F. (latitude 19.20°N) (d) Brasilia (latitude 15.77°S)

Fig. 5. Example of obstacle profile for rows of PV modules with optimal position sep-
arated so that no shadows occur at noon.
Table 2: Annual solar resource losses due to the obstacle profiles of Fig. 5.
PV modules position Annual shadow losses

Ga
Location β= (αopt , βopt ) (% of
(latitude) α (◦ ) βopt (◦ ) (kWh/m2 ) Ga (α,β)) (kWh/m2 )
Madrid (40.45◦ N) 0 38 1950 6.5 127

Astaná (51.17◦ N) 0 47 1758 4.5 79
Mexico D.F. (19.2◦ N) 0 25 2140 10.5 225
Brasilia (15.77◦ S) 180 24 1921 11.9 229
Obviously the previous analysis should be performed in one or several

points of the projected PV generator surface, depending on its size and
proximity to the obstacles. For relatively small PV generators (up to a few
kilowatts) the most affected point could be selected as representative of the
whole surface. For larger generators several points are recommended, which
can provide valuable information for the electrical configuration of the PV
generator (series-parallel association of PV modules).
Even if the losses of available solar resource due to shading have been
properly identified, determination of their effect on the PV generator pro-
duction is not an easy task. Several aspects influence the electrical behavior
of a PV installation under shadowing conditions, such as:
• Electrical configuration of the solar cells and by-pass diodes within the
PV modules.
• Electrical configuration of PV modules within the PV generator.
• The inverter capability to extract the maximum power available from
the PV generator (maximum power point tracking strategy and voltage
range).
Due to such complexity, currently most design and simulation software

tools estimate electrical losses proportionally to the shaded area of PV
strings or generators.18 It is expected that appropriate models resulting
from ongoing research and development efforts19 will be incorporated in
the near future.
3 Performance Assessment of Small-Scale PV Systems

Due to the intrinsic decentralized feature of PV, the generation potential
of PV systems differs enormously. Particularly, the specific location is a
determining factor of PV systems operational conditions and, therefore, of
their electricity production. Due to this fact, the assessment of small scale
PV systems performance should not be done exclusively on the basis of the

number of kWh produced but also in terms of the efficiencies of the main
components. In this sense, the following parameters defined in the early
1990’s by the international PV community are useful for this purpose:20
• Array yield, or electricity produced by the PV generator per unit of
installed or nominal power (PnomG = 1 kWp, or 1 kW at Standard Test
Conditionsd ):
EP V G
YA = [h]. (2)
PnomG
• Final yield, or useful electricity produced by the PV system per unit of
installed power:
EP V
YF = [h]. (3)
PnomA
• Reference yield, which characterizes the PV generator available solar
resource in terms of “equivalent peak hours” (equivalent to a constant
incident irradiance of 1 kW·m−2 ):
GS (kWh·m−2 )
YR = [h], (4)
1 kW·m−2
where GS is the solar irradiation measured by a specific sensor, that
should be expressed in kWh·m−2 .
• Performance ratio, or ratio between the normalized electricity production
(YF ) and the available solar resource (YR ):
YF EP V
PR = = . (5)
YR PnomA · YR
Note that the position of YR in the denominator of Eq. (5) means that
the actual electricity production (EP V ) is “normalized” by the available
solar resource which could be interpreted as an elimination of the local
operational conditions effects. This assumption explains the fact that PR
is the most widely used parameter for assessing PV systems performance.21
However, by doing so the second order effect of solar cells temperatures on
electricity production (a reduction between 2% and 5% per 10◦ C increase
above 25◦ C) is not eliminated, which “penalizes” PV systems operating in
d Defined by normal in-plane irradiance of 1 kW·m−2 , solar spectrum 1.5G, solar cells
temperature of 25◦ C and wind speed 1 m·s−1 .
warm/hot ambient conditions. Two additional parameters allow the effec-

tive elimination of the temperature effect:
• A temperature corrected reference yield, in which temperature losses are

considered equivalent to a reduction of the available solar resource for
electricity conversion:
YRT = YR · [1 + γ · (TC − 25◦ C)] [h], (6)
where γ is the thermal coefficient of the PV modules maximum power

(typically between −0.4 and −0.5%◦ C−1 for crystalline Silicon technolo-
gies, around half of this for thin-film technologies) and TC is the solar
cells equivalent temperature (see Eq. (7)).
• A temperature corrected performance ratio:
YF
P RT = . (7)
YRT
The use of the previous parameters can refer to different operating peri-
ods (one day, one month, one year), the monthly average daily values and
annual values being the most commonly used. It is convenient at this point
to make some comments on the practical measurements of the associated
variables leading to a quality monitoring of PV systems:
• Recommended variables that should be measured in real time for grid-

connected PV systems include operating conditions (irradiance, temper-
ature, wind speed), PV generator and inverter output (voltage, current,
power), and availability (PV system down-times).
• For SAPVS the battery (voltage, current), DC output and diesel gener-
ator output (if existing) should also be measured.
• The in-plane irradiance should be measured with a crystalline silicon
reference device which complies with international standards.22 The use
of more precise, thermopile-based instruments such as pyranometers is
not recommended given the increased cost and complexity of use.
• For the ambient temperature measurements, devices protected from solar
radiation should be used. The most precise instruments are platinum
thermoresistances (typical accuracy between ±0.03 and ±0.3◦ C). Less
precise and less costly sensors with accuracy of ±1◦ C are also acceptable.
• The measurement of solar cells equivalent temperature is highly recom-
mended, especially when PV generators are building integrated, since
operation temperatures and consequently thermal losses can be relevant.
Indirect methods based on the simple measurement of an electrical

variable, namely, the open-circuit voltage of a PV reference device is
recommended.23 For free-standing or well ventilated PV generators the
following estimate can be used from measurements of irradiance and
ambient temperature (typical accuracy of ±5◦ C):
N OCT (◦ C) − 20
TC (◦ C) ∼
= Ta + G(W·m−2 ) · , (8)
800 W·m−2
where Ta is the ambient temperature, G is the in-plane irradiance and
the NOCT parameter is provided by the PV modules technical data
sheets.
In order to show the operational improvements achieved in PV systems

over the first two decades of grid-connected applications, the following fig-
ure summarizes the performance of PV systems installed worldwide, com-
piled by the International Energy Agency — Photovoltaic Power Systems
Programme, Task 2: Performance, Reliability and Analysis of Photovoltaic
Systems.24 The dataset consists of 339 PV systems installed between 1986
and 2002, with nominal PV generator power between 1 kW and a few hun-
dred MW (87% below 25 kW). Figure 6 shows the distributions of the
annual Final, Reference yield and Performance ratio parameters. In sta-
tistical terms, average Final and Reference Yield values were 864 h and
1235 h respectively. Concerning the Performance Ratio, a change in the
distribution shape can be seen comparing Figs. 6(c) and 6(d): whereas
in the first decade the average annual Performance Ratio was 0.66, for
systems installed after 1996 the average performed 6% better (average
PR of 0.70).
Figure 7 shows the range of PV potential demonstrated by PV systems
installed in different countries: Germany, Austria, The Netherlands, Italy,
Japan, Switzerland and others (grouping Belgium, Spain, Israel, Mexico,
Poland, Portugal, United Kingdom, and Sweden). As can be seen, the PV
systems installed in the second period (see Fig. 7(d)) show a smaller vari-
ation range in terms of Performance Ratio and higher average values, thus
demonstrating a better use of the existing solar potential. This tendency
has been observed also in more recently installed PV systems.21
The use of these parameters for SAPVS is not very useful. Consider
a SAPVS designed to power an isolated telecommunication service, with
a constant daily load all year. The PV generator and battery should be
sized to guarantee the service in the worst month, which is the month
YR
(a) Final Yield (b) Reference Yield
(c) Performance Ratio (1986–1995) (d) Performance Ratio (1996–2002)

Fig. 6. Distribution of annual characteristic parameters of 339 PV grid connected sys-
tems installed in IEA countries between 1986 and 2002.
Source: Ref. 24.
with minimum mean daily solar irradiation value. Probably, all the energy
generated in this month will be consumed in the load or stored in the
battery. As the energy generated in this month is the lowest of the year,
the parameters YA and YF for this month will be also the lowest, but PR
will be the highest. However, for the month with highest solar irradiation,
the PR will be the lowest because part of the energy generated could not
be stored when the battery is full and there is not consumption. This fact
produces lower values than expected for YA and YF , while YR is the highest
of the year. To evaluate the performance of SAPVS, the best parameter is
the loss of load probability (LLP ), unfortunately there is not any physical
or mathematical model capable of predicting the LLP value with accuracy.
This parameter only can be evaluated by software simulation if long-term
solar radiation and load consumption data series are available.
(a) Final Yield (b) Reference Yield
PR (1986–1995) PR (1996–2002)
(c) Performance Ratio (1986–1995) (d) Performance Ratio (1996–2002)

Fig. 7. Annual characteristic parameters range of 339 PV grid connected systems
installed in IEA countries between 1986 and 2002.
Source: Ref. 24.
3.1 PV Systems Losses

The combination of the previous parameters allows identifying the main
PV system losses:
(1) Capture losses associated with the PV array:
LC = YR − YA = LCT + LOE , (9)
which can be divided into Thermal and Optical-Electrical Capture

losses, corresponding respectively to solar cells temperature (differences
with reference 25◦ C), irradiance sensor (shading, spectral and angular
response) and electrical parameters (power mismatch between PV mod-
ules, operation point differences from maximum power point, DC wiring
voltage losses):
LCT = YR − YRT , (10)
LCOE = YRT − YA . (11)
(2) Conversion losses associated with the inverter:
LI = YF − YA . (12)
The combination of these losses allows the calculation of the PV sys-
tem’s final yield and, consequently, the Performance ratio parameters:
YF YR − (LCT + LCOE + LI ) LCT + LCOE + LI
PR = = =1− ,
YR YR YR
(13)
YF YRT − (LCOE + LI ) LCOE + LI
P RT = = =1− . (14)
YRT YRT YRT
Figure 8 shows examples of annual losses of 15 PV grid-connected sys-
tems installed in buildings worldwide,24 with different typologies of archi-
tectural integration including free-standing elements, integration in roofs
Fig. 8. Annual losses, final yield and temperatures of 15 PV grid-connected systems

worldwide with different typologies of architectural integration.
Source: Ref. 24.
and façades. Note that the different variables are represented as percent-
ages of the solar resource (YR ). Consequently the height of the Final Yields
(YF , white columns) shows the Performance Ratio parameters. Also shown
in the figure are the average solar cells temperatures and diurnal ambi-
ent temperatures (TC and Ta,diu respectively). Note also that the heights
resulting from adding the columns Final Yield and Thermal Capture losses
equal the temperature corrected Performance Ratios.
As can be observed, annual Thermal Capture losses in PV generators
(LCT ) vary between 11% (tilted roof, S*) and 2% gains (tilted roof, A2,
representing a PV generator operating at an average temperature below
25◦ C, typical of high mountain areas) of the available solar resource (YR ).
This is consistent with the fact that highly insulated PV modules oper-
ate at higher temperatures, and consequently with higher thermal losses,
than free-standing ones. Optical-electrical capture losses (LCOE ) are higher
than thermal capture ones, ranging from 8% to 37% (the last representing
a PV generator highly affected by shadows connected to an inverter with a
poor tracking function of the PV generator maximum power). Concerning
inverters conversion, annual losses vary between 3% and 25%. As a result,
annual Final Yield parameters range from 37% to 81% of the available solar
resource (equivalent to PR values between 0.37 and 0.81). It is worth men-
tioning the fact that the performance of inverters has improved significantly,
as shown in Ref. 24, where more than 70% of the 339 PV systems analyzed
operated with inverter annual conversion efficiencies higher than 90%.
This tendency has been continued in PV systems installed in the last
decade, demonstrated by reported representative PR values of PV systems
operating in Ref. 25: Germany (PR = 0.85), France (PR = 0.76), Belgium
(PR = 0.78), and Taiwan (PR = 0.74).
4 PVs in Buildings
4.1 Introduction
Although PVs were already used in the 1950s and 1960s as a power supply
for telecommunication applications,26 it was not until the mid-1970s that
the first technical recommendations for the use of PV modules in buildings
were issued in the United States.27 Soon after came the first real appli-
cations in residential and commercial buildings which, together with firm
governmental support led to a rapid growth of demonstration projects.28 In
Europe the first examples of PV systems in buildings took place in the late-
1980s in Switzerland,29 Germany,30 and Austria.31 Initially characterized
by technological demonstration projects, new examples appeared in other

countries (Japan, The Netherlands, Spain, Italy, United Kingdom, France,
and Sweden) through the 1990s. Nowadays PV is increasingly present, not
only in buildings, but also in the public spaces of many towns and cities
thus making PV the renewable electricity technology with the most dis-
tributable potential. In this section basics on PV systems types, design and
sizing rules, operation and maintenance provisions are described. Also, a
description of the most successful business models and international expe-
rience is provided.
4.2 Types of PV Systems

Several types of PV systems in buildings can be defined, according to the fol-
lowing approaches: electrical configuration and building integration. From
an electrical perspective, two main configurations are used:
• Distributed topologies for Maximum Power Point Tracking (MPPT),

where PV modules operate typically connected to small power-
conditioning devices, namely microinverters and power optimizers, also
known as module-level power electronics (MLPE) (see Fig. 9). These solu-
tions, within the 200–600 W range, can provide certain advantages over
Fig. 9. Distributed topologies for MPPT: microinverters and power optimizers.

centralized MPPT present in conventional inverters like: higher electric-

ity production in mismatched situations (due to shading, for example),
advanced monitoring allowing for relatively complex fault detection rou-
tines (monitoring has to be done at the individual PV module level), pro-
tection against hot-spots, system design flexibility (combination of PV
modules with very different location are possible), better safety against
fire, etc.
In shaded PV generators, recent research has confirmed32 that,

although some power gains can be obtained compared to centralized MPPT
(typically 10–15%, with maximum reported values up to 34%), they will not
translate to the same amount of annual energy gains due to several factors
like: the stationary nature of the obstacles, the moving position of the sun
throughout the year and, in some cases, the amount of the diffuse fraction
of the solar resource.
The main drawback, namely the reduced reliability, was experienced
in the first commercial microinverters in Europe (1990s), mostly related to
high working temperatures (the MLPE devices are usually placed behind
the PV modules) and, consequently, low operational lifetimes. Also, more
complex replacement operations are to be expected in architecturally inte-
grated PV generators if the MLPE devices lifetime is shorter than that of
the PV modules. Since 2010, after continuous R&D efforts, new microin-
verter designs and power optimizers have increased their market share
steadily (especially in the U.S.) with better guarantees. Although they are
not limited to urban environments, these are their natural market since
in large ground-mounted PV systems the extra cost has been difficult to
justify up till now.
• Centralized topologies for MPPT, based on string- and central inverters

are shown in Fig. 10. The selection of one or the other is far from an easy
task, since both cost and technical issues must be taken into account.
In energy efficiency terms, the efficiency of both solutions is practically
the same (string inverters often being slightly more efficient). Other fac-
tors may also influence the final selection, such as: PV modules/arrays
in multiple locations, space or weight constraints (string inverters are
more compact and lighter), reliability (specially demonstrated in central
inverters), etc.
From the perspective of how the PV modules are incorporated into

buildings, the novelty of the use of PVs in the building industry has not
+ AC grid
+ + +
PV PV PV PV
module module module module
1 1.1 2.1 m.1
−
+
PV String inverter Central inverter
module
2 MPPT
− MPPT
+ PV PV PV
PV
module module module
module 1.n 2.n m.n
n − − −
−
Fig. 10. Centralized topologies for MPPT: string inverters and central inverters.
allowed it to reach a consensus yet in defining what is “building integra-

tion”. As has happened with other technological innovations, definitions
continuously evolve as knowledge and experience increase. It is worth men-
tioning at this point the joint efforts done under the International Energy
Agency framework, particularly through its Solar Heating and Cooling and
Photovoltaic Systems Programs (respectively, Task 16: Photovoltaics in
Buildings,33 and Task 7: Photovoltaic power systems in the built environ-
ment34 ). In parallel, the following distinction was increasingly used:
• “Building Added/Attached Photovoltaics” (BAPV), when the PV mod-

ules are incorporated over the building envelope, on top of the building
skin.
• “Building Integrated PV” (BIPV), when the PV modules play dual (or
multiple) functions by replacing conventional construction elements in
roofs, façades, glass construction systems, shading and canopy systems,
etc.35
Continuous international collaborative work done under the Interna-

tional Energy Agency umbrella has allowed developing publicly accessi-
ble case studies databases, so that cumulated experience can be shared,
such as: the “PV Database” of building integrated and urban PV solar
energy projects (jointly developed with European Union resources)36; and
the “Case study collection”,36 where projects using passive solar and active
Fig. 11. Solar energy integration typologies, according to the IEA-SHC, Task 41: Solar
Energy in Architecture (Subtask C: Concepts, Case Studies, and Guidelines).
solar thermal technologies can also be found. This approach has clearly
demonstrated the variety of PV integration possibilities to be used in the
envelope composition (see Fig. 11 for schematic illustration, the grey ele-
ments being PV generators).
The previous classification is obviously not final and appears to be a
candidate for continuous evolution over the next few years, particularly if
urban and buildings design are successful in providing solutions to growing
concerns internationally about the impact of climate change, sustainability,
rising energy prices and interdependence, etc. These concerns are, in fact,
behind European Union legislation37,38 concerning buildings’ energy effi-
ciency and many member States national regulations (see for example the
cases of Germany, France,39 and Spain40 ), as well as getting behind interna-
tional cooperation initiatives under the auspices of the International Energy
Agency, Solar Heating and Cooling Program (Task 40: Net Zero Energy
Solar Buildings41 ).
4.3 Design and Sizing

As mentioned at the beginning of Sec. 2.1, small to medium PV grid-
connected systems can be designed according to different objectives ranging
from maximum annual production to optimization of the generation profile
at certain time periods, either in daily or seasonal terms (e.g. at times of
particularly high building electrical loads, in order to partially or totally
meet the demand).
In any case, design and sizing of a grid-connected PV system entails:
• Concerning the PV generator; determination of the nominal power, tech-

nology and electrical configuration.
• Regarding the inverter; determination of its nominal and rated output

power and typology.
• Selection of the suitable protection measures to guarantee electrical safety
for people, other electrical equipment and the electricity grid.
In the next paragraphs, basic recommendations are provided for the

previous aspects.
4.3.1 PV generator
The decision about the PV generator nominal power depends, in the
absence of legal (maximum acceptable value) or economical limitations,
on the surface available which is reasonably free of shadows and on the
physical dimensions of the PV modules to be used.
Regarding the electrical configuration of the PV generator, the follow-
ing alternatives are used42 :
• Functionally earthed PV generator, where one of the DC conductors is

intentionally connected to earth for performance reasons (for example,
to avoid “Potential-induced degradation”, designation for power losses
due to leakage currents induced by the system voltage bias together with
certain environmental conditions such as humidity and temperaturee ).
• Floating PV generator, where both active DC conductors are isolated
from ground. This alternative is intrinsically safer for people (see com-
ments about safety below), although the absence of a reference earth
voltage may expose the PV modules to high voltages above ground poten-
tial — to which the metallic frames are usually connected).
Both alternatives entail different protection measures, as described

below.
Concerning the maximum voltage of the PV generator, although inter-
nationally (International Electrotechnical Vocabulary) “low voltage” is lim-
ited to 1500 V, values below 1000 V are typically used, particularly when
e Initiallydetected in n-type monocrystalline solar cells, evidence has been also found
in multi- and monocrystalline p-type cells, as well as in some thin-film technologies.
Research and Development efforts done by research institutions and manufacturers have
led to significant improvements and an international technical standard for experimental
detection (IEC/TS 62804: “Test methods for detection of potential-induced degradation
of crystalline silicon photovoltaic modules”).
the PV systems are installed in buildings. This maximum voltage estab-

lishes a limit for the open circuit voltage at Standard Test Conditions:
VMAX
VOC ,STC = , (15)
k
where VMAX is the maximum design voltage and k is a constant depending
on the minimum historical local ambient temperature (for example42 : 1.12
for temperatures between −1 and −5◦ C; 1.16 for temperatures between
−11 and −15◦ C; 1.25 for temperatures between −36 and −40◦ C).
In practice, several other factors influence also the selection of the PV
generator open circuit voltage and consequently the number of series con-
nected PV modules, such as:
• Inverter input voltage characteristics (maximum acceptable voltage and

MPPT voltage range) and conversion efficiency curve (input voltage for
which the inverter performs best according to its technical sheet).
• PV modules Physical distribution (reasonable layout of DC cabling) and
open circuit voltage.
• Safety considerations (for example, design according to Extra Low Volt-
age provisions).
Regarding the maximum current of the PV generator, the inverter

maximum acceptable input current is the main limiting factor. This value,
together with the PV modules short circuit current determines the maxi-
mum number of PV strings to be connected in parallel.
4.3.2 Inverter
Accumulated experience in grid connected PV systems, together with con-
tinuous technological improvements in power electronics has led to several
inverter design concepts:
• Inverters with transformer. Their main advantage is the possibility of

operating with functionally earthed PV generators. They also generally
offer a wide range of input voltages, and due to the transformer, the trans-
mission of electromagnetic interference to the electricity grid is reduced.
The main disadvantage is the losses introduced by the transformer nega-
tively influencing the conversion efficiency. Also size and weight are higher
than in transformerless devices (especially in the case of low frequency
−50/60 Hz — transformers, less in high frequency transformers). Typical
maximum conversion efficiencies achieved by these inverters nowadays are

between 91% and 96%.
• Transformerless inverters. Their main advantage is the increased
efficiency, reduced size and weight. As disadvantages, higher electro-
magnetical interferences are induced in the electrical grid unless specific
filtering is used. Also, in some topologies a minimum PV generator
voltage is required (of around 400 V), which reduces PV generator
configuration possibilities. Also, only floating PV generators can be used.
Currently, typical maximum conversion efficiencies achieved by trans-
formerless inverters are between 94% and 98%.
At this point, it is important to note that when speaking about effi-
ciency, two aspects should be considered:
• Instantaneous conversion efficiency or ratio between the output power
and the input power (PAC and PDC respectively):
PAC
η= . (16)
PDC
Given the dependence of this parameter on the input voltage and power,
information about conversion efficiencies measured at different input volt-
ages covering the MPPT range43,44 should be provided in the devices’
technical data sheetf and be considered together with the PV generator
expected voltage range.
• Energy conversion efficiency or ratio between the output energy and input
energy during a specific time period, typically one year. One of the most
widely used parameters are the “Euro” (typical of Central European con-
ditions) and “CEC” weighted (issued by the California Energy Commis-
sion and representative of sunnier conditions) annual energy efficiencies.
These are calculated considering optimal PV generator position, optimal
inverter size and nominal input voltage and are included in most inverter
technical data sheets.
Concerning other important technical requirements, compliance with
safety standards,45,46 national/local grid connection standards and
codes47,48 is essential.
Currently, the main technological trends of grid connected inverters
include: multiple MPPT (“multistring” concept), where each PV string
f Although required by international standards since the early–mid 2000s, unfortunately

it is not usually included in the inverters technical data sheets.
has its own input and independent MPPT function; active and reactive
power control; “master-slave” concept; active filtering; and “hybrid” power
conditioning where, besides grid-connection, a dedicated input for electrical
storage is provided allowing a more efficient and flexible energy management
of PV electricity.
4.3.3 Operation and maintenance

Operation of small-scale PV systems requires a minimum maintenance, as
any electrical installation does; PV generators usually need more mainte-
nance as they are located outdoors. The question of cleaning the PV mod-
ules has no simple answer, since it depends on the environment (frequency
of soiling phenomena such as dust, pollution, etc.) and other determin-
ing factors (e.g. aesthetics in building integrated PV generators). In this
respect, mechanisms should be planned to facilitate cleaning, access and
substitution of potentially faulty PV modules. Several options can be used,
ranging from sliding cranes mounted in buildings to external platforms,
automatic mechanisms and self-cleaning glass.
In addition, maintenance routines should include:
• Monitoring provisions to guarantee the correct PV system operation (ide-
ally, a daily check of inverter faults and analytical monitoring25 ).
• Preventive plans to maintain within acceptable limits the operation,
safety and durability of the installation: visual inspections, verification
of protections performance, cleaning and revision of the PV modules,
supporting structure, inverter, cables, enclosures, etc.
4.4 Business Models and International Experiences

Market development of small-scale PV grid connected systems has been
associated with different business models, the evolution of which has been
dependent on policy issues, market regulations and, especially, PV technol-
ogy costs:
• Financing incentives consisting of subsidies or tax rebates applicable to
the PV systems investment costs. Initially adopted in the U.S. and some
European countries in the 1990’s, their main purpose was to reduce the
principle non-technical barrier identified at that time. One of the best
known examples was the German “1000 Roofs Program (1990–1995)”,
promoted by the German Federal and States governments, in which sub-
sidies amounted to 70% of the investment costs. Besides the realization
of more than 2200 PV systems, the program produced other relevant

results such as fostering the development of a national inverters indus-
try and the formulation of the first regulations concerning installation
and grid connection of decentralized PV systems. A detailed monitor-
ing campaign of the installed PV systems allowed the identification of
one of the main drawbacks of this model for opening new markets and
attracting pioneer customers, namely the fact that users are usually
more interested in obtaining the subsidies than in the continuous per-
formance of the systems. In addition, success of this model strongly
depends on the availability of funding supported by policies and/or
regulations.
• “Rate-based” incentives (also known as “feed-in-tariffs”, FIT), where the
PV owners receive economic incentives for every kWh fed into the elec-
tricity grid, the origins of which come from the grid customers’ bills. Pio-
neered by the German city of Aachen and later adopted in many countries
in Europe (Austria, Belgium, Czech Republic, France, Greece, Italy, Por-
tugal, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, United Kingdom), it is considered the
most effective policy at stimulating the rapid development of renewables,
and more specifically of PVs. The success of this mechanism to steadily
increase the PV market has shown a clear dependence on the difference
between the incentives with commercial electricity prices and electricity
production costs. Also important for the design of these incentives is the
capacity to dynamically adapt the FIT tariffs to market development.
Among the most successful experience is the German Renewable Energy
Sources Act. Issued in 2000, it has been revised and amended several
times in order to adapt the feed-in-tariffs and other legal provisions to
the market evolution and European Union legislation concerning state
aid rules. Similar but less successful incentives are “feed-in-premiums”,
where the remuneration for PV electricity consists of a general market
price (e.g. wholesale electricity price) and a premium, the sum of which
is less than the retail electricity price.
Over the last two decades, PV technology cost competitiveness has

improved significantly due to remarkable cost and price reductions in PV
modules (a price decrease of 20% every time the cumulative sold volume of
PV modules has doubled, and a price reduction of around 85% between 2007
and 2014) and in the so-called Balance-of-system (BOS: inverter, cables,
protections, etc.). This fact, together with decreasing rate-based incentives
and rising prices of retail electricity has generated a growing interest in the
concepts of “self-consumption” and “self-sufficiency”g, physically possible

when using the electrical block diagram shown in Fig. 2(a). Besides the
availability of the solar resource and PV system costs (including financing),
other relevant aspects for the profitability of self-consumption schemes are:
• The cost of grid electricity. Under most common electricity billing prac-
tices used in (theoretically) liberalized electricity markets, commercial
electricity tariffs for residential and small-commercial users are the high-
est, the main reasons being related to the full use of electrical infrastruc-
ture required (generation, transport and distribution services). For this
reason, this sector is generally considered to be able to benefit first from
the so-called “grid parity” condition, where the cost of generating 1 unit
of the user’s own electricity equals the unitary market value (commercial
electricity). As an indicator, the parameter “Levelized cost of electricity”
(LCOE) is most often used. Assuming a constant value per year it can
be calculated, in currency units per kWh, as:
T
Ct /(1 + r)t
LCOE = T t=0 [c·u/kWh], (17)
t
t=0 EP V,t /(1 + r)
where Ct is the net cost of PV system investment for a time t; EP V,t is

the net PV electricity generated by t; r is the discount rate for t; and T
is the lifetime of the PV system.
Although criticized for the difficulty and frequent lack of clarity of the
many underlying assumptions (discount rate, PV system costs, financing
and incentives) of the reported values and for ignoring social and economic
externalities associated by the different electricity supply mix options, it
has been used to demonstrate academically the “turning” point for the
cost effectiveness of solar PV, both in America and Europe (starting in
California, Mexico, Spain, Italy). Unfortunately, still existing technical and
non-technical barriers, also not accounted for in LCOE calculations, still
hinder an important share of potential investments.
• The potential self-consumption in relation to the user’s electricity
demand. Here the time coincidence between generation and load and
the existence (or not) of electrical storage are of paramount importance.
g Calculated as follows: the “self-consumption” rate is the ratio between PV electric-
ity locally consumed and total PV generation; the “self-sufficiency” rate is the relation
between PV electricity locally consumed and the local demand. Both rates can be cal-
culated in different time-frames, the annual period being the most widely used.
Whereas the first can be improved with strategies of demand-side man-

agement (DSMh ), the second allows daily shifting of PV electricity to
supply evening-night loads by using only relatively small storage capaci-
ties, thus increasing both self-consumption and autarky rates. In a recent
study done with data from 10 countries and the most important PV mar-
kets, for typical residential load and PV generation profiles (respectively,
annual electricity demand of 3500 kWh and average PV system size of
3.5 kWp with no storage), the expected share of self-consumption lies in
the range between 29% and 43%. Small scale storage (providing less than
one day of “autonomy”) combined with DSM can provide relatively high
self-sufficiency levels (around 80%) at moderate LCOE increase. For the
commercial and industrial consumers sectors of the previously mentioned
European countries, assuming standardized load profiles and PV system
(annual demand of 150 MWh and PV system size around 150 kWp), the
share of annual self-consumption lies between 30% and 52%.
• The value of the PV electricity excess or surplus after meeting the local
demand, which is fed into the grid. In this respect, a particularly inter-
esting model for residential and small commercial customers is “net-
metering”, where the PV excess value equals the price of commercial
electricity; in other words: when it is fed into the grid the electricity
meter runs backwards. A similar model can be used when following the
electrical block diagram of Fig. 1, in the so-called “net billing” schemes,
where the PV electricity excess generates the right to consume an equal
amount of electricity within a pre-defined period (within the next one
or two billing periods, in the following year, etc.). Examples of these
schemes can be found currently in America and Europe (several U.S.
States, Brazil, Belgium, Italy, The Netherlands).
Another relatively common business model for medium-large PV grid-

connected systems in built areas are Power Purchase Agreements, by which
the PV system owner sells the electricity within the same building or via
a direct line to a nearby consumer, so that the consumer reduces his grid
electricity demand and consumes PV electricity at a (usually) lower price.
In this model the profitability is mainly influenced by the grid electricity
costs, in terms of both power and energy demand. Large commercial and
h Although there is no commonly accepted definition, Demand Side Management is con-

sidered here as the set of actions that influence the way consumers use electricity, leading
to savings and a more efficient use.
industrial buildings can profit easily from this model, given the also usually
available large surfaces for solar use; an environment-friendly image can
also provide marketing benefits.
As a final conclusion, it can be stated that the accumulated experience
with PV grid-connected systems over the last 2 decades has demonstrated
that PV technologies have matured significantly. With reliable components
being nowadays commercially available, technical and non-technical chal-
lenges still lie ahead including an expected sustained effort in research and
development (as has been the case in the past). PVs could be the paradigm
of DG for the much needed sustainable electricity systems worldwide.
5 SAPVS
5.1 Introduction
In this section, we describe briefly the design and the sizing of SAPVS in
order to supply the energy requested by a specific autonomous application.
As was commented previously, PV technology is often the best solution to
electricity supply for a wide range of autonomous applications since it can
provide energy from Wh to MWh cost-effectively. Nevertheless, it should
be mentioned that PV electricity generation depends on an intermittent
source and requires particular procedures to guarantee the reliability in the
electrical service.
At the beginning of PV terrestrial use, the message was that this tech-
nology does not require maintenance, but the reality is quite different. Like
other isolated electrical generators that have high maintenance require-
ments, SAPVS also needs to implement O&M procedures.
The market for SAPVS could be divided into professional applications
(located throughout the world), and domestic applications which are mainly
installed in regions without electricity access. Many countries of the devel-
oping world in Africa, Asia and Latin-American are implementing SAPVS
to facilitate electricity access to rural populations. Some discussion about
financial and business models applied in these countries will be included.
5.2 Types of SAPVS

Before describing the different types and topologies it is convenient to
describe the particularities of PV modules and BOS components of PVSAS.
PV Modules: The PV technology most commonly used is crystalline sil-
icon. Also a-Si is present in low power PV systems, but the share is less
than 10%; higher degradation rates and lower reliability are the reason. The
CdTe technology is not used at present. Because of the contamination risk
due to Cadmium, the manufacturers of these thin film modules are required
to recycle it at the end of life. But the operational cost to implement this
with low power generation units and isolated systems is not economically
viable at present.
As the first PV terrestrial applications were isolated, and the common
batteries used were car or truck batteries, which have a 12 Vdc nominal
voltage, the first PV modules had between 34 to 36 solar cells connected
in series (or multiples of this value). The voltage for the maximum power
point is between 16.5 V and 18 V with this number of crystalline solar cells.
Therefore, the working point of the PV module (imposed by the battery)
is located in the high current region of their curve for all ambient temper-
ature ranges. This is why, in some PV module specification sheets, there
is a parameter named “Nominal Voltage”. In fact this value indicates the
voltage of the battery to be connected to this module.
The difference with grid connected systems is that also very small mod-
ules are employed with peak power lower than 100 Wp, i.e. solar lanterns
use PV modules of a few watts. These small modules are made with pieces
of bigger solar cells.
Support structures: Practically all PV array supports have fixed orien-

tation throughout the year. Sun tracking structures are not used because
of their lower reliability in these environments. They require higher main-
tenance, which is very expensive in isolated locations.
Storage: With the exception of solar pumping, in which the storage is in

potential energy with water reservoirs, SAPVS accumulate the not con-
sumed energy generated in electrochemical batteries: the most common is
the lead-acid battery, but the Li-Ion battery is being introduced more and
more into the PV market. A battery bank is composed of a set of bat-
tery elements connected in series; in Pb-acid batteries each element has a
nominal voltage of 2 V, which, depending on the state of charge (SOC),
fluctuates between 1.9 and 2.3 V. Commercial batteries have several tens
to thousands of ampere-hour capacity.
Li-Ion technology has important advantages: a high energy density,
an efficiency of 95% and these batteries can be discharged by 95% with-
out damage. The main drawbacks are the cost, although this is decreasing
quickly, and its time degradation rate.
The battery life time depends on the number of charge–discharge cycles

and their operation regime; frequent overcharge and/or over-discharge dra-
matically reduces the useful life of the battery. This is why the use of control
devices is compulsory.
Charge controller or Battery Management System: Its main func-

tion is to protect the battery against overcharge and over-discharge. The
identification of the SOC is made with the battery voltage. While quiescent
value voltage is a good indicator of the SOC, the dynamic voltage value is
not very precise because it depends on the equivalent internal resistance,
which changes with the SOC and the number of charge–discharge cycles. To
overcome this, some charge regulators integrate control algorithms based
on the history of the battery to modulate the voltage set points.
The charge controller can be classified as parallel or series depending
on the strategy to protect from overcharge. Figure 12 shows the schematic
of these configurations.
Parallel charge controllers have a better efficiency because in normal
operation (both switches on) the losses in control devices are lower than
in series charge controllers. Nevertheless, a major inconvenience is that a
PV module could be short-circuited for long periods when there is not
consumption. If the short-circuited PV module has some solar cell with
different ISC parameters or is partially shadowed, a “hot spot” failure could
appear.i The terms of reference of some tenders explicitly forbids the use
Fig. 12. Charge controller with (a) parallel and (b) series control for overcharge.
i When a solar cell works in different condition such that it has to dissipate part of
the power generated by the remaining solar cells. If the temperature is higher than the
encapsulate fusion temperature, the PV module will be damaged quickly. This failure is
denominated “Hot Spot”.
of parallel charge controllers. Besides the “hot spot” failure is linked to the
module quality.
In addition to its battery energy control function, the charge con-
troller integrates status indicators to improve the user management. Many
charge controllers integrate also a maximum power point tracking MPPT to
extract the maximum power to the PV generator. With this control device
the PV power could increase by a mean value of 8%, and in cold months
could achieve 14%.49 Another advantage of MPPT charge controllers is
that they increase the range of PV modules to be used in SAPVS, because
they increase the voltage range of PV generators suitable to connect with
batteries.
Inverter: This equipment is essential to supply AC loads in SAPVS, but

this design is different from grid connected inverters because these have
to synchronize with the grid (and switch off if there is a blackout). The
stand-alone inverters have to produce AC electricity without external ref-
erences and have to supply electricity to not purely resistive loads, i.e. they
have to support transient power requested by loads such as motors just to
arrive at a permanent regime. This is why it is important to verify the over-
load capacity in the specifications sheet. While the size of a grid connected
inverter depends on the PV array size, the size of a stand-alone inverter only
depends on the maximum current supply to the AC loads. The efficiency of
stand-alone inverters is typically below grid-connected ones, mainly because
the input DC voltage is lower: the usual values are between 0.92 and 0.95.
There is a particular inverter, named bidirectional or charger-inverter
that permits power flux from AC side to battery, besides battery to AC
loads; it is employed to charge the battery from an AC supply. This equip-
ment is also used in a particular topology, an AC bus, which will be
described later.
In Chapter 2, Sec. 5.3 were represented all the main SAPVS topolo-
gies. In this section, we analyze in more detail the topologies used for the
different autonomous applications. The simplest SAPVS is composed of a
PV module, a battery and a charge controller to supply energy to a DC
load, as shown in Fig. 13.
Most SAPVS have this topology. The typical loads are: lights (fluores-
cent, LED lamps), electronics, small kitchen appliances, etc; in general, low
consumption equipment. In the case of domestic rural electrification, the
terms used are: pico-solar (picoPV)50 for systems with a PV module lower
than 5 Wp; solar home systems (SHS) composed by a PV module between
Fig. 13. PV system diagram for DC loads.
Fig. 14. PV system for DC and AC loads.
50 to 100 Wp, a Pb lead battery with capacity about 100 Ah to 150 Ah

to supply fluorescent lamps and small appliances; and, recently, microSHS,
that are composed of a PV module between 10 to 20 Wp, a Li-Ion battery
between 40 to 90 Ah to supply LED lamps and phone chargers.
When the PV system has to supply AC loads the previous scheme is
completed with a stand-alone inverter, as it is shown in Fig. 14.
The inverter should be plugged into the PV system through the charge
controller (dotted line in Fig. 14), but many charge controllers do not work
properly in this case. Power transients, when an AC load is switch on,
produce a temporary large reduction in the battery voltage, lower than
the voltage set point for the discharged battery. Consequently, the charge
controller disconnect the loads. Some manufacturers integrate a delay of
some minutes before disconnecting or adding a data line between the two
pieces of equipment (valid only if both have the same manufacturer). To
avoid this inconvenience it is usual to connect the inverter directly to the
battery, but this requires that the inverter contains a protection for battery
over-discharge.
A particular topology for SAPVS is the case of water PV pumping
where the electrochemical storage is replaced by potential energy storage
with reservoirs. The motor is pumping water while there is generation and
the tank is not full. Depending of the water quantity per day and the height
to be pumped, DC or AC pumps are used. The capacity is higher for AC
pumps, but if a special inverter is used that can change the voltage and the
frequency, then the global efficiency is improved. PV pumped water was one
of the first competitive applications in comparison with more conventional
off-grid pumping procedures such as diesel engines.51
In general, when the requirements for energy delivered are higher, the
SAPVS integrate additional power sources such as a diesel generator, wind
machine, hydropower, etc.; they are called Hybrid Generation Systems.
Figure 15 shows a PV-diesel hybrid system, the only difference with the
PVSAS represented in Fig. 14 is the added engine. It is a DC bus topology
because the main power line is direct current.
Another option, when the systems increase in size, is AC coupled hybrid
systems, as shown in Fig. 16. In these systems DC coupling is completely
avoided and the battery is equipped with a bidirectional inverter. This
provides great modularity, simplifying the addition of any new equipment,
Fig. 15. Hybrid PVSAS.

Fig. 16. Hybrid system coupled in an AC bus.
with the cost of having additional power conditioning equipment and, thus,
additional power conversion losses.52
In AC coupled hybrid systems an island grid is built. Normally, one of
the components acts as a voltage source and constitutes the grid, setting
voltage and frequency; the other AC generators feed in their power, acting
as current sources. This results in a relatively simple control structure.
However, it also has some drawbacks. Because the grid must always be
kept alive, a permanent power supply has to be provided.
If a diesel generator is used for building the grid and is kept running
during long periods only for this purpose, the overall efficiency of the sys-
tem will be affected. In systems without a diesel generator, if the battery
inverter is used, the whole system could fail during low battery periods.
When the sun comes out again, the PV inverter, which is a grid-connected
type, will not work without the grid formed by the battery inverter and
will not be able to charge the batteries. At this point the system is blocked
and to unblock it the batteries would have to be charged independently of
the system, with the obvious drawback and system down time. In hybrid
systems with a diesel backup some strategies could be implemented to avoid
this blackout.
In addition, the power produced by the PV generator has to be

transformed to AC and the excess power with respect to AC load
consumption has to be transformed to DC for battery storage. When the
power to the AC loads is delivered from the batteries two unnecessary
energy transformations are taking place: AC–DC to the battery and DC–
AC. Considering a 92% weighted efficiency of the battery inverter,53 this
results in a maximum efficiency loss of 15%.
From the combination of the two previous systems and extracting the
advantages of each system, a combined AC–DC coupled system is possible.
Basically, this topology consists in coupling all DC sources and loads in DC
and all AC sources and loads in AC. Figure 17 shows a schematic of this
topology.
In the combined AC–DC topology the bi-directional inverter is the
brain of the system. It is in charge of building the AC grid and regulating
the charge and discharge of the battery. It is a proven robust technology,54
Fig. 17. Combined AC–DC coupled hybrid mini-grid.

plus it solves the problem of blocking the system as in AC coupling because

the batteries can be charged without the grid, and the modularity advan-
tage remains. It is suitable for large systems and it gets rid of unnecessary
efficiency losses in the battery inverter of AC coupled systems.
5.3 Design and Sizing

Planning the design of a stand-alone power generator requires us to spec-
ify the load demand curve and their evolution in the future. With this
information, we can proceed to estimate the nominal power of the genera-
tor. In the case of PV generators there is a supplementary effort: to esti-
mate the energy resource, the solar irradiation, which is a non-deterministic
variable.
The merit of a SAPVS should be judged in terms of the reliability of
the electricity supply to the load. This is usually quantified by the concept
of loss of load probability, LLP, defined as the ratio between the energy
deficit and the energy demands on the load, over a long period of time.55
Because of the random nature of the solar radiation, the LLP of even a
trouble-free PV system is always greater than zero.
The size of a PV system is a general concept including the dimensions
of the PV array and the accumulator. A useful definition of such dimensions
relates to the load: On a daily basis, the PV array capacity, CA , is defined as
the ratio between the mean PV array energy production and the mean load
energy demand. The storage capacity, Cs , is defined as the ratio between
the available energy from the accumulator fully charged and the mean load
energy demand. As will be justified later, it is convenient to consider values
for both parameters averaged over a month. Thus:
EFVdm PNOM ,G Gdm (α, β)/G∗

CAm = = PR,
Ldm Ldm
CU
CSm = ,
Ldm
where EFVm is the useful energy generated by the PV array, which has a
nominal power of PNOM,G , when the mean monthly daily irradiation value
on the array plane is Gdm (α,β) and the efficiency is PR, the performance
ratio of the PV system. The mean daily energy consumption is represented
by Ldm and the useful storage capacity is CU , which could be estimated
as the product of the nominal capacity and the maximum depth of dis-
charge allowed by the charge controller. The minimum monthly value of
CAm defines the reliability of the SAPVS and this will be the “worst”
month. When the load is constant for all the year, the worst month is that
with the lowest mean daily irradiation value.
Note that CAm depends on the meteorological conditions of the loca-
tion. That means that the same PV array for the same load can be “large”
in one site and “small” in another site with lower solar radiation.
Given a location and a load, two general ideas are intuitive: First, it
is possible to find many different combinations of CAm and CSm leading to
the same LLP value. Second, the larger the PV system size, the greater is
the cost and the lower the LLP.
The task of sizing a SAPVS consists of finding the better trade-off
between cost and reliability. Very often, the reliability is an a priori require-
ment from the user, and the PV engineering problem is formulated as fol-
lows: Which pair of CAm and CSm values leads to a given LLP value at the
minimum cost? To find the solution depends on the available solar daily
irradiation data for the location and the load evolution. A minimum time
for daily data needed for accuracy estimation is 7 years. In this case it is
easy to simulate the daily energy flows between generation, consumption
and storage for a pair of CAm and CSm values; the ratio between energy
not delivered by the generator and energy delivered to the load is the loss
of load probability.
Unfortunately, the number of locations with such information is scarce,
particularly for isolated regions. Nor has an algorithm based on solar radia-
tion statistical parameters been developed to estimate the pairs of CAm and
CSm with which a specific LLP value is achieved. When the information
about solar radiation is limited to daily mean monthly values, one value for
each month, the relation between CAm , and LLP depends upon the intu-
ition of the PV engineer. The PV array dimension is calculated to ensure
that the generation during the worst month exceeds the consumption by
a security factor directly established by the PV engineer according to the
type of application and his own experience. A similar procedure is used to
estimate the battery size. To summarize:
min(CAm,m=1 to 12 ) = FS1 and CSm = FS2 ,
where FS1 and FS2 are arbitrary factors. For instance, a typical FS1 value
for domestic SAPVS is 1.2, which means that the mean daily PV energy
production, in the worst month, will be the 120% of the energy consumed.
Normal values for FS2 , when there is not another power supply, are between
2 and 5. This method is very simple and useful to calculate the PV system
dimensions, but they do not allow us to quantify the reliability. Nevertheless

this is the method most generally used.
The steps to design a SAPVS with the “worst” month procedure are
as follow:
(a) Estimate the monthly mean daily load consumption.

(b) Calculate the mean values of a month’s solar irradiation.
(c) Select the month with the lower ratio between solar irradiation and
load consumption, once the tilt plane is optimized (see Sec. 2.2).
(d) Decide the values for FS1 and FS2 . Then the nominal power of the
PV generator, PN OM,G , and the useful battery capacity, CU , could be
calculated considering a performance ratio as 0.65 as a typical value
for SAPVS.
(e) Select the specific PV modules and battery elements in combination
with the charge controller; the number of series batteries depends of
the nominal DC voltage, VN OM . The parallel-series connection of PV
modules depends upon the charge regulator selected, but if this does
not have maximum power point tracking depends of VN OM .j The nom-
inal capacity of the battery will be the useful capacity divided by the
maximum depth of discharge allowed by the charge controller. In this
phase it is fundamental to verify the electrical compatibility between
the PV generator and the charge controller in terms of voltage and
current.
(f) Select the stand-alone inverter, if the PVSAS has to supply AC loads. If
there is no information about the hourly load distribution, the designer
should postulate it in order to select the nominal power of the inverter.
(g) Estimate more exactly the performance ratio, if possible, to correct the
PN OM,G obtained in step d. Also it is interesting to reevaluate FS1 and
FS2 with the definitive values of PN OM,G and CU .
In the case of hybrid systems the sizing task is more complex and it is
indispensable to appeal to multivariable algorithms.56 As an example, con-
sider the design of a PV-diesel hybrid system in which the diesel engine has
a backup role, i.e. the yearly energy delivered by the engine is lower than
10% of the total energy consumed. With this hybrid system, the selection of
j Theelectrical engineering rule to select the nominal DC voltage is to minimize the

thermal losses in wiring, but in SAPVS possible conflicts could be presented when there
are DC loads that have to be supplied with specific voltage values (12, 24, 48, 120 V).
battery storage capacity is fully dependent on investment costs, the replace-

ment costs of the battery and the fuel cost, but not dependent on the loss
of load probability required: the deficit of energy production, a consequence
of the solar radiation variability, is provided by the diesel backup.
To optimize the design of a hybrid system it is very suitable to use
software tools such as HOMER (Hybrid Optimisation Model for Electric
Renewables), which is freely available as HOMER Legacy Version 2.68.57
5.4 Operation and Management

Although the system is installed according to the guidelines and is thor-
oughly inspected prior to handing it over to the user, its short-term as well
as long-term performance is considerably influenced by the user. There are
some simple but basic guidelines, all of them compulsory, to be followed in
system operation:
• The PV module should be without shadows and properly cleaned.

• Limit consumption according to the technician recommendations.
• Connect only allowed line extensions and new load appliances (attention
to power and voltage).
• Do not by-pass the charge controller.
• Pay attention regularly to charge controller warnings.
• Do not short-circuit the fuse location with a wire.
• If load replacements or any other task is done on the installation, pay
attention to polarity.
Users’ training is important for sustainable SPV stand-alone electrifi-

cation effort.
• Maintenance is a key factor for PV systems sustainability. Maintenance

strategy, resources and responsibilities should be clarified at the project
design phase, before the installation. Some points to be defined are: Sub-
stitution of old equipment;
• Preventive actions: frequency and tasks;
• Time of response after users warning;
• Maintenance tasks distribution; expert technicians, local technicians,
users;
• Sanctions in case of maintenance delay;
• Costs;
• Training.
Table 3: PV generator maintenance guidelines.
General item Specific item Action (if failure is detected)
Location Position changes, Relocation, avoiding shadowing as much

shadowing as possible.
Cleanliness Appreciable soiling Cleaning, with a frequency depending on
(visual inspection) outdoors conditions
Connections Tightness, box enclosure, Reconnect wiring Change terminals by
signs of corrosion new ones
Technical guidelines for stand-alone system maintenance are given below.

Local factors and project design considerably affects system operation, per-
formance, failures and maintenance needs. These guidelines can be suitably
modified for any particular project conditions. The specific points to be
checked by the technician and the recommended corrective action are given
in Table 3. All maintenance calls should be recorded (the type of incidence
and date) by the technician. This is very useful for the long-term perfor-
mance of the system and also as reference document for the installations
to follow.
(A) PV generator:
The PV generator does not usually need frequent actions, although they
are basic to achieve an optimum energy generation. Particular conditions
determine this PV generator maintenance.
(B) Battery:
Battery ageing is one of the main concerns in PV system performance and
energy supply. Battery checking, maintenance and replacement are essential
tasks in long-term operation. However, it is not easy to state specific criteria
for decisions, since a bad battery state could have different, but sometimes
dependent, causes. The experience of the technician is crucial for good
maintenance. In the Table 4 there is a proposed set of battery maintenance
guidelines.
(C) Charge controller:
Charge controllers should be periodically checked, because of their influence
on the system operation. Some specific points should be always checked
(see Table 5).
(D) Load appliances:
Loads are obviously the components that change most frequently between
technicians’ visits. Special attention need to be paid not only to particular
Table 4: Battery maintenance guidelines.
Labeling Battery type and Ask for battery characteristics and

capacity labels
Location Safety, ventilation, Relocate the battery or rebuild its
temperature protection enclosure
General conditions Liquid spillage, box Ask for causes of bad conditions
breakage, left cup (internal or external) → change
battery if energy supply is not
correct
Connections Tightness, signs of Reconnection, cleaning Ask for
corrosion energy supply conditions
Electrolyte level At minimum level signal Refilling with distilled water → too
(above plates) frequent water refilling can be
caused by a poor battery or a
high voltage regulation
Below the plates Battery can be seriously damaged
→ verify energy supply and
check its evolution
Electrolyte density Mean value → it depends Recharge battery
on the SoC (never
below 1.10 g/cc)
Differences between cells Equalization charge → Density
(never above 0.03 g/cc) correction (to be made only by
technicians) → Battery change,
due to cell damage
Voltage Open-circuit voltage Check the actual irradiation
(never below 11.4 V) conditions and the energy supply
evolution → battery ageing,
charge controller failure.
Capacity High number of load Check system conditions (load
disconnections (users consumption, component
complaints if no conditions) → battery change →
monitoring equipment verify remaining capacity of
is installed) replaced batteries (or samples)
lamps conditions but on the number and type of the appliances, due to
their influence on the energy balance of the system (see Table 6).
(E) Wiring and accessories:
Load line extensions made by users to supply electricity to new rooms are
common practices in the field. Special attention need to be paid to assure
some basic requirements (see Table 7).
(F) Inverter:
Inverter maintenance tasks are similar to the ones for charge controllers
(see Table 8).
Table 5: Charge controller maintenance guidelines.
General conditions Breakage, burnt signs Substitution

Warning signals Active in maintenance Substitution
time
Power transmission: Values out of Substitution due to internal
voltage measurement specifications component failure
Regulation thresholdsk Out of specifications Readjustment if possible
(field measurement Substitution → cause of
with a potentiometer) battery damage
Fuse conditions Rating, Blown, Connect new fuses
short-circuit fuse (including spare parts)
position
Connections Tightness, terminals Reconnect
Table 6: Loads maintenance guidelines.
Type and power Out of project Retirement of incorrect

specifications appliances → Advise for low
consumption if no low power
appliances are available
(provisional measure)
Light performance No light Replacement → Verify
replacement frequency for
further causes
Excessive blackening Spare parts needed → check
time in operation → quality
Connections Tightness Reconnect
(G) PV system:
After all components have been checked, the system operation needs to
be verified (see Table 9). If there are no failures or if the failures can be
repaired at the moment, the system is ready to operate. If not, provisions
have to be made to assure the fastest repair possible.
To conclude this section, the paramount importance of O&M in SAPVS
has to be stressed; the long term reliability is linked to the implementation
of the best O&M practices, but this is not an easy task in rural electrification
k Thistest is the substantial importance for the long-term operation of the PV system.
The procedure is easy, but for a technician. Only a voltmeter, a potentiometer and the
battery itself are enough to measure the voltage set points of the charge regulator.
Table 7: Wiring maintenance guidelines.
Type Incorrect type, no Substitution

polarity identification
Electrical behavior High voltage losses, Substitution, (optionally:
insufficient capacity double wiring, as interim
solution)
Line extensions Permission, conditions Retirement if not allowed
Substitution if out of
specifications
Plugs and sockets External conditions, Reconnect
polarity, connections Substitution
Switches Bad connection, type, Reconnect
rating Substitution
Table 8: Inverter maintenance guidelines.
General conditions Breakage, burnt signs Substitution

Warning signals Active in maintenance Substitution
time
Self-consumption Values out of Substitution
specifications
Voltage regulation Out of specifications Substitution → loads damage
(AC voltage at real
DC input)
Fuse conditions Rating, Blown, Connect new fuses (including
short-circuit fuse spare parts)
position
Connections Tightness, terminals Reconnect
Table 9: PV system maintenance guidelines.
Item Criteria Action (if failure is detected)
System performance Switch all loads Return to component verification
programs with a high degree of dispersion. In fact, many rural electrification

programs fail because the operation costs were not sustainable.
5.5 Business Models and International Experiences

To analyze the business models for SAPVS it is convenient to separate the
PV systems depending on the particular economic regions where the PV
systems are located. For SAPVS installed in the developed world the sales
model, direct or credit, is practically the only one present. However, for rural
electrification in developing countries the most extended business model
are microcredits and fees for service, also denominated “Energy Service
Company”.58
Rural electrification programs with Solar Home Systems based on
microcredits are the most extended, probably because it is the preferred
model in Asia (in Bangladesh more than 3.5 SHS millions have been
installed at the end of 201459 ), but there are many electrification programs
based on fee for service: 58.000 SHSs in Laos,60 25.000 in Morocco61 24.000
in the program funded by the Foundation Rural Energy Services — Mali,
South Africa, Burkina Faso, Guinea-Bissau and Uganda — and at a lower-
scale Botswana, Ethiopia, Kiribati (the first example of Energy Service
Company at the end of 80s), Namibia, Zambia, Fiji, Ghana, India, Cape
Vert, Tuvalu, Benin, etc.
Also in Latin America there are fee for service rural electrification pro-
grams. Some examples are: Argentina, Bolivia, Brazil, Chili, Honduras,
Peru, and Dominican Republic. It should be remarked that the Argen-
tinian program PERMER,62 was started in 1996 and is still running. One
of the companies working in this program is EJESA. This company has
7.000 clients disseminated in the Jujuy Department, who receive electricity
produced by thermal generation, PV-diesel hybrid systems, hydroelectricity
and solar homes systems (4,000 are installed). Other interesting case study
is the program Luz para todos, in Brazil. In the Bahia Department, Coelba,
alone, the concessionary company installed 20.000 SAPVS for AC loads at
the end of 2012. After reviewing the extended bibliography about business
models for SAPVS the conclusion is that the business model selected does
not guarantee the success of the program.63
In an interesting reference, the success and failure factors are analyzed
for ten energy access programs supplied by renewable energy in Asian coun-
tries (eight with PV technology).64 The methodology used for the study is
based on a multifactorial qualitative analysis from a selected bibliogra-
phy and many interviews with the stakeholders. The results show ten key
elements for success: appropriate technology, income generation, financ-
ing, political leadership, capacity generation, programs flexibility, market-
ing and awareness, stakeholders implication, real appropriateness of the
project as seen by the users community and technical quality. Once again
the study shows that the business model is not critical for the success of
the rural electrification program.
6 Safety and Protections

Before describing the main recommendations on safety, it is worth mention-
ing the particular characteristics of PV generators, that are different from
other DC electricity generators. First, PV generators are intrinsically cur-
rent limited sources (with the rated current ISC being approximately just
20% higher than the optimal operating point IM for crystalline silicon tech-
nologies). Secondly, they are spatially distributed and permanently operate
outdoors, which increases the exposure to ageing agents. And third, the
previous fact, together with their particular energy source (the sun) makes
PV generators especially difficult to be “turned-off” in case of faults. Faults
that, in cases such as electric arcs, may persist for long periods before being
noticed when the damage is already done. All these aspects influence the
required safety measures to be implemented in the design and sizing of PV
systems.
Potential faults in PV systems include faulty electrical connections,
insulation losses, short circuits, overcurrents and overvoltages, the causes
being common to conventional electrical installations: ageing, degradation,
mechanical damages, ill-functioning connections, adverse meteorological
conditions, etc. In any case, a PV system should be designed to guaran-
tee safety for people, electrical installations and the electricity grid, if it is
grid connected. In the next paragraphs basic design criteria and the most
frequently used methods are described.
The main principles underlying electrical protection for human beings
are to prevent direct access to active (live) parts and to make accessible
conductive parts safe in normal operation conditions or in the presence
of a single insulation defect. In this sense, consideration of the effects of
DC and AC current on human beings has led to the definition of limit
contact voltages applicable to PV generators and inverters under which
no dangerous currents occur,65 respectively: 120 V (maximum open cir-
cuit voltage66 ) and 50 V (dry/humid AC electricity supply). These lim-
its would involve large currents of PV generators in systems of just a
few kW and, additionally, would be not compatible with grid connection
requirements. Consequently, protection measures must be taken in order to
guarantee:
• Protection against direct contact, or physical contact with an electrical

material (e.g. a conductor, or equipment terminal) that is live in normal
circumstances.
• Protection against indirect contact, or contact with an exposed-

conductive-part that is not normally alive, but has become so accidentally
(due to an insulation failure or some other cause).
Particularly, effective in this sense is the use of double or reinforced insula-

tion, especially in the DC circuit. This requires using PV modules and other
electrical materials (cables, connectors, connection boxes, etc.) equivalent
to class II insulation (class A according to a specific PV modules stan-
dard67 ) and results in floating PV generators, which are intrinsically safer
than functionally earthed ones. However, since insulation faults cannot be
fully avoided in the DC circuit, automatic disconnection of supply can be
implementedl,42 :
• For inverters with galvanic isolation by means of continuous measure-

ment of the PV generator insulation resistance. Disconnection should be
triggered if this resistance falls below a specific limit; re-connection with
the grid should occur when insulation resistance returns to acceptable
values.
• For inverters without galvanic isolation (e.g. transformerless) upon con-
tinuous measurement of insulation resistance and residual currents (leak-
ages to ground). In addition to an insulation resistance limit, a residual
current limit should also trigger the disconnection.
For functionally earthed PV generators that should be only connected

to inverters with galvanic isolation, implementation of automatic discon-
nection of supply is also based on insulation resistance monitoring prior
to connection and continuous residual currents monitoring during normal
operation.
Automatic disconnection of supply on the AC side can be implemented
by using circuit breakers and residual current devices, depending on the
AC earthing/grounding configuration (TT, TN, IT).68–70
Concerning protection measures of electrical installations, they should
include:
• Short circuits and overcurrents. In addition to selecting the DC and AC

cables’ adequate sections (given the expected maximum currents), cable
layout should prevent contact between opposite polarity conductors and
l Combining inverter shut down and physical disconnection of the PV generator–inverter

or inverter–grid interfaces.
terminals. Protection devices to interrupt faulty currents should be also

used, complying with existing standards (e.g. fuses,71 circuit breakers,
switches,72 etc.).
• Overvoltages. A PV generator does not necessarily increase the risk of
the direct impact of lightning strikes. However, if PV is installed in build-
ings, in case of lightning strikes, the electrical facilities may experience
electromagnetic interference induced in the PV conductors, cable race-
ways, etc. In any case, a lightning strike risk assessment should be done
according to existing standards73 and results considered for the electri-
cal design. In addition, surges in PV systems may be induced by coupled
voltages due to lightning discharges and switching operations in the elec-
trical grid. Consequently, overvoltage protection must be implemented at
the PV generator–inverter or charge controller interface (usually before
DC cables enter the building and at the inverter’s input) and at the
inverter–grid connection interface (at the inverter’s output and at the
building’s low-voltage power supply).74,75
• Equipotential bonding and grounding. These are paramount for the cor-
rect operation of protection measures against electrical shock, lightning
and overvoltages; consequently, they should be carefully planned tak-
ing into account their particular operation conditions (especially in the
PV generator). Grounding should be also compatible with existing AC
earthing/grounding configuration. Functional earthing of PV genera-
tors should be implemented according to recommended practices (stan-
dards).42
• When batteries are present in the installation, additional safety provi-
sions have to be made. Batteries are potentially dangerous, because of
their high energy density: short circuit and overcharge could produce an
explosion; additionally, in the case of vented lead-acid the overcharge
could cause the dissociation of water into oxygen and hydrogen and both
gasses are highly flammable. To avoid critical situations it is compulsory
to add protective measures for lead-acid76 and Li-Ion77 batteries that are
preferred for PV systems.
Last, but not least, small grid connected PV systems must main-
tain the electricity grid quality parameters, described in the correspond-
ing national/local grid connection standards,47,48 an explicit responsibility
allocated to the inverters. In addition, PV systems should not transfer to
the grid any potential defects and disturbances.
References
1. R. Barlow, B. McNelis and A. Derrick, Status and experience of solar PV
pumping in developing countries, in Proc. 10th European Photovoltaic Solar
Energy Conf., Lisbon, Portugal, pp. 1143–1146 (1991).
2. T. Ackermann, G. Anderson and L. Soder, Distributed generation: A defini-
tion, Electric Power System Research 57(3) (2001), pp. 195–204.
3. S. Wilcox and W. Marion, Users’ manual for TMY3 data sets, Techni-
cal Report NREL/TP-581-43156, National Renewable Energy Laboratory
(2008).
4. World Meteorological Organization, World radiation data centre. Available
at: http://wrdc.mgo.rssi.ru/wrdc en new.htm 1 September 2014.
5. European Commission, Joint Research Centre, Institute for Energy and
Transport, Photovoltaic Geographical Information System (PVGIS), Avail-
able at: http://re.jrc.ec.europa.eu/pvgis/index.htm. Accessed 1 September
2014.
6. Solar and Wind Energy Resource Assessment (SWERA). Available at:
http://en.openei.org/apps/SWERA/. Accessed 1 September 2014.
7. R. J. Aguiar, M. Collares-Pereira and J. P. Conde, Simple procedure for
generating sequences of daily radiation using a library of Markov transition
matrices, Solar Energy 40(3) (1988), pp. 269–279.
8. M. Collares-Pereira and A. Rabl, The average distribution of solar radiation
correlations between diffuse and hemispherical and between daily and hourly
insolation values, Solar Energy 22(1) (1979), pp. 155–164.
9. D. G. Erbs, S. A. Klein and J. A. Duffie, Estimation of the diffuse radia-
tion fraction for hourly, daily and monthly — average global radiation, Solar
Energy 28(4) (1982), pp. 293–302.
10. R. Perez, P. Ineichen, E. Maxwell, R. Seals and A. Zelenka, Dynamic global to
direct irradiance conversion models, ASHRAE Transactions-Research Series,
pp. 354–369 (1992).
11. J. E. Hay, Calculation of monthly mean solar radiation for horizontal and
inclined surfaces, Solar Energy 23 (1979), pp. 301–330.
12. R. Perez, R. Seals, P. Ineichen, R. Stewart and D. Menicucci, A new simplified
version of the Perez diffuse irradiance model for tilted surfaces, Solar Energy
39(3) (1987), pp. 221–231.
13. J. Cronemberger, E. Caamaño-Martı́n and S. Sánchez, Assessing the solar
irradiation potential for solar photovoltaic applications in buildings at low
latitudes — making the case for Brazil, Energy and Buildings 55 (2012),
pp. 264–272.
14. T. Nordmann and L. Clavadetscher, Understanding temperature effects on
PV system performance, Proc. 3rd World Conf. Photovoltaic Energy Con-
version, 3 (2003), pp. 2243–2246.
15. J. A. Duffie and W. A. Beckman, Solar Engineering of Thermal Processes
3rd edn. (Wiley, New York, 2006).
16. E. Lorenzo, Energy collected and delivered by PV modules, in eds. A. Luque
and S. Hegedus, Handbook of Photovoltaic Science and Engineering (Wiley,
Great Britain, 2003), pp. 905–970.
17. M. Iqbal, Introduction to Solar Radiation (Academic Press, Canada, 1983).

18. Deutsche Gesellschaft für Sonnenergie, Planning and Installing Photovoltaic
Systems, 3rd edn. (Routledge, London, 2013).
19. J. Solórzano-Moral, D. Masa-Bote, M. A. Egido-Aguilera and E. Caamaño-
Martin, A model for the simulation of energy gains when using distributed
maximum power point tracking (DMPPT) in photovoltaic arrays, Progress
in Photovoltaics: Research and Applications, 23(2) (2015), pp. 182–193.
20. G. Blaesser and D. Munro, Guidelines for the assessment of photovoltaic
plants document. A photovoltaic system monitoring, Commission of the Euro-
pean Communities, Joint Research Centre, Ispra, Italy, EUR 16338 EN, Issue
4.2 (June 1993).
21. International Energy Agency — Photovoltaic Power Systems — Task 13:
Performance and Reliability of Photovoltaic Systems, Analysis of long-term
performance of PV systems, IEA-PVPS T13-05:2014 (2014).
22. IEC 60904-2, Photovoltaic devices — Part 2: Requirements for photovoltaic
reference solar devices.
23. IEC 60904-5, Photovoltaic devices — Part 5: Determination of the equiva-
lent cell temperature (ECT) of photovoltaic (PV) devices by the open-circuit
voltage method.
24. International Energy Agency — Photovoltaic Power Systems Programme —
Task 2: Country reports on PV system performance, Report IEA-PVPS T2-
05:2004 (2004).
25. International Energy Agency — Photovoltaic Power Systems — Task 13:
Performance and Reliability of Photovoltaic Systems, Analytical monitoring
of PV Systems, IEA-PVPS T13-03:2014 (2014).
26. K. Butti and J. Perlin, A Golden Thread: 2500 Years of Architecture and
Technology (Van Nostrand Reinhold Company, New York, 1980).
27. S. J. Strong and R. H. Wills, Building integration of photovoltaics in the
United States, in Proc. 11th European Photovoltaic Solar Energy Conf., Mon-
treaux, pp. 1672–1676 (1992).
28. E. Kern, Residential utility connected systems, in Proc. 19th IEEE PV Spe-
cialists Conf., New Orleans, pp. 1007–1011 (1987).
29. C. Meier, C. Schaffner and W. Blum, 1996 Photovoltaic energy statistics of
Switzerland. Overall yield, quality assurance and Results of monitoring, in
Proc. 14th European Photovoltaic Solar Energy Conf., Barcelona, pp. 901–906
(1997).
30. H. Gabler, K. Heidler and V. U. Hoffmann, Market introduction of grid-
connected photovoltaic installations in Germany, in Proc. 14th European Pho-
tovoltaic Solar Energy Conf., Barcelona, pp. 27–31 (1997).
31. H. Wilk, Grid interconnection of photovoltaic systems in Austria, in Proc.
Seminar, PV grid-interconnection, Task V of International Energy Agency —
Photovoltaic Systems Programme, Zurich (1997).
32. J. Solorzano, Distributed control strategies for Photovoltaic systems in urban
environments, PhD, Escuela Técnica Superior de Ingenieros de Telecomuni-
cación, Universidad Politécnica de Madrid (2014).
33. F. Sick and T. Erge (eds.), Photovoltaic in Buildings. A Design Handbook for
Architects and Engineers (James & James (Science Publishers), 1996).
34. D. Prasad and M. Snow (eds.), Designing with Solar Power. A Source
Book for Building Integrated Photovoltaics (BIPV) (Earthscan, London,
2005).
35. T. H. Reijenga, PV in Architecture, in eds. A. Luque and S. Hegedus, Hand-
book of Photovoltaic Science and Engineering (Wiley, Great Britain, 2003),
pp. 1006–1042.
36. International Energy Agency — Solar Heating and Cooling Programme —
Task 41, Solar energy and architecture, subtask C: Concepts, case studies and
guidelines. Available at: http://task41.iea-shc.org/casestudies/. Accessed on
22 February 2015.
37. Directive 2002/91/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16
December 2002 on the Energy Performance of Buildings, Official Journal of
the European Union, 04.016.2002, L.1/65–L.1/71.
38. Directive 2010/31/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 19
May 2010 on the Energy Performance of Buildings, Official Journal of the
European Union, 18.06.2010, L.153/13–L.153/35.
39. F. Crassard and J. Rode, The evolution of building integrated photo-
voltaics (BIPV) in the German and French technological innovation systems,
Chalmers University of Technology, Report 2007, 16 (2007).
40. Royal Decree 314/2006, of 17 March 2006 approving the Spanish Techni-
cal Building Code. [In Spanish]. Available at: http://www.boe.es/diario boe/
txt.php?id=BOE-A-2006-5515. Accessed on 15 February 2015.
See also a revised version of parts related to energy use, including solar
active technologies (solar thermal and PV): Order FOM/1635/2013, of
10 September updating Basic Document DB-HE “Energy Savings”, of
the Spanish Technical Building Code. Available at: http://www.boe.es/
diario boe/txt.php?id=BOE-A-2013-9511. Accessed on 2 February 2015.
41. A. Athienitis and W. O’Brien (eds.), Modelling, Design, and Optimization of
Net-Zero Energy Buildings, 5th edn. (Ernst & Sohn, Berlin, 2015).
42. IEC/TS 62548, Photovoltaic (PV) arrays — Design requirements.
43. IEC 61683, Photovoltaic systems — power conditioners — procedure for mea-
suring efficiency.
44. W. Bower, C. M. Whitaker, W. Erdman, M. B. Behnke and M. Fitzgerald,
Performance test protocol for evaluating inverters used in grid-connected pho-
tovoltaic systems, Sandia National Laboratories (2004).
45. IEC 62109-1, Safety of power converters for use in photovoltaic power sys-
tems — Part 1: General requirements.
See also: IEC 62109-2, Safety of power converters for use in photovoltaic
power systems — Part 2: Particular requirements for inverters.
46. UL 1741, Inverters, converters, controllers an interconnection system equip-
ment for use with distributed energy resources.
47. EN 50438, Requirements for micro-generating plants to be connected in par-
allel with public low-voltage distribution networks. Note: This European
standard deals with installations rated up to 3 × 16 A, or a maximum out-
put of approximately 11 kW. A new standard for larger generators is under
development.
48. IEEE Standards Association, IEEE 1547 Standard for Interconnecting Dis-
tributed Resources with Electric Power Systems.
49. M. Camino-Villacorta, M. A. Egido-Aguilera and P. Dı́az, Test procedures for
maximum power point tracking charge controllers characterization, Progress
in Photovoltaics, 20(3) (2012), pp. 50–62.
50. J. Keane, Pico-solar Electric Systems: The Earthscan Expert Guide to
the Technology and Emerging Market, Earthscan expert series (Routledge,
New York, 2014).
51. B. Van Campen, D. Guidi and G. Best, Solar photovoltaics for sustainable
agriculture and rural development, (Rural Development, FAO Publication,
Rome, 2000).
52. J. Solorzano and M. A. Egido, Simulation of AC, DC and AC–DC Coupled
Hybrid Mini-grids — In Search of the Most Efficient System in 6th European
Conference PV Hybrids and Mini-grids (Chambery, France, 2012).
53. A. Chouder and S. Silvestre, Automatic supervision and fault detection of PV
systems based on power losses analysis, Energy Conversion and Management
51(10) (2010), pp. 1929–1937.
54. P.-O. Moix and C. Ruchet, Partial AC-coupling in minigrids, in 5th European
Conf. PV Hybrids and Mini-grids (Tarragona, Spain, 2010).
55. M. Egido and E. Lorenzo, The sizing of stand-alone PV-system: A review
and a proposed new method, Solar Energy Materials and Solar Cells 26(1)
(1992), pp. 51–69.
56. D. Neves, C. A. Silva and C. Stephen, Design and implementation of hybrid
renewable energy systems on micro-communities: A review on case studies,
Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 31 (2014), pp. 935–946.
57. S. Sinha and S. S. Chandel, Review of software tools for hybrid renew-
able energy systems, Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 32 (2014),
pp. 192–205.
58. Meeting the Challenge of Rural Electrification in Developing Nations — The
Experience of Successful Programs, ed. D. Barnes, ESMAP (2005).
59. www.idcol.org. Accessed in March 2015.
60. M. J. Bambawale, A. L. D’Agostino and B. K. Sovacool, Realizing rural
electrification in Southeast Asia: Lessons from Laos, Energy for Sustainable
Development 15(1) (2011), pp. 41–48.
61. B. Allali, TEMASOL: Providing Energy Access to Remote Rural Households
in Morocco, GIM Case Study No. B093 (United Nations Development Pro-
gramme, New York, 2011).
62. Chapter 10: A case study on exclusive concessions for rural off-grid service in
Argentina, Energy Services for the World‘s Poor, ESMAP (2000).
63. M. Bazilian, P. Nussbaumer, C. Eibs-Singer, A. Brew-Hammond, V. Modi,
B. Sovacool, V. Ramana and P. Aqrawi, Improving access to modern energy
services: Insights from case studies, The Electricity Journal 25(1) (2012),
pp. 93–114.
64. B. K. Sovacool, A qualitative factor analysis of renewable energy and Sustain-
able Energy for All (SE4ALL) in the Asia-Pacific, Energy Policy 59 (2013),
pp. 393–403.
65. IEC/TR 60479-5, Effects of current on human beings and livestock — Part
5: Touch voltage threshold values for physiological effects.
66. IEC 60364-7-712, Low-voltage electrical installations — Part 7-712: Require-
ments for special installations or locations — Solar photovoltaic (PV) power
supply systems.
67. IEC 61730-1, Photovoltaic (PV) module safety qualification — Part 1:
Requirements for construction.
68. IEC 61008, Residual current operated circuit-breakers without integral over-
current protection for household and similar uses (RCCBs).
See also: IEC 61009, Residual current operated circuit-breakers with integral
overcurrent protection for household and similar uses (RCBOs).
69. IEC 60898-1, Electrical accessories — Circuit breakers for overcurrent pro-
tection for household and similar installations — Part 1: Circuit-breakers for
a.c. operation.
See also: IEC 60898-2, Circuit-breakers for overcurrent protection for house-
hold and similar installations — Part 2: Circuit-breakers for a.c. and d.c.
operation.
70. IEC 60947-2, Low-voltage switchgear and controlgear — Part 2: Circuit-
breaker.
71. IEC 60269-6, Low-voltage fuses — Part 6: Supplementary requirements for
fuse-links for the protection of solar photovoltaic energy systems.
72. IEC 60947-3, Low-voltage switchgear and controlgear — Part 3: Switches,
disconnectors, switch-disconnectors and fuse-combination units.
73. IEC 62305-2, Protection against lightning — Part 2: Risk management.
74. IEC 62305-3, Protection against lightning — Part 3: Physical damage to
structures and life hazard.
75. DEHN+SÖHNE, Lightning Protection Guide, 3rd edn. (DEHN + SÖHNE
GmbH + Co.KG., Neumarkt (Germany), Germany, 2014).
76. IEEE Std 937-2000, IEEE recommended practice for installation and main-
tenance of lead-acid batteries for photovoltaic (PV) systems.
77. IEC/TS 62257-9-5, Recommendations for small renewable energy and hybrid
systems for rural electrification — Part 9.5: Integrated system — Selection
of stand-alone lighting kits for rural electrification.
Chapter 8
Low Temperature Solar Thermal Applications
Brian Norton
Dublin Institute of Technology
Grangegorman, Dublin 7
[email protected]
Hans Martin Henning

Division Thermal Systems and Buildings
Fraunhofer-Institut für Solare Energiesysteme ISE
Heidenhofstrasse 2, 79110 Freiburg, Germany
[email protected]
Daniel Mugnier
TECSOL SA, 105 avenue Alfred Kastler — BP90434
66004 Perpignan — France
[email protected]
The applications of harnessing solar energy as heat are presented. The empha-
sis is on the practical uses of these technologies and their potential for more
extensive adoption. Solar water heating, the space heating of buildings, indus-
trial and agricultural process heating together with the many uses of solar
cooling are discussed.
1 Outline of the Chapter

A range of solar energy applications are considered that produce heat or
cooling from about −20◦ C to +200◦ C. They include domestic hot water
production, the provision of heating and cooling for buildings and industrial
processes and agricultural uses such as drying. The emphasis in this chapter
is on applications on the left-hand-side of Fig. 1.
299
300 B. Norton, H. M. Henning & D. Mugnier
Fig. 1. Taxonomy of solar thermal applications.
2 Brief History of the Low Temperature Uses of Solar

Thermal Energy
Mankind’s conscious intentional harnessing of solar energy probably com-
menced with solar drying of harvested crops, animal skins and of clay to
make bricks. Appropriate orientation of buildings for solar heat gain fea-
tured in China from 6000 BC, in Greece from 500 BC1 and 2,000 years ago
Roman baths included glazings to retain solar heat.2
In 1974, Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries action led to
an increase in oil prices. This led to increased use of solar water heaters
with novel designs arising from a general upsurge in solar energy research
and development.3 For example, the heat pipe evacuated tube collector and
improved flat plate collectors using solar selective surfaces were developed
in this period.4,5 Such urban planning for solar access has long antecedents,
for example La Chaux de Fonds in Switzerland; shown in Fig. 2 was rebuilt
(after a fire) so that minimal mutual overshading of buildings ensued.
The first solar water heater, the “The Climax Solar Water Heater”,
shown in Fig. 3 was patented in 1891.6 It comprised four 2 liter galvanized
iron dull-black tanks in a single-glazed felt-insulated wooden box.4
The first solar water heater which separated the collector and hot water
tanks was patented in 1910. This thermosyphon unit7 consisted of a sin-
gle serpentine absorber tube flat-plate collector. Header-and-riser collector
absorber tube arrangements, that gave both less pressure resistance to fluid
Low Temperature Solar Thermal Applications 301
Fig. 2. Urban planning to avoid overshading in La Chaux de Fonds.
Fig. 3. Kemp’s “Climax” solar water heater.6
flow and more effective heat transfer, emerged later but spread rapidly as
can be seen from an example of such a latter system installed in London
U.K. in 1947 shown in Fig. 4.
Such thermosyphon solar water heaters which stored heated water for
use at night, represented a significant advance over integral collector store
solar water heaters that had poor nocturnal heat retention. In the 1950s
and 1960s, solar water heaters of varying design had niche markets in,
for example, Japan, the Caribbean, and Cyprus. Significant markets also
emerged in Israel and Australia.
Fig. 4. Diagram of a typical early header-and-riser absorber thermosyphon solar water

heater with system temperatures in Fahrenheit.
3 Solar Water Heating

Solar water heaters shown in Fig. 5, are termed either direct or indirect
depending on whether the liquid in the collector constitutes the hot water
withdrawn or is a separate liquid that passes through a heat exchanger.
The heat exchanger can (i) be part of another hydronic circuit or outside
the hot water tank,8 (ii) surround the store9,10 or (iii) most commonly, is
Fig. 5. Water heating solar collectors. Clockwise from top left, a flat-plate ther-
mosyphon system, an unglazed collector for swimming pool heating, a photovoltaic-
thermal collector and a evaluated tube thermosyphon.
immersed in the tank.11 The terms passive or active apply when the heat
transfer liquid circulates buoyantly or by the action of a pump respectively.
In a thermosyphon solar-energy water heater, the difference in the densities
of the hot water in the solar-heated collector and the cooler water in the
store induces gravity-driven buoyancy forces in a closed pipework circuit
comprising either (i) in a direct system comprising a solar collector, and hot-
water store or (ii) in an indirect system, in an aqueous anti-freeze solution
passing through a solar collector and heat-exchanger located in the tank. In
regions with “hard” water, the use of soft water as the anti-freeze solvent
in an indirect system avoids calcium carborate scale deposits on the inner
walls of collector tubes that restrict flow and inhibit heat transfer. Cold
water can be supplied at mains water pressure or at reduced pressure via
either a pressure reduction valve or a header tank.
Though pumped circulation solar water heaters neither provide more
hot water nor heat water more efficiently than a comparable thermosyphon
system,11 they allow for greater layout flexibility as; (i) the hot water tank
can be located beneath the collectors, (ii) only the collectors need be located
external to the building so the roof does not need to support the weight
of a hot water tank and (iii) particularly for larger systems, installation is
easier.
In pumped circulation systems, temperature sensors at the collector’s

inlet and outlet feed signals a controller so that the pump ceases opera-
tion at night and during periods when the solar heat gained by the col-
lector is less than the heat lost from it. To achieve this, various control
algorithms have been developed12 though in practical systems pumps are
activated usually by an unmodified temperature difference across the collec-
tor. Systems using a photovoltaic-powered circulation pump operate only
when the solar energy intensity is sufficient to meet the power requirement
of an optimally-selected13 direct current pump. Most pumped-circulation
systems have roof-mounted collectors, through collectors have been wall-
mounted14,15 and formed free-standing ground-level collector arrays16,17 for
very-large-scale solar district heating applications.
Satisfying parts of both a building’s space heating demand and domes-
tic hot water, a solar combi-system can provide high energy savings when a
well-insulated thermally-stratified small-capacity storage tank is operated
at a low set-point temperature.18 Combi-system configurations including
(i) tank-in-tank solar combi-systems that have a domestic hot water tank
integrated into the space heating hot water store: solar heat is transferred
by an internal spiral heat exchanger located in the lower part of the tank
with domestic hot water withdrawn directly from domestic hot water tank
in the store; (ii) “bikini” tank combi-systems comprise two separate mantles
encircling the hot water tank circumferentially at upper and lower levels,
these circulate domestic hot water and solar heated water respectively, both
transferring heat to the space heating water with domestic hot water being
withdrawn directly from the tank. Bikini tank combi-systems are particu-
larly suited to low-energy buildings because they operate effectively at set-
point temperatures.19
In integral collection storage solar water heaters, the hot water tank
absorbs solar energy directly beneath a glazed aperture. Nocturnal radia-
tive heat losses to clear night skies can lead to only luke-warm water being
available early the next day. Techniques to retain heat better overnight
include; (i) perforated inner sleeves,20–27 (ii) transparent foils separated by
a honeycomb structure28,29 (iii) “Breadbox” integral collector storage sys-
tems,30 in which an insulated manually or automatically moveable aperture
cover is deployed to reduce night-time heat loss and is opened during the
day when it can double as a reflector30 and (iv) evacuation of the space
between the store and the glazed aperture.31
Passive indirect closed two-phase transfer of heat from the solar
collector to the store avoids scaling, fouling and the need for freeze
protection, With suitable fluids, corrosion is far more limited than with
aqueous systems. Working fluid options include acetone, petroleum ether,32
trichlorofluoromethane,33 R134a,34 R407C,35 and R410A.36 In a novel inte-
gral collector storage solar water heater with an outer absorbing vessel and
an inner storage vessel, a small pool of water is placed in the space between
the two vessels? When heated this water evaporates to condense on the
colder surface of the inner vessel, thus transferring thermal energy to the
store.37
In a Combi+ system, heat provided by solar collectors may be used to
evaporate the working fluid in a heat pump in a combi-system that transfers
heat from a colder reservoir to a warmer reservoir. During compression, the
temperature of the heat pump as38 working fluid increases to well above
the temperature provided by the solar collector. During condensation, heat
is rejected at a higher temperature to the hot water store.39,40
As swimming pools’ water temperatures are modest, unglazed flat plate
collectors are used with simple arrangements of black plastic pipes often
being employed. Swimming pool heating is currently the main solar water
heater type in the USA, Canada, and Australia.41 Systems almost always
use pumped circulation and together with the pool itself, collectors are
drained in winter in locations at higher latitudes to avoid freezing. Para-
metric analyses have been conducted to optimize solar heated swimming
pool configurations.42
PV solar water heating ensues when electricity from a PV array is dis-
sipated as heat from a resistive heater immersed in the hot water store.43,44
The maximum power point of the photovoltaic array’s current–voltage char-
acteristic is maintained by varying optimally the electrical load imposed by
the heating element. Solar energy conversion efficiencies of PV systems are
lower than solar thermal collectors so for a PV solar water heater the col-
lection area is larger. However as only a cable connects the heating element
in the store to the PV array, the installation process is simple and the use
of electricity to transfer energy obviates any need for mains water pressure
reduction and/or freeze protection. Many building integrated PV systems
act as embedded generators that supply a grid. Where photovoltaic-to-grid
feed-in tariffs for electricity sold to the grid are not in place or do not pro-
vide a sufficient return on investment, the best use of excess PV energy
may be to heat water.
The use of solar heated air passing through an air-to-water heat
exchanger obviates the need for freeze protection. Air heating collectors
are lighter than those containing water and air heating systems require less
specialist installation expertise. However the lower efficiency of air heating

solar collectors and significant heat exchanger losses, mean that collector
areas must be very large.
A taxonomy of solar water heaters based on key attributes is provided
in Table 1.11 Both solar heated air-to-water systems and the use of PVs
specifically for water heating are uncommon. All the other types are avail-
able in a very wide range of commercial products.
Water freezing in the collector can lead to the need to replace the
collector and where joints located internally burst can cause significant
water damage to a building. Both of these incur costs that adversely affect
economic viability and consumer confidence. Use of evacuated collector
tubes,45 flat plate collectors with multiple glazing layers15 or transparent
insulation materials28 can provide collector freeze protection. Similar mea-
sures can be applied to integral passive solar water heaters, though collector
performance is reduced by optical losses through too many multiple glazed
layers.46 Thermal mass provides significant freeze protection for integral
pressure solar water heaters.22 Systems of all types may also be drained in
winter.5,11
The most common protection against potential damage arising from
water freezing within the collector pipe work is to have an aqueous gly-
col solution flowing in a closed pipe work loop comprised of the collector
and a heat exchanger, located in the associated hot water tank. Requiring
neither automated nor manually-operated drain valves, in winter a glycol-
filled indirect system can produce warm water unlike a seasonally drained-
down system. This advantage is counteracted in summer by the slightly
lower thermal efficiency47 due to (i) the higher viscosity of aqueous glycol
solutions (compared with water) thus reducing the natural circulation flow
rate or incurring higher pumping power in a forced circulation system, (ii)
the additional (compared with a direct system) flow resistance introduced
by the heat exchanger, (iii) additional heat transfer resistance in the heat
exchanger, and (iv) the lower specific heat capacity of the heat transfer fluid
compared with water. For the freezing points of different concentrators of
aqueous propylene-glycol solutions and ambient temperature distributions
for each of the months when frost is recorded, critical concentrations for
system survival can be determined. For a particular water heater located
in London UK,47 the critical aqueous propylene-glycol concentration for
year-long survival is 25%. An indirect system with critical antifreeze con-
centration operates throughout the year. It’s output (in the London, UK,
climate and for typical systems) is approximately 12% greater than that
from a direct system as the latter is used from March to October only and
drained-down in winter.
4 Building Heating and Cooling with Solar Energy

A building mediates between the seasonal and diurnal variation of temper-
ature, illuminance and wind speed to create the more stable environmental
conditions that are normally required for human comfort. By means of the
design and form of the building itself, together with additional specialist
mechanical components, solar energy can reduce heating ventilation and/or
lighting loads. The best use of solar energy in a building is specific to a given
climate, site, building function, occupancy and use as well as the prevailing
cultural and architectural preferences. Climate specific handbooks on solar
energy use in buildings are available.48–50 As any one building’s shading
and wind-flow is affected by other buildings nearby, in large urban settings,
master planning is particularly important.
Direct solar gain refers simply to a room with a southerly-facing win-
dow.47 To have a low heat loss, the window comprises a multiple pane
glazing or a glazing in which low heat for convective and radiative heat
transfer is reduced by intervention between the glass panes.
For windows in which the space between panes is evacuated or encloses
an aerogel, the frame also must exhibit low heat loss if overall window per-
formance is to be commensurate with that of the glazed element. In both
cases low long-wave emittance coatings are applied to the glass together
with an appropriate framing. When multiple panes are framed, an insu-
lating spacer may be placed between the panes to reduce conductive heat
transfer between them.51,52 In very low heat loss glazing systems, such as
evacuated glazing53–59 and aerogels,60 the edges of the glass panes are sealed
contiguously. As an insulated spacer thus cannot be employed to inhibit
thermal conduction between the panes, new forms of insulating frame are
therefore required.61
The fabrication of a vacuum glazing (VG) was first reported62 using a
low melt solder glass gasket that formed a contiguous edge seal at temper-
atures of above 450◦ C. At such temperatures, tempered glass and many
types of soft low-emittance coatings degrade. A method for producing
an edge seal at less than 200◦ C has overcome this problem.54 For low-
temperature sealed vacuum glazing, measured58 heat transmittance of less
than 1 W m−2 K−1 in the center-of-glass area has been achieved. Depend-
ing on its emittance value, employing a low-e coating on one or two glass
Table 1: Predominant combinations of attributes distinguish different generic solar

water heaters.
Prevention of
nocturnal reverse
Hot-water store thermosyphon
Hydronic Integral Collector Storage Single or multiple Hot water

cylindrical usually withdrawal.
horizontal. Double glazing.
Plastic pillow or Movable aperture
bags installation.
Thermo- Close- Single phase Horizontal Height of collector

syphon coupled cylindrical above store.
Pipework
arrangement.
Two phase Cessation of fluid
evaporation
Distributed Vertical cylindrical Height difference

between collector
and store
Pumped Solely Hot water Vertical cylindrical Non-return valve

Combisystem: space Vertical Flow resistance of
and water heating tank-in-tanks. pipework and
Bikini tanks stationary pump
Solar-assisted heat Vertical cylindrical
pump (Combi + )
Swimming Swimming pool
pool heating
Aeolic Solar Heated Air An air-to-water Unnecessary

heating
exchanger
Electric Photovoltaic Vertical

cylindrical
Table 1: (Continued )
Position of store
Collector
freeze Relative to Relative to Collector
production collector building Installation type
Heat retained in Same item On roof Installed as a complete Integral

thermal mass of exterior factory — built unit
the store
Indirect. Directly Evacuated

Drained. above tube.
Flat-plate.
Photovoltaic/
Thermal.
Indirect. Above Inside Assembled from

loftspace components during
installation
Indirect. Below Variety of

possible
locations
inside
building
Outdoor pool Pool usually Solar heated Unglazed.

collectors located below pools are Glazed flat
drained in indoor and plate.
freezing weather outdoor
Various Air-heating
Any Interior Water heating is an Photovoltaic

optional use of installed
photovoltaic electricity
surfaces within the vacuum gap reduces radiative heat transfer across vac-
uum glazing significantly.53,61 A low-e coating also reduces solar and visual
transmittance. Nevertheless, the use of a low-e coating increases thermal
resistance much more than it reduces the solar gain.
An electrochromic film can be used to control visual light transmit-
tance. Simulation studies of window systems that have considered the effect
of control strategies on energy saving63 have demonstrated that in a cooling-
dominated climate, the inclusion of an electrochromic double glazed win-
dow can enable a building to consume less cooling energy by controlling
visual light transmission and solar heat gain coefficient when compared to
conventional double glazing. In a heating-dominated climate, as an elec-
trochromic window should remain in its bleached state during the heating
season, it does not improve energy performance. An electrochromic win-
dow plus vacuum glazing provides both very low heat loss with visible light
transmittance whilst allowing control of solar gain and thus thermal comfort
for the building’s occupants while reducing peak energy demands both for
cooling during summer and heating during winter. In a study of the effect
of insolation intensity on the thermal behavior of electrochromic vacuum
glazing shown in Fig. 6,61 it was found that to avoid intolerable overheating
discomfort, the electrochromic layer between the vacuum glazing and the
third glass pane must face the outdoor environment.
Fig. 6. Electrochromic vacuum glazing.

A conservatory located on the south side of a building provides indi-

rect solar heating by (i) conduction only through the separating wall (ii)
natural circulation of air between the conservatory and the heated build-
ing and/or (iii) forced circulation of air between the conservatory and the
building (iv) a net flow of air from outside into the heated building via the
conservatory.46 Appropriate sensors, controls and actuators can be used
to optimize the energy collection. In well insulated buildings, in climates
with short heating seasons, as temperatures in an attached conservatory
are rarely above the building’s internal temperature, the annual heating
contribution is likely to be small. A contribution to a reduction of heat
load however, does ensue from the reduction in the rate of thermal con-
duction out through the separating wall. If the air entering the building
via the conservatory forms the major constituent of the air required for
ventilation, then the net flow of air from outside into the heated building
via the conservatory can provide significant solar ventilation pre-heating.
This is particularly true for very well insulated buildings as most energy is
used to heat ventilation air.
For a Trombe–Michel wall, as shown in Fig. 7, the indirect thermal
coupling to the heated space are the same virtually as with conservatories.
However, the conductive heat transfer is generally larger than the convective
heat transfer. As Trombe–Michel walls delay the delivery of solar heat, they
Fig. 7. Trombe–Michel Wall located beneath a south-facing window.

are ideal for providing heating in the early part of a cold night after a sunny
day, as encountered frequently in arid and mountainous regions. Alternative
design for Trombe–Michel walls have attempted to provide more controlled
heat output.64
Isolated solar gain, decoupled thermally from the building, may be
accomplished via an insulating separating wall, as in thermosyphoning air
panels, or by location above the building, as in roof space collectors. These
approaches enable controllable solar heat gain combined with no summer
overheating. Isolated gain solar collectors such as the thermosyphoning air
panel,46 overcome some of the disadvantages of indirect gain collectors by
dispensing with heat storage and relying totally on convective heat gain.
Heat input is almost immediate whilst heat losses during non-gain periods
when the collector is isolated from the heated space, are low. This design
is ideally suited to the task of providing daytime heat in cool or cold cli-
mates as it operates in the same manner as the natural convection mode
of a Trombe–Michel wall. The absorber is often made of metal, usually
aluminium or steel, and the unit is insulated to prevent heat loss to, or
from, the building. There are many system variants that are typically some
combination of: (i) a low thermal capacity dual-pass absorber, (to maximize
the heat transfer area between air and absorber) decoupled from the south
wall of the building with a (ii) buoyancy-driven or fan driven distribution
of heated air throughout the dwelling via air channels within the ceilings,
walls and floors (iii) thermal energy storage within these ceilings and walls
and floors.
A roof-space solar-energy collector, is essentially a pitched-roof which
is partially or fully-glazed on its southerly aspect.46 Solar-heated air from
the roof space collector is conveyed by an automatically controlled fan via
a duct either directly into the living space or as a pre-heated supply to a
warm-air space-heating system. The roof-space collector is replenished with
air either from within the dwelling or from the outside ambient environ-
ment. A roof-space collector has a low initial capital cost as its physical
construction does not differ greatly from that of a conventional pitched
roof. A low initial cost can arise from the employment of components (i.e.
fans and controls) that would be already present in an auxiliary air heat-
ing system. In urban locations exhibiting high housing densities, a dwelling
may often experience levels of overshading at lower sun angles by neighbor-
ing buildings, but roof-space collectors are more likely to be unshaded most
of the time. Figures 8 and 9, show domestic and non-domestic roof-space
collectors.
Fig. 8. Domestic roof-space collectors.
Fig. 9. Roof-space collectors on a school building.

5 Low Temperature Solar Heating in Industrial

Applications
Water extracted from streams, rivers, and lakes in tropical locations fre-
quently contains pathogens and thus requires disinfection before human
consumption. A solar ultra-violet disinfection process, has been developed
for this purpose.68 However as some bacteria have enzymes that repair their
DNA after ultra-violet radiation damage, ultra-violet treated water can only
be consumed safely within one day. Solar thermal pasteurization, in which
the water is heated to 348 K for 10 minutes destroys, rather than dam-
ages, all pathogens, does not require the water to be filtered and has fewer
operational constraints than chlorination. Though solar pasteurization is
effective and incurs little requirement for maintenance, it has been shown
to have high life-cycle costs when compared with competing options.69
Many arid regions have underground brackish water resources or are
close to sea water and have high annual levels of insolation. The production
of potable water using solar energy has thus been well-researched70 and, in
remote or isolated regions adopted practically. Fundamentally there are
three potable water extraction processes that can employ solar energy: (i)
distillation in which water is evaporated using solar heat, it condenses sep-
arated from its mineral content. This can be at atmospheric pressure in
various diverse forms of passive basin stills71 or in a multiple effect process.
In a vapor compression system, water vapor is compressed adiabatically
producing a superheated vapor. This is first cooled to saturation tempera-
ture and then compressed, using mechanical energy, at constant pressure,
(ii) reverse osmosis, in which a pressure gradient across a membrane causes
water molecules to pass from one side to the other.
Farm-built metal solar air-heaters range from unglazed low-
temperature transpired units for animal husbandry through to double-
glazed medium temperature systems for crop drying.72 The principal
attraction of farm-built air-heating collectors is the low initial investment
required. The disadvantages are potentially poor fabrication quality control
leading to poor performance and the frequent lack of optimized sizing of
system components.
The potential use of solar heated water in industrial and agricultural
processes remains largely unrealized.73
The use of solar energy in a thermal non-domestic application should
ideally be designed, installed, and operated to meet the specific energy
and temperature requirements of the particular industrial or agricultural
Table 2: Process temperatures in low to medium temperature solar industrial pro-

cess applications.
Required
temperature
Process range (◦ C)
Sector Food and Beverages drying 30–90

washing 40–80
pasteurising 80–110
boiling 95–105
sterilizing 140–150
heat treatment 40–60
pre-heating of feedwater to boilers 30–80
space heating of factories 30–100
Textiles washing 40–80

bleaching 60–100
dyeing 100–160
Chemicals boiling 95–105

distilling 110–300
ancillary processes 120–180
context via an optimal combination of efficient performance, high solar

fraction, low initial and running costs, robustness and durability, safety and
environmental sustainability. As can be seen in Table 2, industrial processes
vary greatly as to their required processing temperatures.
6 Use of Solar Energy to Dry Crops

The objective in drying is to reduce the moisture content of an agricultural
product to prevent deterioration for a time frame regarded as the safe stor-
age period. Drying is a dual process of (i) heat transfer to the product from
the heating source; and (ii) mass transfer of moisture from the interior of
the product to its surface and from the surface to the surrounding air.36 In
solar drying, solar energy is used either as the sole source of the required
heat or as a supplemental source, and the air flow can be generated by
either forced or natural convection. Figure 10 shows a taxonomy of solar
dryers.
The heating procedure involves the passage of pre-heated air through
the product, by directly exposing the product to solar radiation or often
A taxomony of solar dryers.
Fig. 10.
a combination of both. The major requirement is the transfer of heat to

the moist product by convection and conduction from surrounding air mass
at temperatures above that of the product, by radiation mainly from the
sun and/or to an extent from surrounding hot surfaces, or conduction from
heated surfaces in contact with the product.74 Water starts to vaporize from
the surface of the moist product when the absorbed energy has increased its
temperature sufficiently for the water vapor pressure of the crop moisture
to exceed the vapor pressure of the surrounding air. The rate of moisture
replenishment to the surface by diffusion from the interior depends largely
on the nature of the product and its moisture content.75 If the diffusion
rate is slow, it becomes the limiting factor in the rate of the drying pro-
cess, but if it is sufficiently rapid, the controlling factor becomes the rate
of evaporation at the product surface. Both the moisture diffusion and
convective mass transfer coefficients increase with temperature though the
rate will depend on how the crop is prepared for drying, that is whether
it is peeled and/or sliced. For example large differences, particularly for
convective mass coefficients, have been found between the drying kinetics
of cylindrical and sliced potatoes. The solar absorptance of the product is
important in direct solar drying; most agricultural materials have relatively
high absorptances of between 0.67 and 0.81. Heat transfer and evaporation
rates must be controlled closely for an optimum combination of drying rate
and acceptable final product quality.76
Direct absorption of solar radiation enhances the proper color ‘ripen-
ing’ of greenish fruits by allowing the decomposition of residual chlorophyll
during dehydration.76,77 For certain varieties of grapes and dates, exposure
to sunlight78 is considered essential for the development of the required
color in the dried products. A period of exposure to sunlight of Arabica
coffee is thought to give full flavor in the roasted beans.
The advantages of solar dryers over traditional open sun drying include
(i) a smaller area of land in order to dry similar amounts of crop, (ii)
relatively high quality of dry crop, because insects and rodents are unlikely
to infest it during drying, (iii) shortened drying period (iv) protection from
sudden rain, and (v) low capital and running costs.79–82
To avoid localized over-heating and relatively slow overall drying rates,
a solar chimney, as shown in Fig. 11, is often employed to provide enhanced
buoyant force on the air stream thereby increasing the rate at which dry
air enters or fans are used to convey air through solar collectors83 as shown
in Fig. 12.
Fig. 11. A solar drying using natural circulation enhanced by a chimney.
Cabinet dryers are usually relatively small units used typically to pre-
serve domestic quantities of fruits, vegetables, fish and meat. Solar radiation
is transmitted through the cover and is absorbed on the blackened interior
surfaces as well as by the product itself. Holes located at both the upper
parts and the base of the cabinet’s sides allow warmed moist air to leave
and replenishing fresh air to be drawn in respectively, under the action of
buoyant forces. Shallow layers of the product are placed on perforated or
mesh trays inside the enclosure.
Solar dryers performance can be compromised by very high wet sea-
son ambient humidity84 : as can be seen in Fig. 13, at night the “dry” air
temperature can fall below the prevailing ambient temperature.
Drying
silos
Air heaƟng solar energy

collectors
Fig. 12. A fan-driven solar drying system.
Fig. 13. Typical diurnal variation of temperatures in a natural circulation solar dryer
in Nigeria in September.
Fig. 14. The variation of the drying duration to achieve safe storage with drying tem-
peratures and product moisture contents.
This leads to relatively moist air being entrained into the dryer and
nocturnal reabsorption of moisture by the product.85
For crops for which low safe storage moisture content is required, drying
times can be many days as shown in Fig. 14 depending on the dryer’s
operating temperature.86–93
7 Solar Air Cooling Conditioning and Refrigeration

7.1 Passive Cooling of Building
The discomfort of unwanted solar gains can be avoided by preventing the
initial solar gain by means of shading devices,50 switchable glazings63 reject-
ing the solar gains by means of ventilation and/or absorbing the solar gain in
thermal mass.48 To keep the temperature elevation above ambient tempera-
ture small by ventilation alone, very large ventilation rates can be required.
Fixed shading devices use the seasonal geometry of solar radiation to con-
trol unwanted solar radiation. However for buildings where solar energy
through windows provides significant heating, more flexible control of solar
gain is needed. This cannot be provided by fixed shading devices. The most
efficient shading is provided by external devices (e.g. awnings), as the solar
energy is rejected before it enters the building.48 However, weather proof
external shading devices can be expensive.
Natural cooling systems dissipate heat from the building to environ-
mental heat sinks which are at lower temperatures than that of the building
interior.65,66 These heat sinks may include ventilation to achieve the ambi-
ent dry bulb temperature, evaporative cooling to the ambient wet bulb
temperature, night sky radiative cooling and using the ground as a con-
duction heat sink.50 If the night-time ambient dry bulb temperature is low
enough it is possible to cool the thermal mass of a building sufficiently for it
to absorb the daytime cooling load without the interior temperature raising
to an uncomfortable level. During the day it will usually be advantageous
to ventilate by wind capture, a particular vernacular example of the latter
is shown in Fig. 15. Window placement, landscaping, and the microclimate
are important design considerations if natural ventilation is to be used.67
Fig. 15. Air flow in a wind capture tower.

Burying a building in the ground either partially or completely, can

reduce the cooling load either by (i) the earth acting as extra insulation,
especially since it tends to be dry during the summer, and also tends to
reduce air infiltration; and (ii) if the temperature below ground level is
significantly lower than the required internal temperature, then heat will
flow out of the building into the surrounding earth. If the cooling load is
small enough and the ground is sufficiently cool, then no further cooling
will be required.
Direct evaporative cooling can be provided when, outside air is blown
through a fibrous pad soaked in water. The air is abiabatically cooled and
humidified and its dry bulb temperature approaches its wet bulb temper-
ature. The air is then supplied to the building. In an indirect evaporative
cooling system, the evaporatively cooled air cools the air in the building via
a heat exchanger rather than being supplied directly. This has the advan-
tage that water vapour is not added to the room air, hence extending the
applicability of evaporative cooling to semi-humid climates.
In more humid climates, the wet bulb temperature is high enough
to limit the amount of evaporative cooling that can be obtained without
employing uneconomically large air flow rates and/or heat exchangers. In
such climates, the lowest temperature environmental heat sink is the night
sky. A cloudless night sky has a radiant temperature up to 10◦ C below
the ambient dry bulb temperature. However, if the sky is covered with low
clouds its radiant temperature will be close to ambient. The sky tempera-
ture can be predicted from the ambient dry bulb temperature and humidity
and the fraction of the sky covered by clouds. A horizontal surface exposed
to the night sky will dissipate 5 W per m2 for every degree of difference
between the surface temperature and the sky temperature. If the roof can
be coupled to thermal storage, nocturnal cooling can be used to keep the
building cool throughout the day.94,95
7.2 Principles of Active Solar Cooling

Using solar energy to provide active cooling is not an alternative to either
energy efficiency measures or passive systems that use environmental heat
sinks. The application of active solar heating and cooling technologies
should always go hand-in-hand with energy efficiency measures. Holistic
design of the building and the solar assisted heating, ventilation and air-
conditioning (HVAC) system will lead to an optimal solution in terms of
energy balance and cost.
Solar Air-Conditioning and Refrigeration technology (SAC) converts

solar energy into cooling via two main routes:
• Electricity generated with PV modules can be converted into cooling

using well-known refrigeration and air-conditioning technologies that are
mainly based on vapor compression cycles.
• Heat generated with solar thermal collectors can be converted into
cooling using thermally driven refrigeration or air-conditioning tech-
nologies. Most of these systems employ the physical phenomena of
sorption in either an open or closed thermodynamic cycle. Other tech-
nologies, such as steam jet cycles or other cycles using a conversion of
heat to mechanical energy and of mechanical energy to cooling are less
significant. These routes are illustrated in Fig. 16.
Today, the first approach — solar electricity driven cooling — is mainly

used for solar driven refrigerators for cooling medicine in remote, sunny
regions as well as in small air conditioners, while the second approach —
solar thermally driven cooling — is mainly applied for comfort cooling
and air-conditioning in buildings. Some first demonstration installations
have been realized for large capacity refrigeration applications. The first
approach being installed in buildings is emerging through the use of small
Fig. 16. Principles for solar driven cooling.

air conditioners in Asia. In other cases, it is normally not considered a

“solar cooling system” since today most photovoltaic plants are connected
to the electric grid and are operated completely independent from the
HVAC installations used in buildings or the refrigeration machines used
in industrial applications. However, in countries where the electricity price
from photovoltaic systems is lower than the price that has to be paid for
electricity from the grid, the situation is favorable for a development of
large PV cooling systems.
However, this chapter focuses on the widely-used technology for solar
cooling using the second approach — heat driven air-conditioning and
refrigeration systems using solar thermal energy as the main driving energy.
Figure 17 shows the heat fluxes and temperature levels of a thermally
driven cooling system and is used for the definition of the thermal Energy
Efficiency Ratio EERthermal (often also denoted as thermal Coefficient of
Performance, COPthermal ), which is a key figure to characterize thermally
driven cooling systems. Table 3 provides a brief overview the main charac-
teristics of systems using sorption technology.
The main arguments for SAC96,97 originate from an energy saving per-
spective:
• Application of SAC saves electricity and thus conventional primary

energy sources.
useful cold at low temperature

EER thermal =
driving heat at high temperature
Fig. 17. Heat fluxes of a thermally driven cooling system and definition of the thermal
Energy Efficiency Ratio, EERthermal . The useful cold is produced at a low temperature
level, TC . The driving heat is supplied at a high temperature level, TH . Both heat fluxes
flow into the machine and have to be rejected at a medium temperature level, TM .
February 11, 2016
Table 3: Overview of market available thermally driven cooling systems based on sorption technology.96,97
Type of Direct air treatment

system Water chillers (closed thermodynamic cycles) (open thermodynamic cycles)
14:8
Physical
phase of
sorption
Low Temperature Solar Thermal Applications

material Liquid Solid Liquid Solid
Sorption Water Lithium-bromide Zeolite Silica gel Lithium- Lithium- Silica gel (or

material chloride chloride zeolite), cellulose
matrix with
lithium-chloride
Refrigerant Ammonia Water Water Water Water Water Water
Type of 1-effect 1-effect 2-effect 1-effect 1-effect 1-effect Cooled sorption Desiccant rotor
cycle(1) process
EERthermal 0.5–0.75 0.65–0.8 1.1–1.4 0.5–0.75 0.5–0.75 0.5–0.75 0.7–1.1 0.6–0.8
range
Driving tem- 70 . . . 100 70 . . . 100 140 . . . 180 65 . . . 90 65 . . . 90 65 . . . 90 60 . . . 85 60 . . . 80
perature 120 . . . 180(2)
range,◦ C
Solar FPC, ETC FPC, ETC SAT FPC, ETC FPC, ETC FPC, ETC FPC, ETC, SAHC FPC, ETC, SAHC
b2236-ch08
collector SAT(2)
technology(3)
Comments:
(1) 1-effect: single-effect thermodynamic cycle (no internal heat cascade); 2-effect: double-effect thermodynamic cycle (with internal
heat cascade)
(2) Valid for production of cold at temperatures significantly below the freezing point of water, i.e. <0◦ C
(3) Abbreviations for solar thermal collector types: FPC = flat plate collector; ETC = evacuated tube collector; SAT = single-axis
tracking solar collector (e.g. parabolic trough collectors or Fresnel type collectors); SAHC = solar air heating collector.
325
page 325
• SAC also leads to a reduction of peak electricity demand, which is a ben-

efit for the electricity network and could lead to additional cost savings
of the most expensive peak electricity when applied on a broad scale.
• SAC technologies use environmentally sound materials that have no
ozone depletion and no (or very small) global warming potential.
Other arguments originate from a more technical perspective:
• Solar energy is available almost at the same time when cooling is needed;
this argument holds for both, solar thermal and solar electric based sys-
tems.
• Solar thermal systems used for production of sanitary hot water and
heating (solar combi-systems) have large collector areas that are not fully
used during summer. They can be used for SAC and thereby reduce the
risk of stagnation situations of the solar collector system.
• Comparatively low noise and vibration-free operation of thermally driven
chillers.
7.3 Technical Maturity of SAC

The key components of SAC systems are the solar collector subsystem and
the thermally driven cooling subsystem. Additional key components are a
heat rejection unit to reject the waste heat of the thermally driven chiller
and heat or cold storage.
Solar collectors and solar collection systems have achieved good tech-
nical maturity. For SAC systems that operate with temperatures below
approximately 110◦ C there exists a good supply of robust, cost effective
solar collectors. Solar collectors have been developed with increased safety
and enhanced efficiency of solar collection for solar cooling: examples are
solar collectors operated with water and have a drainback system or night
recirculation.
Solar collector systems for higher temperatures as needed for SAC are
still scarce, but an increasing number of manufacturers are entering the
market. Nevertheless, solar collector systems for operation at temperatures
above approximately 130◦C — typically single-axis tracking with optical
concentration — are now commercialized but not so widely used for cooling
applications.
Large thermally driven chillers and open sorption cycles have existed for
many decades and have been introduced in the market; their main operation
today is with waste heat (e.g. from a co-generation system or industrial
waste heat) or directly gas-fired. Typically, they are designed for operation
to provide base load cooling and not specially adjusted for operation with
solar energy.
In the last decade, the main progress was made in the field of small
capacity thermally driven chillers and SAC has significantly contributed
to stimulate this development. Today, numerous systems from various
manufacturers are offered on the market and have reached a considerable
technical maturity. However, most of the manufacturers are small start-up
companies. Some of those companies set up a manufacturing capacity on
an industrial scale and others are moving in the same direction.
Installation of buffer storages is quite common in SAC installations.
Sizes range from small buffers to overcome short-term fluctuations up to
large buffer stores used to save solar gains for a number of hours (e.g. from
noon to afternoon). Storages are applied on the hot and/or cold side and
are usually filled with water. In a few applications, ice storage is used on the
cold side to increase the storage density (or for applications with cooling
demand at temperatures below 0◦ C). Other phase change materials are still
not common in solar cooling.
The main shortcoming of SAC from a technical perspective lies at
the system level. Many systems fail to achieve the planned energy sav-
ings because of shortcomings in proper design and energy management
of systems that result in a high overall electricity consumption of auxil-
iary components. A particular area where mistakes are made is the heat
rejection subsystem, which often has not received sufficient attention in
the past. Another mistake made is that many systems were far too com-
plex and as a result created non-optimal control and big maintenance
efforts.
The main problems from practical experience in realized installa-
tions are:
• Heat rejection: cooling towers often need too much electricity and are
not controlled for partial loads. Small capacity wet cooling towers are
relatively expensive as they need a high level of maintenance. Dry cooling
towers need more electricity and often the re-cooling temperatures are
too high for the solar thermally driven chillers. Hybrid systems (dry/wet)
seem to be a promising solution, but very few systems are available on
the market and they are not adjusted for combination with thermally
driven chillers.
• High efficient auxiliary components and a careful hydraulic design are
essential. This is particularly important as solar cooling systems need
more hydraulic loops than standard systems.
• Another technical barrier is the integration of all components into a

complete system. The overall system design requires various professional
skills for the different subsystems: solar energy at medium temperature
(but higher than standard sanitary hot water applications), hydraulics
with pressurized and medium temperature water, and air-conditioning
or industrial cooling.
7.4 Energy Performance of SAC

Solar cooling systems have proven to be able to save energy in comparison
to conventional standard solutions. The amount of achieved energy saving
strongly depends on system design and operation. Key figures that deter-
mine the energy savings are the solar fraction for the heat needed to drive
the thermally driven cooling and the overall electricity demand for auxil-
iary components, such as the fan (e.g. the fan in the cooling tower) and the
pumps in the hydraulic circuits.
Figure 18 shows the dependence of the saved primary energy of a solar
cooling system in comparison to a standard system as a function of the
solar fraction of the driving heat. Two types of technologies are repre-
sented: single-effect machines achieve a lower coefficient of performance.
That is they produce less cooling per amount of driving heat. But, they also
Fig. 18. Energy saving compared to a conventional system versus the solar fraction of
the driving heat needed to operate the thermally driven cooling.
Fig. 19. Energy saving compared to a conventional system versus the overall electricity
consumption of all auxiliary components of the solar driven cooling system.
need a low driving temperature, typically 70–110◦C, and thus can use flat
plate or evacuated tube collectors. Double-effect machines achieve a higher
coefficient of performance, but need higher driving temperatures, typically
130–180◦C, and thus require more sophisticated solar collector technology,
such as single-axis tracking solar systems. System design should aim at
achieving a high solar fraction, that is they should use almost no heat from
conventional sources, such as natural gas to operate the thermally driven
cooling.
In Fig. 19, the influence of the electricity demand of auxiliary com-
ponents on the achieved primary energy saving is demonstrated. Today,
systems are found on the market that work with a relatively high electric-
ity demand and thus do not save much energy or — even worse — lead
to a negative energy balance because they consume more primary energy
compared to a conventional system.
All the relations shown here are valid for cooling only. Typically, the
overall energy balance becomes more favorable for solar thermal systems if
other heat needs are covered, such for heating or for sanitary hot water.
In summary, it turns out that SAC has the ability to realize an
energy efficient solution and lead to significant energy savings the main
requirements to achieve this are:
• Before the choice is made for SHC/SAC it has to be compared to other

solutions in terms of energy saving and cost.
• An important design item is to keep systems as simple as possible in
order to reduce the risk of errors in implementation, operation, and main-
tenance.
• A careful design and planning are needed in order to define an optimal
sizing of key components and an appropriate design that matches the
actual load structure.
• All auxiliary components have to be highly energy-efficient.
• An operation strategy has to be developed that leads to the most energy-
efficient operation under full and part load conditions and long-term
reliability.
• A careful commissioning phase of the system is necessary to ensure that
the system operates as planned.
• An ongoing monitoring (“continuous commissioning”) is helpful in order
to enable long-term operation at the highest possible performance.
7.5 Economic Viability and Environmental Benefits of SAC

First cost (investment cost including planning, assembly, construction and
commissioning) for SAC systems is significantly higher than the correspond-
ing cost of best practice standard solutions — this is a very well-known fact
for almost all solar energy systems and many other systems using renewable
energy. The first cost of actual SAC installations is between 2 and 5 times
higher than to a conventional state-of-the-art system depending on local
conditions, building requirements, system size, and of course on the selected
technical solution. In recent studies, first cost for total systems ranged from
2000 per kWcold to 5000 per kWcold and even higher in some partic-
ular cases. This large range is due to different sizes of systems, different
technologies, different application sectors, and other boundary conditions.
A recent trend is the development of (solar) cooling kits, that is pre-
engineered package solutions that consist of all-important components of a
system and where the components are well matched to each other. These
kits are mainly developed for small capacities up to about 35 kW cooling
capacity. Prices excluding installation cost and distribution system to the
building for the package solutions dropped from about 6000 per kW in
2007 to about 4500 per kW in 2013.
The cost saving during operation very much depends on the boundary
conditions. Boundary conditions in favor of a low payback time are:
• High solar radiation leading to high gains of the solar system.

• A long cooling season leading to a large number of hours where the system
is used.
• Other heat loads such as for sanitary hot water and/or building heating
increase the usefulness of the solar system.
• High prices of conventional energy make a solar alternative more com-
petitive.
When looking at the overall life-cycle cost of an SAC system (excluding

any incentives or funds) in comparison to a conventional standard solution
the situation looks much better than in the case of first cost. Depending on
the particular conditions SAC systems will in many cases amortize within
their lifetime. Under promising conditions even payback times of ten years
and less can be obtained. However, commercial companies often expect
a payback time of five years and less in order to justify an investment.
Such low values of payback time will only be achieved under very special
conditions.
SAC application has some other advantages that are often difficult
to translate to an economic advantage, but may be important for policy
makers:
• The use of SAC systems may lead to (primary) energy savings and thus
help to reduce the dependence on finite energy fuels, which have to be
imported in many countries.
• Correspondingly, the use of SAC systems will lead to reduced CO2 emis-
sions and thereby contribute to a reduction of climate change and related
effects.
• SAC systems using thermally driven cooling cycles show additional envi-
ronmental benefits since they typically employ refrigerants with no ozone
depletion potential and no or a very small global warming potential.
• SAC systems can be used also for all heating applications in a building
or industry. The large solar collector field also provides heat for other
purposes than cooling and thus helps to avoid consumption of fuel (or
electricity) for heating applications.
• SAC systems can contribute to grid stability in regions where a con-
siderable share of daily electricity consumption comes from the grid for
air-conditioning with conventional techniques.
7.6 Market Status of SAC

Close to a thousand SAC plants were installed worldwide in 2013 covering
all types of technologies and sizes. This is of course a very early market
in comparison to the tens of millions of compression air-conditioning sys-
tems sold worldwide every year. Recently, a number of large and very large
installations have been built or are under development. Importantantly a
number of projects are completely driven by private investors without major
incentive or funding programmes.
The numerous SAC RD&D activities initiated many of those
installations and also led to the establishment of a SAC community. An
international bi-annual conference focusing on this R&D of SAC has been
established and held three times already with an increasing number of par-
ticipants and papers.97 Nevertheless there are still only very few companies
that offer complete SAC solutions. Most systems are still composed of com-
ponents or subsystems that are put together by a planning office for the
particular project. In addition, there is still a great need for increased exper-
tise and experience on the side of planners, installers, and other involved
professionals.
A significant number of companies have been created in the last 10
years that offer thermally driven chillers in the small capacity range up to
approx. 35 kWcold . Most of these companies were start-ups that entered
into an almost nonexistent market. Therefore, a significant increase in
production rates, in particular for these small capacity systems, can be
expected and correspondingly significant reductions in cost can be expected
here. These systems, which can be operated with relatively low driving
temperatures, are not only operated in combination with solar thermal
energy, but also as co-generation units, district heat networks and industrial
waste heat.
Thus, the overall market for these thermally driven chillers could be
much larger than for solar cooling only. Today, there are mature prod-
ucts available and first companies started to establish a manufacturing
capacity on an industrial scale. More companies will follow to enlarge
their production capacity and thereby develop more automated production
processes.
The next important step is to develop today’s low volume market chan-
nels into a mass market and, at the same time, drive costs down further
through standardization of concepts and design methods and development
of reliable package solutions.
7.7 Technical Potentials of SAC

Potentials on the technical level range from new and advanced mate-
rials through improved components to more efficient and more reliable
systems.
Main ongoing R&D on the material level is aiming to improve materials
for adsorption and absorption (tailor-made adsorbents or Ionic liquids) or
absorption cycles and composites mainly using adsorption materials. These
materials and compounds have the potential to allow for more compact sys-
tems with advanced heat and mass transfer and thus will lead to lowering
the cost for installation and broadening the application range. Completely
different solutions, such as new thermo-mechanical cycles, promise a sig-
nificant increase in efficiency are under development but have not yet left
laboratory scale.
Work on components concerns advanced cooling cycles on the one hand
and advanced solar collectors, which are well adjusted to the needs of ther-
mally driven cooling on the other hand. Important R&D activities address-
ing advanced components are:
• Integration of the generator of a thermally driven cooling machine in

the solar collector will lead to reduced heat transfer losses and to more
compact systems. Also, space in a technical room will be saved. Overall,
such concepts aim at high efficiency at reduced system cost.
• Double-effect cycle absorption technology, which achieves high efficiency
at high operation temperatures, will be extended also for the small capac-
ity range and thus offer solutions with high overall efficiency for applica-
tions in the range of small capacity.
• Single-axis tracking solar thermal collectors to produce heat at temper-
atures in the range of 150◦C to 250◦ C are still a rather new technology
and important cost savings may be achieved by development of advanced
materials (e.g. for reflectors) and advanced production technologies.
• Non-tracking collectors have achieved a high level of technical maturity.
However, improvements towards higher operation efficiency at tempera-
tures of 80◦ C to 110◦ C are still possible and advanced production tech-
nologies will allow for reduction of cost.
Important work on the system level is required in order to achieve more reli-
able systems and a high quality in the whole chain of projects ranging from
design over planning, construction, and assembly to operation. This work
includes measures such as training and education to increase knowledge and
experience among professionals active in design and installation of HVAC

systems.
7.8 SAC Costs and Economics

Cost reductions are required in order to increase the cost competitiveness of
SAC in comparison to conventional solutions and thus increase the market
deployment.
On the component level, main cost reductions are particularly expected
for small capacity thermally driven cooling machines. Both technology
improvements and mass production on an industrial scale will certainly lead
to a lower cost of this key component. In principle, a noticeable potential
also exists for cost reduction of solar thermal collectors. However, prices
of solar thermal collectors remained almost stable over the last decade,
which is mainly due to unstable market development and market policies.
Another major component is the heat rejection unit. Today, mainly units
in the large capacity range exist. The development of heat rejection sys-
tems specially designed for their use in SAC will lead to reduced component
cost, in particular for small capacity units (e.g. below 100 kW of cooling
power).
On the system level two main market areas have to be distinguished:
• Pre-engineered systems: mainly for applications in the small capacity

range, that is air-conditioning in residential buildings and systems for
small commercial applications, pre-fabricated standard packages will be
developed. This pre-fabrication minimizes the planning effort and reduces
the effort on the construction side, which also leads to minimized risk of
errors in assembly and installation. As was pointed out above a signifi-
cant cost reduction of pre-fabricated systems, also called kits, has been
observed and will certainly continue to take place with growing markets.
• Custom-made systems: for large buildings and industrial applications
custom-made systems will remain the appropriate approach. However,
also for custom-made systems cost reductions on the system level are
possible.
• Increased experience among involved professionals is an important need
and guidelines and software tools for the design and layout of systems
will help to reduce the effort during design and planning. In particular,
standardized measures to assure a high quality of installations is required
in order to increase the certainty of energy savings and related operation
cost savings.
In the following section, some comments are made on the comparison of

solar thermally driven SAC with solar electrically driven SAC using photo-
voltaic modules and electrically driven vapor compression cycles.
As was pointed out in the introduction, systems using electrically driven
vapor compression cycles combined with photovoltaic systems may be an
alternative of using solar energy for air-conditioning or refrigeration. Pho-
tovoltaic modules experienced a continuous cost reduction with a growing
market during the last two decades. Under today’s price conditions both
solar solutions, that is a solar thermally driven heating and cooling com-
pared to conventional heating and cooling system plus a photovoltaic sys-
tem, lead to similar economic performance, if no funds or incentive are
taken into consideration. Therefore, a decision on the one or the other
alternative has to be made based on particular boundary conditions. In
particular, when an attractive feed-in tariff for electricity produced by PV
systems exists, most probably the economic outcome will be in favor of
a photovoltaic system. In these cases, the photovoltaic system will oper-
ate completely separated from the heating and cooling system and deliver
all electricity into the grid. However, this may change significantly with an
increased share of electricity production from fluctuating renewable sources.
Onsite solutions that lead to a minimum impact on the grid, such as pho-
tovoltaic driven heating and cooling systems using electrically driven vapor
compression cycles, may become an alternative. It is difficult to assess which
of the two main solar driven heating and cooling solutions — thermally
driven or electricity driven — will be more competitive under such condi-
tions. Obviously the thermally driven system always provides a local system
solution and thus will always lead to a reduced dependence of conventional
energy and has never a negative impact on the grid. Also the easier integra-
tion of thermal energy storages compared to electrical storages is in favor of
thermally driven cooling systems from a grid point of view. Solar thermally
driven systems allow the integration of buffer storage on the “hot” side of
the thermally driven chiller and thus offer a degree of freedom in system
design and operation, which is not given in the case of photovoltaic driven
systems.
7.9 Market Opportunities for SAC

Generally speaking most favorable conditions for a successful market imple-
mentation for SAC systems are:
• Applications with a high need for heating and cooling (and sanitary hot
water).
• Places with a high solar energy potential, that is high solar radiation.
• Conditions characterized by a high coincidence of loads and solar gains
since this reduced the need for storage.
• Places with high cost of conventional energy.
A major obstacle is that in many places that fulfill the above require-
ments no or very little experience with solar energy use exists and often
HVAC and refrigeration installations have a comparatively low standard.
Nevertheless, under such conditions best economic performance can be
expected. Companies that offer overall solutions and have the capability
to provide maintenance services (e.g. using remote control approaches) will
be able to exploit this market opportunity.
A major argument for the installation of SAC systems is their envi-
ronmental soundness due to reduced consumption of conventional energy
and employment of environmentally friendly refrigerants. This can be an
important argument for an investor even if the system is not yet econom-
ically competitive, that is the return on investment is above the normal
expectations for commercial investments.
Concretely speaking, market opportunities are seen in the following:
• Tertiary buildings, such as office buildings and hotels, in regions with suf-
ficient solar gains: here in particular technologies employing non-tracking
solar collector technologies will be employed and the solar system will be
used for heating, cooling and sanitary hot water (if needed).
• Production buildings in sunny regions that need cooling for industrial
processes (e.g. in the food industry): depending on the required temper-
ature level of the cooling process either non-tracking solar collectors or
single-axis tracking solar collector technologies will be employed. Large
factory roofs can serve to place the collectors but also systems installed
on the ground will be usual, in particular in areas where ground is not a
limiting resource.
• In sunny regions in particular a potential for application of SAC in resi-
dential houses exists. Heating and cooling solutions making use of solar
thermal energy for single family houses as well as for multi-family houses
are particularly interesting in new buildings and in combination with
highly energy efficient buildings which allow for radiative solutions (e.g.
using the floor and/or the ceiling for heating/cooling).
Overall, renewable energies will play an increasingly important role in future

energy systems due to the strong need to limit CO2 emissions originating
from conventional energy sources. SAC technology is one of the important

solutions applicable on the demand side. Thus, this technology provides
a market opportunity for many involved stakeholders including building
owners, planners, manufacturers, and installation companies.
8 Economic and Policy Issues Related to Solar Heating

and Cooling Thermal Applications
Many solar thermal applications are viable economically now in favorable
climate and use contexts. This would be true of even more applications if
for those applications nearing economic viability, the economic externali-
ties associated with the potential for CO2 abatement were given tangible
value by appropriate fiscal intervention. Solar materials processing technolo-
gies require further research and development. Solar thermal process heat
delivery, though a mature technology, still requires intensive programmes
of component improvement.
The unreliability and irregularity of supply together with variable and
often high cost of fossil fuels and electricity means that in many hot
climates, particularly in remote and/or island locations, many thermal
applications of solar energy in agriculture and industry are not only viable
economically but are the obvious and preferred approach. That they are
not ubiquitous is due to two interlinked factors; (i) this lack of widespread
system component suppliers and associated design and installation exper-
tise and experience and (ii) the often large initial capital cost. The latter
is a particular obstacle where the potential user does not have sufficient
available capital and/or is unable or unwilling to borrow funds at favorable
interest rates.
However often as a consequence of a diverse range of governmental mar-
ket stimulation interventions internationally, the influences of such limiting
behavioral, trading structure and capital market factors are, in specific
favorable contexts, now being superseded by recognition of the tangible
commercial advantages of solar energy use. These include for example the
often minimal or non-existent recurrent outlays for fuel leading to pre-
dictable running costs that are a hedge against inflationary energy costs
adversely affecting business competitiveness.
SAC technology is at a critical stage. Mature components are available
and many installations have been realized. The technology has shown that
significant energy savings are possible, and it has reached a level of early
market deployment. However, the financial risk for parties involved in SAC
business is still too high:
• Due to no complete assurance on the quality of the system the user cannot
be sure about the level of energy savings and related cost savings.
• Most planners and installers have little experience with SAC technology
and thus the effort — and related cost — to install those systems is
higher than for standard systems.
• Due to unstable and small markets, manufacturers cannot be sure about
sale rates and thus cannot bear the risk to significantly increase their
production scale.
Therefore, measures to support a sustainable market development are most

important. This includes in particular establishment of large-scale solar
cooling demonstration programs and implementation of adjusted incentive
schemes to lower the risk for investments. In parallel establishment of qual-
ity procedures that cover all phases of a project are most critical in order
to satisfy the expectations of all involved stakeholders.
Acknowledgments
Solar thermal research at Dublin Institute of Technology has been sup-
ported by Science Foundation Ireland and the European Union through
the 7th Framework Programme and COST actions. Solar Thermal cooling
research at Fraunhofer Institute for Solare Energiesysteme and at TECSOL
S.A. has been supported by the IEA Solar Heating and Cooling Programme
under Task 38 “Solar Air conditioning and Refrigeration”.
References
1. J. Perlin, Let it shine: The 6000 year story of solar energy (2013).
2. J. W. Ring, Windows, baths and solar energy in the roman empire, Am. J.
Archeol. 100 (1996), pp. 717–724.
3. D. Behrman, Solar Energy: The Awakening Science (Routledge and Kegan
Paul, London, 1979).
4. K. Butti and J. Perlin, A Golden Thread (Van Nostrand, Reinhold Co, New
York, USA, 1980).
5. J. A. Duffie and W. A. Beckman, Solar Engineering of Thermal Processes,
2nd edn. (Wiley lnterscience, New York, 1991).
6. C. M. Kemp, US Patent No. 451, 384, April 28 (1891).
7. W. J. Bailey, Solar heater, US Patent No. 966, 070 (1910).
8. S. D. Dahl and J. H. Davidson, Performance and modeling of thermosyphon
and heat exchangers for solar water heaters, ASMIE J. Sol. Energ. Eng. 119
(1977), pp. 193–200.
9. E. Yazdanshenas and S. Furbo, Theoretical comparison between solar

water/space-heating combisystems and stratification design options, ASME
J. Sol. Energ. Eng. 129 (2007), pp. 438–448.
10. Y. C. S. Too, G. L. Morrison and M. Behnia, Performance of solar water
heater with narrow, Solar Energy 83 (2009), pp. 350–362.
11. B. Norton, Solar water heaters; a review of systems research and design inno-
vation, Green 1 (2011), pp. 189–207.
12. M. D. Wuestling, S. A. Klein and J. A. Duffie, Promising control alterna-
tives for solar water heating systems, ASME J. Sol. Energ. Eng. 107 (1985),
pp. 215–221.
13. A. M. Al-Ibrahim, W. A. Beckman, S. A. Klein and J. W. Mitchell, Design
procedure for selecting an optimum photovoltaic pumping system in solar
domestic hot water system, Solar Energy 64 (1998), pp. 227–239.
14. J. Ji, J. Hun, T.-T. Chow, H. Yi, J. Lu, W. He and W. Sun, Effect of fluid
flow and packing factor on energy performance of a wall-mounted hybrid
photovoltaic/water-heating collector system, Energ. Buildings 38 (2006),
pp. 1380–1387.
15. T .T. Chow, W. He and J. Ji, Hybrid photovoltaic-thermosyphon
water heating system for residential application, Solar Energy 80 (2008),
pp. 298–306.
16. T. D. Schmidt, Mangold and H. Müller-Steinhagen, Central solar heat-
ing plants with seasonal storage in Germany, Solar Energy 76 (2004),
pp. 165–174.
17. J. D. Dalenbäck, Take off for solar district heating in Europe, Polska Ener-
getyka Sloneczna 1 (2010), pp. 9–13.
18. W. Weiss, Solar Heating for Houses — A Design Handbook for Solar Com-
bisystems (James and James, London, 2003).
19. E. Yazdanshenas, S. Furbo and C. Bales, Theoretical comparison between
solar combisystems based on bikini tanks and tank-in-tank solar combisys-
tems, Proc. EuroSun 2008: 1st Int. Congress on Heating, Cooling and Build-
ings, Lisbon, Portugal, October (2008).
20. M. Smyth, P. C. Eames and B. Norton, A novel high performance inte-
grated collector/storage solar water heater design, Renew. Energ. 16 (1998),
pp. 2217–2222.
21. M. Smyth, P. C. Eames and B. Norton, A comparative performance rating
for an integrated solar collector/storage vessel with inner sleeves to increase
heat retention, Solar Energy 66(4) (1999), pp. 291–303.
22. M. Smyth, P. C. Eames and B. Norton, Evaluation of a freeze resistant inte-
grated collector/storage solar water heater (ICSSWH) for Northern Europe,
Appl. Energ. 68 (2001a), pp. 265–274.
23. M. Smyth, P. C. Eames and B. Norton, Annual performance of heat retain-
ing integrated collector/storage solar water heaters in a Northern maritime
climate, Solar Energy 70(5) (2001b), pp. 391–401.
24. M. Smyth, P. C. Eames and B. Norton, Heat retaining integrated collec-
tor/storage solar water heaters, Solar Energy 75 (2003), pp. 27–34.
25. M. Smyth, P. C. Eames and B. Norton, Techno-economic appraisal of an

integrated collector/storage solar water heater, Renew. Energ. 29 (2004),
pp. 1503–1514.
26. M. Smyth, P. McGarrigle, P. C. Eames and B. Norton, Experimental com-
parison of alternative convection suppression arrangements for concentrat-
ing integral collector storage solar water heaters, Solar Energy 78 (2005),
pp. 223–233.
27. M. Smyth, P. C. Eames and B. Norton, Integrated collector storage solar
water heaters, Renew. Sust. Energ. Rev. 10 (2006), pp. 503–538.
28. C. Schmidt, A. Goetzberger and J. Schmid, Test results and evaluation of
integrated collector storage systems with transparent insulation, Solar Energy
41(5) (1988), pp. 487–494.
29. C. Schmidt and A. Goetzberger, Single-tube integrated collector storage sys-
tems with transparent insulation and involute reflector, Solar Energy 45(2)
(1990), pp. 93–100.
30. S. Baer, Breadbox Water Heater Plans (Zomeworks Corporation, Albu-
querque, New Mexico, USA, 1975).
31. W. S. Duff and A. Menon, Modelling and validation of integral collector stor-
age evacuated tubular collector DHW systems, J. Chem. Phys. 100 (1994),
p. 337.
32. R. K. Sion, R. Sangameswar, D. Rao and K. Rao, Performance of a flat plate
solar collector with fluid undergoing phase change, Solar Energy 23 (1979),
pp. 69–73.
33. J. M. Shreyer, Residential application of refrigerant charged solar collectors,
Solar Energy 26 (1981), pp. 307–312.
34. K. S. Ong and M. Haider-E-Alathi, Performance of a 134a-filled ther-
mosyphon, Appl. Therm. Eng. 23 (2003), pp. 2373–2381.
35. M. Esen and H. Esen, Experimental Investigation of a two phase closed ther-
mosyphon solar water heater, Solar Energy 79 (2005), pp. 459–468.
36. A. Odaz-Flores, O. Garcia-Valladares and V. H. Gomez, Comparison of
the thermal performance of different working fluids in a closed two-phase
solar water heating thermosyphon, in Proc. EuroSun 2008: 1st International
Congress on Heating, Cooling and Buildings, Lisbon, Portugal, October
(2008).
37. H. A. De Beijer, Product development in solar water heating, in Proc. 5th
World Renewable Energy Congress, Florence, Italy, pp. 201–204 (1998).
38. A. Troi, Y. Vangiouklakis, E. Korma, D. Jähnig, E. Wiemken, G. Franchini,
D. Mugnier, B. Egilegor, P. Melograno and W. Sparber, Solar Combi+ ; iden-
tification of most promising markets and promotion of standardized system
configurations for small scale solar heating and cooling applications, in Proc.
EuroSun 2008, October, Lisbon, Portugal (2008).
39. G. L. Morrison, Simulation of packaged solar heat pump water heaters, Solar
Energy 53 (1984), pp. 249–257.
40. B. J. Huang and C. P. Lee, Long-term performance of solar-assisted heat
pump water heater, Journal of Renewable Energy 29 (2005), pp. 633–639.
41. W. Weiss and Mauthner, Solar heat worldwide, Report of the International
Energy Agency, Solar Heating and Cooling Programme (2010).
42. E. Ruiz and P. J. Martinez, Analysis of an open air swimming pool solar heat-
ing system using an experimentally validated TRNSYS model, Solar Energy
84 (2010), pp. 116–123.
43. A. H. Fanney and B. P. Daugherty, A PV solar water heating system, ASME
Journal of Solar Energy Engineering 119 (1997), pp. 126–133.
44. A. H. Fanney, B. P. Daugherty and K. P. Kramp, Field performance of PV
solar water heating system, ASME Journal of Solar Energy Engineering 119
(1997), pp. 265–272.
45. A. Rabl, Active Solar Collectors and Their Applications (Oxford University
Press, Oxford, UK, 1985).
46. B., Norton, Solar Energy Thermal Technology (Springer-Verlag, Heidelburg,
Germany, 1992).
47. B. Norton and J. E. J. Edmonds, Aqueous propylene glycol concentrations
for the freeze protection of thermosyphon solar energy water heaters, Solar
Energy 47(5) (1991), pp. 375–382.
48. N. V. Baker, Passive and Low Energy Building Designs for Tropical Island
Climates (Commonwealth Secretariat Publications, London, 1987).
49. E. Mazria, Solar Home Book (Rodale Press, Emmaus, Pennsylvania, USA,
1980).
50. A. Konya, A Design Primer for Hot Climates (Architectural Press, London,
1980).
51. O. S. Aschehoug, Baker, Frame and edge-seal technology — an international
view, in Proc. Window Innovations, ’95, Toronto, Canada (1995).
52. S. Svendsen and P. Fritzel, Spacers for highly insulated windows, in Proc.
Window Innovations ’95, Toronto, Canada (1995).
53. R. E. Collins and T. M. Simko, Current status of the science and technology
of vacuum glazing, Solar Energy 62 (1998), pp. 189–213.
54. P. W. Griffiths, M. Di, P. Leo, P. C. Cartwright, P. Eames, G. Yianoulis and
B. Leftheriotis, Norton fabrication of evacuated glazing at low temperature,
Solar Energy 63 (1998), pp. 244–249.
55. P. W. Griffiths, B. Norton, P. C. Eames and S. N. G. Lo, Detailed simulation
of heat transfer across planar evacuated glazing building, Res. Information
24 (1996), pp. 42–147.
56. B. Norton, Harnessing Solar Heat (Springer, Heidelberg, Germany, 2013).
57. Y. Fang, P. C. Eames and B. Norton, Influence of insolation level and glass
thickness on the thermal performance of evacuated glazing, in Proc. World
Renewable Energy Congress VI, Brighton, UK, pp. 1878–1881 (2000).
58. Y. Fang, P. C. Eames, B. Norton and T. J. Hyde, Experimental validation
of a numerical model for heat transfer in evacuated glazing, Solar Energy 80
(2006), pp. 564–577.
59. Y. Fang, P. C. Eames, B. Norton, T. Hyde, J. Zhao, J. Wang, Y. Huang, Low
emittance coatings and the thermal performance of vacuum glazing, Solar
Energy 81 (2007), pp. 8–12.
60. K. Duer and S. Svendsen, Monolithic silica aerogel in superinsulating glazings,

Solar Energy 63 (1998), pp. 259–267.
61. Y. Fang and P. C. Eames, The effect of glass coating emittance and frame
rebate on heat transfer through VG and EC vacuum glazed windows, Sol.
Energ. Mat. Sol. Cells 90 (2006), pp. 2683–2695.
62. S. J. Robinson and R. E. Collins, Evacuated windows-theory and practice, in
ISES Solar World Congress, International Solar Energy Society, Kobe, Japan
(1989).
63. S. Selkowitz, M. Rubin, E. S. Lee and R. Sullivan, A review of EC window
performance factors, SPIE 2255 (1994), pp. 226–248.
64. R. Zriken and E. Bilgen, Theoretical study of Trombe–Michel wall solar col-
lector system, Solar Energy 39 (1987), pp. 409–419.
65. M. N. Wright, Solar Radiation as Related to Summer Cooling and Winter
Radiation in Residences (J.B. Pierce Foundation, New York, 1936).
66. M. Wegelin, S. Canonica, K. Mechsner, T. Tleischmann, F. Pasaro and A.
Metzler, Solar water disinfection: Scope of the process and analysis of radia-
tion experiments, J. Water S. R. T. — Aqua 40 (1994), pp. 154–169.
67. J. D. Burch and K. E. Thomas, Water disinfection for developing coun-
tries and potential for solar thermal pasteurisation, Solar Energy 64 (1998),
pp. 87–97.
68. N. K. Bansal, R. L. Sawhney, A. Misra and A. Boettcher, Solar sterilization
of water, Solar Energy 40 (1988), pp. 35–39.
69. M. A. S. Malik, G. N. A. Tiwari Kumar and M. S. Sodha, Solar Distillation
(Pergamon Press, Oxford, U.K., 1982).
70. M. F. Kocher, R. Gerald, P. E. Bodman and M. Lay, Solar grain drying and
farrowing house heating with a multi-use collector, ASAE Paper No. 4554
(1981).
71. W. Weiss, H. Schweiger and R. Battisti, Market potential and system designs
for industrial heat applications, in Proc. ESTEC (2005).
72. S. Kalogirou, The potential for solar industrial process heat applications,
Appl. Energ. 76 (2003), pp. 337–361.
73. G. N. Kulkarni, S. B. Kedere and S. Bandyopadhyay, Design of solar thermal
systems utilising pressurised hot water storage for industrial applications,
Solar Energy 82 (2008), pp. 686–699.
74. O. V. Ekechukwu, P. O. Fleming and B. Norton, The potential of solar energy
agricultural dryers in Nigeria, in Proc. 2nd Annual Conf. Biotechnology Soci-
ety of Nigeria, 16–19 May (1986).
75. P. H. Bailey and W. F. Williamson, Some experiments on drying grain by
solar radiation, J. Agr. Eng. Res. 10 (1965), pp. 191–196.
76. H. R. Bolin, A. E. Stafford and C. C. Huxsoll, Heated fruit dehydrator, Solar
Energy 20 (1978), pp. 281–291.
77. H. R. Bolin, A. E. Stafford and C. C. Huxso, Solar through dryer, Solar
Energy 22 (1979), pp. 455–457.
78. E. A. Arinze, G. Schoenau and F. W. Bigsby, Solar energy absorption prop-
erties of some agricultural products, ASAE Paper, No 79-3071 (1979).
79. L. S. Cheema, Solar drying of cassava for alcohol production, ISES Cong.,
New Delhi, India, 1940–1944 (1978).
80. L. S. Cheema and C. M. C. Ribeiro, Solar dryers of cashew, banana and
pineapple, ISES Conf., New Delhi, India, 3, 2075–2079 (1978).
81. P. E. Doe, M. Ahmed, M. Muslemuddin and K. Sachithananthan, A polythene
tent drier for improved sun drying of fish, Food Tech. Australia 29 (1977),
pp. 437–441.
82. R. H. B. Exell, A simple solar rice dryer, basic design theory, Sunworld 4
(1980), pp. 186–190.
83. W. E. Ferguson and P. H. Bailey, Solar air heater for near ambient crop
drying; Description test methods and 1977 results, The British Soc. for Res.
Agric. Eng., Scotish Inst. Ag. Eng. Departmental Note, SIN/275, (1979).
84. P. D. Fleming, B. Norton, S. O. Onyegegbu, S. D. Probert and O. V.
Ekechukwu, A large-scale facility for experimental studies of natural circula-
tion solar-energy tropical crop dryers, in Proc. of the 1986 Int. Drying Symp.,
pp. 685–693 (M.I.T. Cambridge, USA, 1986).
85. K. A. McLean, Drying and Storage of Combinable Crops (Farm Press Ltd.,
Ipswich, Suffolk, UK, 1980).
86. B. Norton, P. O. Fleming and O. V. Ekechukwu, Passive autarkic solar drying
techniques, physics and technology of solar energy, in Proc. International
Workshop on Physics of Solar Energy, New Delhi (1986).
87. M. N. Ozisik, B. K. Huang and M. Toksoy, Solar grain drying, Solar Energy
24 (1980), pp. 397–401.
88. G. C. Shove, G. W. Barton, M. D. Hall and W. H. F. Peterson, Studies of
solar grain drying, ASAE Paper, No 81-4037 (1981).
89. O. P. Singhal and G. P. Gupta, Use of solar energy for parboiling and drying
of paddy, ISES Cong., New Delhi, India, pp. 1958–1963 (1978).
90. U. J. Taylor and A. D. Weir, Simulation of a solar timber drier, Solar Energy
34 (1985), pp. 249–255.
91. J. F. Thompson and H. E. Studer, Sun drying of prunes continuous trays,
ASAE., Paper, No 81-3.051 (1981).
92. J. L. Tschernitz and W. T. Simpson, Solar heated, forced-air, lumber dryer
for tropical latitudes, Solar Energy 22 (1979), pp. 563–566.
93. B. Brenndorfer, L. Kennedy, C. O. O. Bateman, G. C. Mrema and C. Wereko-
Brobby, Solar Dryers — Their Role in Postharvest Processing (Common-
wealth Science Council (Commonwealth Secretariat Publications), London,
1985).
94. K. Crowther and B. Melzer, The thermosphoning cool pool — A natural cool-
ing system, in Proc. Third National Passive Solar Conf., San Jose, California,
USA, 3, pp. 448–451, January (1979).
95. K. Crowther, Cooling from an evaporating thermosyphoning roof pond, in
Proc. Passive Solar Conf., Kansas City, Missouri, USA, pp. 409–503 October
(1979).
96. www.iea-shc.org. Accessed 8/31/2015.
97. http://task48.iea-shc.org/. Accessed 8/31/2015.

Chapter 9
Solar Thermochemical Processes
Roman Bader∗ and Wojciech Lipiński†

Research School of Engineering,
The Australian National University
Canberra ACT 2601, Australia
∗[email protected]
†[email protected]
Solar radiation is an abundant energy source with high exergy content, suitable
for driving thermochemical processes with high efficiency. This chapter provides
a comprehensive review of the field of solar thermochemistry, with focus on
production of fuels and other chemical commodities. Material, process, and
reactor developments for selected processes are discussed along with pertinent
advances in thermodynamics, kinetics, and thermal transport.
1 Introduction
Solar energy can be used as a source of renewable process heat to drive
energy-intensive chemical processes. If solar energy is the only source of
process heat, the difference between the energy content of the products
and that of the reactants corresponds to the amount of solar energy stored
chemically during the process.
For example: The endothermic dissociation of H2 O(l) into H2 (g) and

1/2O2 (g), with all reactants and products at room temperature and atmo-
spheric pressure, requires an energy input of approximately 286 kJ per mole
of dissociated H2 O.
Thus, endothermic chemical processes offer the possibility to absorb
and store solar energy. If the resulting products are chemically stable and
have sufficiently high energy density, these chemical energy carriers can be
used to decouple the time and location of solar energy utilization from the
time and location of its collection, thus serving as solar fuels.
345
346 R. Bader & W. Lipiński
For example: If the energy density of solar-derived chemical energy carriers

is sufficiently high, solar energy can be harvested in rural Australia and
transported in chemically stored form to densely populated regions in Aus-
tralia and overseas to generate mechanical or electrical energy using heat
engines or fuel cells.
In addition, solar thermal energy can replace fossil fuels in the pro-
duction of many other energy-intensive materials, of which the primary
use is non-energetic. Such products can be referred to as solar commodity
materials.
For example: A rapid growth in urban populations in Asia leads to a rapid
increase in the demand for construction materials such as cement and steel.
Currently, unprocessed iron ore is exported from Australia to China where
it is processed to iron using vast amounts of fossil fuels. Instead, iron can
be produced in Australia using solar energy as the source of process heat,
thereby reducing the amount of raw material to be shipped and the fossil
energy used in the production process.
Several high-temperature processes have been considered for the uti-
lization of solar energy in the production of fuels and commodities. This
chapter provides an overview of the processes that have been most widely
examined to date.
1.1 Overview of Processes

Figure 1 gives an overview of the most common solar thermochemical pro-
cesses, including reactants, main products, and process types. These pro-
cesses can be broadly categorized according to the type of their products
into processes that yield solar fuels and processes that yield solar com-
modities. Solar fuels processes aim at producing hydrogen (H2 ) or syngas,
a mixture of mainly H2 and CO. These processes can be further catego-
rized according to the feedstocks involved. Syngas can be obtained either
via H2 O- and CO2 -splitting processes or via conversion of carbonaceous
feedstocks other than CO2 . H2 O and CO2 splitting can be accomplished
in a single thermal dissociation step (thermolysis), followed by a high-
temperature gas separation step. Thermolysis of H2 O and CO2 at ambi-
ent pressure, while conceptually simple, requires very high temperatures
exceeding 2500 K to obtain significant H2 /CO concentrations.1 In thermo-
chemical redox cycles, intermediate oxygen exchange (redox) materials are
used to break the process down into multiple process steps and reduce the
temperature required to split H2 O and CO2 . Many of the proposed redox
February 11, 2016
14:8
FUELS CHEMICAL COMMODITIES
AND PROCESSING
H2O/CO2 splitting Decarbonization / Upgrade

Solar Thermochemical Processes
Carbonaceous N2, C, Ores, Air, flue
H2O, CO2 CaCO3
feedstocks CH4, H2O waste gases
Extractive
Ammonia CO2
Thermolysis Redox cycles Cracking Reforming Gasification Calcination processes,
production capture
recycling
b2236-ch09
Optional:
Synthesis gas NH3, CO, Metals, CO2,
CO2 / C CaO, CO2
(H2, CO) H2 materials gases
sequestration
Fig. 1. Overview of process routes for the solar thermochemical production of fuels and commodity materials. This figure is an expanded
version of the schematic published in Ref. 2.3–5
347
page 347
materials used to split H2 O and CO2 are metal oxides (e.g. Fe3 O4 , ZnO,
CeO2 ). These materials are either partially reduced to a lower-valence metal
oxide or fully reduced to a pure metal using high-temperature solar heat.
Subsequently, the reduced redox material is exposed to H2 O and CO2 to
produce H2 and CO, respectively. Thereby, the redox material is reverted to
its initial oxidation state and is returned to the thermal reduction step. In
the carbothermal reduction of metal oxides, reducing agents such as carbon
or methane are used to lower the process temperature and co-produce CO
or syngas in the reduction step. H2 or syngas can also be produced from
the conversion of carbonaceous feedstocks via methane cracking, methane
reforming, or gasification of solid materials (e.g. coal, petcoke, biomass). In
conventional autothermal or allothermal processes, part of the feedstock or
a separate fuel is combusted to generate the process heat for the endother-
mic reaction. If solar energy is used as the source of process heat, solar
energy in the amount of the enthalpy of reaction of the process is stored in
the products.
Syngas produced via solar thermochemical processes can either be used
directly as a fuel or further processed to synthetic fuels (e.g. diesel, gaso-
line, kerosene) via the Fischer–Tropsch process or other catalytic reforming
processes. Synthetic liquid hydrocarbon fuels offer high energy density and
can be integrated directly into the existing fuel infrastructure.6 To avoid the
CO2 emissions emerging from the combustion of hydrocarbon fuels, CO2
can be recovered either at the source, e.g. via a CaCO3 -based calcination–
carbonation process, or from ambient air, e.g. via a temperature–vacuum
swing desorption/adsorption process.7 The carbon material cycle can be
closed by returning the captured CO2 to the solar fuels process, as shown
schematically in Fig. 2.
Solar process heat can also be used for the production of energy-
intensive commodities. Pure metals can be extracted from metal ores in
the thermal and carbothermal reduction processes described in the con-
text of solar fuels. Thermally reduced redox materials can also be used
as chemical or combined chemical and sensible heat storage media to pro-
vide high-temperature process heat on-demand, for example to a thermal
power cycle. In this case, the reduced redox material is re-oxidized with an
oxygen-rich gas, for example ambient air. Alternatively, metal oxides can be
reduced carbothermally in nitrogen to form metal nitrides. These ceramic
materials can either be used as high-temperature materials, or utilized in
cyclic metal oxide/metal nitride processes to produce ammonia and syn-
gas.9 The first step of the CaCO3 -based calcination–carbonation process,
Solar Thermochemical Processes 349
Hydrocarbon
fuel synthesis
Synthesis Synthetic
gas fuels
(H2, CO) CxH2x+2 O2
Concentrated Solar H2O / Applications:

• Transportation
Work and
solar energy CO2 splitting • Industry heat
O2
Combustion
Reactants
products
CO2, H2O
CO2, H2O
CO2, H2O
uptake
Work
Fig. 2. CO2 material cycle in a CO2 neutral energy system based on solar fuels.
the calcination of limestone (CaCO3 ), yields lime (CaO), the main ingre-
dient of cement. In addition, the CO2 evolving from this process could be
used as a feedstock in solar fuels processes.
Before we enter the discussion of different solar processes, chemical
reactions, and solar reactor technologies, we establish the thermodynamic
basis that supports the idea of utilizing concentrated solar energy in ther-
mochemical processes.
1.2 Thermodynamic Limits

For a chemical reaction operated at constant temperature and pressure,
the total amount of energy to be supplied for the reaction to proceed is
given by:
∆Hrxn = ∆Grxn + T ∆Srxn , (1)
By definition, ∆Hrxn , the enthalpy of reaction, is positive for endothermic

reactions and negative for exothermic reactions. For most reactions, ∆Hrxn
is only a weak function of temperature. The first term on the right-hand
side of Eq. (1), ∆Grxn , is the Gibbs free energy of reaction. It corresponds
to the amount of energy that needs to be supplied in the form of work for
the chemical reaction to proceed. A negative value of ∆Grxn indicates that
a chemical reaction proceeds spontaneously without any work input. The

second term, T ∆Srxn , corresponds to the amount of energy to be supplied
in the form of heat.
At room temperature and ambient pressure, the magnitude of ∆Grxn
is usually much larger than the magnitude of T ∆Srxn , and ∆Hrxn ≈
∆Grxn . Hence, endothermic reactions (∆Hrxn > 0) normally do not occur
spontaneously at room temperature and ambient pressure without work
input. With increasing temperature T , the magnitude of the term T ∆Srxn
increases. Hence, an endothermic reaction with ∆Srxn > 0 proceeds with-
out work input above the temperature T∆G=0 , at which ∆Grxn = ∆Hrxn −
T∆G=0 ∆Srxn = 0.a These trends of ∆Hrxn , T ∆Srxn, and ∆Grxn for an
endothermic reaction are shown qualitatively in Fig. 3. Therefore, con-
ducting an endothermic chemical reaction with thermal energy as the only
source of energy requires heat input at elevated temperatures.
For example: For the dissociation of H2 O(l) into H2 (g) and 1/2O2(g),
∆Grxn = 237 kJ mol−1 at room temperature and 1 bar pressure, and
∆Grxn = 0 occurs at approximately 4330 K.5,b
Hrxn
T Srxn
Energy
Grxn
0
Temperature T G=0
300 K
Fig. 3. Qualitative trends of the thermodynamic quantities enthalpy of reaction, ∆Hrxn ,
Gibbs free energy of reaction, ∆Grxn , and T ∆Srxn , for an endothermic reaction with
positive ∆Srxn . T∆G=0 indicates the temperature above which the reaction proceeds
spontaneously. Reprinted from Ref. 4, Copyright (2001), with permission from Elsevier.
a Note that T∆G=0 is only indicative. The reaction starts to proceed at T < T∆G=0 and
complete reaction occurs at T > T∆G=0 .
b In practice, H, O, and OH will also be present at this temperature.
QH,TH
reactants products
Reactor
TC TC
QC ,TC
Fig. 4. Schematic of a generic thermochemical reactor.
Next, consider the thermochemical reactor shown schematically in

Fig. 4. The reactor is assumed to host an endothermic reaction. It is fur-
ther assumed to operate at steady-state and at ambient pressure. Heat is
supplied at temperature TH and rejected to the environment at ambient
temperature, TC . Reactants and products cross the reactor boundary at
temperature, TC . The first and second laws of thermodynamics yield:
0 = QH − QC − ∆Hrxn (TC ), (2)

QH QC
0= − − ∆Srxn (TC ) + Sirr . (3)
TH TC
In Eq. (3), Sirr denotes the entropy generated within the system due to
internal irreversibilities. Combining Eqs. (2) and (3) and using Eq. (1)
yields:

TH
QH = ∆Grxn (TC ) + TC Sirr , (4)
TH − TC
The energy efficiency of the process to store thermal energy in chemical

products is defined as:
∆Hrxn (TC )
ηenergy = , (5)
QH
The maximum efficiency is reached for an internally reversible process,

Sirr = 0. Inserting Eq. (4) into Eq. (5) yields:

∆Hrxn (TC ) TC
ηenergy,ideal = 1− . (6)
∆Grxn (TC ) TH
For example: The maximum energy efficiency ηenergy,ideal of the dissociation

of H2 O(l) into H2 (g) and 1/2O2(g) in a reactor according to Fig. 4 with
TH = 1000◦ C and TC = 298 K is ηenergy,ideal = 92.3%.
If the products are used to derive work in a closed material system,
they are returned to their initial form as they react exothermically to
produce work. The maximum work that can be derived from a chemical
energy carrier is that generated in a reversible fuel cell operating at ambient
temperature TC :
∆Grxn (TC )
ηFC,ideal = , (7)
∆Hrxn (TC )
Hence, the maximum thermal efficiency to convert the heat input QH
to work via a thermally-driven endothermic reaction and a reversible fuel
cell in a closed material cycle equals the Carnot efficiency:
TC
ηth,ideal = ηenergy,idealηFC,ideal = 1 − , (8)
TH
For example: The maximum thermal efficiency ηth,ideal of the dissociation of
H2 O(l) into H2 (g) and 1/2O2 (g) in a reactor according to Fig. 4 with TH =
1000◦ C and TC = 298 K, followed by the recombination of the products in
a reversible fuel cell operating at TC = 298 K is ηth,ideal = 76.6%.
For an open material system in which the products of the work generation
process are not equal to the reactants of the thermochemical fuel production
process, the maximum efficiency of converting solar energy to work is:
∆GFC (TC )
ηth,ideal = ηenergy,ideal , (9)
∆HFC (TC )
with ηenergy,ideal given in Eq. (6) and ∆GFC (TC ) and ∆HFC (TC ) denoting
the Gibbs free energy and enthalpy of reaction, respectively, of the work-
generating step occurring in the fuel cell.
To provide solar process heat, solar energy has to be captured with
a solar receiver. Hence, the absorption efficiency of the solar receiver has
to be taken into account. Neglecting convection and conduction losses, the
absorption efficiency of an ideal blackbody absorber (absorptivity and emis-
sivity equal to 1) at temperature TH is:c
σTH4
ηabs,ideal = 1 − , (10)
CI sun
c Thefeasibility and benefit of a solar-selective absorber diminishes with increasing tem-

perature of the absorber. Therefore, a blackbody absorber is considered as the ideal
absorber in the present context.
where σ is the Stefan–Boltzmann constant, Isun = 1 kW m−2 is the nomi-

nal direct normal solar irradiance, and C is the solar concentration ratio,
defined as the ratio of the average radiative flux on the absorber to
Isun . Hence, for a solar-driven thermal process, the maximum thermal
efficiency is:
ηsolar,ideal = ηabs,ideal ηenergy,idealηFC,ideal . (11)
Figure 5 shows ηsolar,ideal as a function of TH for a closed mate-

rial system, ηabs,ideal , and the Carnot efficiency. With increasing solar
concentration ratio, C, the maximum of ηsolar,ideal increases and shifts
towards higher TH . It can be shown with a radiation heat transfer analy-
sis that the theoretical maximum solar concentration ratio is Cideal =
1/ sin2 θsun ≈ 46,000,d where θsun = 4.65 mrad is the cone half-angle
subtended by the sun.9 Hence, the maximum ηsolar,ideal that can be the-
oretically achieved is ηsolar,ideal,max (Cideal = 46,000) = 84% and occurs at
TH,max (Cideal = 46,000) = 2318 K. For existing three-dimensional solar con-
centrators (e.g. solar tower, solar dish), the solar concentration ratio is typi-
cally in the range C = 1,000−10,000 and the maximum of ηsolar,ideal is in
1
C=
0.8
46,000
0.6
1,000
η
0.4 2,000 10,000

3,000
0.2 5,000
0
0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000
TH, K
Fig. 5. Solid lines: theoretical maximum thermal efficiency, ηsolar,ideal , of a solar-driven

closed-cycle thermal process operating between the temperature reservoirs TH and TC =
298 K. Dashed lines — absorption efficiency of an ideal blackbody receiver, ηabs,ideal ;
dash-dotted line — Carnot efficiency.
d Thisresult is for an ideal three-dimensional concentrator containing air. In general, if

the concentrator contains a medium with refractive index n, Cideal = n2 / sin2 θsun .
the range of 67–79%, occurring between 1105 K and 1721 K. In practice,

the peak efficiency will occur at a lower temperature due to additional heat
losses by convection and conduction.
From the above, it follows that storing solar energy via endothermic
thermochemical reactions (i) requires elevated temperatures (Fig. 3) and
(ii) is most efficient at temperatures between approximately 1000–2000 K
(Fig. 5).
2 Thermolysis
Direct thermal dissociation of H2 O and CO2 according to:
1 ◦ −1
H2 O(l) → H2 + O2 , ∆H298 K = 286 kJ mol , (12)
2
1 ◦ −1
CO2 → CO + O2 , ∆H298 K = 283 kJ mol , (13)
2
is conceptually the simplest way to produce syngas from H2 O and CO2 .
However, at ambient pressure, these reactions occur only at extremely high
temperatures. For example, 20% dissociation of H2 O and CO2 requires
approximately 2800 K and 2600 K, respectively.10,11 These temperatures
are significantly higher than the optimum temperatures for solar ther-
mal processes operated with state-of-the-art solar concentrators (Fig. 5).
In addition, unwanted gaseous species (H, O, OH) are co-produced at these
high temperatures.10 Furthermore, in order to avoid the recombination of
the product gases upon cooling, they must be separated at the extremely
high dissociation temperatures required by the process. Potential separa-
tion techniques include effusional separation (the separation of gas species
with differing molecular weights with porous membranes),10,12 electrolytic
separation,13,14 and quenching.4,15,16 Finally, the availability of materials of
construction that can be operated at temperatures in excess of 2500 K over
extended periods of time is limited. These drawbacks and challenges with
the direct thermal dissociation of H2 O and CO2 have been the motivation
for the development of thermochemical cycles.
3 Thermochemical Cycles
The main advantages of thermochemical cycles compared to the direct ther-
molysis of H2 O and CO2 are: (i) the need for high-temperature separation
of H2 /CO and O2 is avoided because the gases are produced in separate pro-
cess steps, and (ii) the maximum process operating temperature is generally
lower. Numerous candidate cycles have been scanned for their suitability
to split H2 O using solar energy,17–21 but only a handful of them have been
investigated in-depth so far. While cycles with three or more steps have
been proposed, the majority of today’s research focuses on two-step cycles.
Of the cycles that have been studied so far, the cycles comprising more
than two steps tend to be operable at lower temperatures than the two-step
cycles, which makes the reactor design and material selection less challeng-
ing and reduces the required solar concentration ratio. On the other hand,
increasing the number of cycle steps increases irreversibilities in the pro-
cess due to internal heat transfer, heat losses to the environment, and the
number of transport and separation processes of reactants and products,
leading to an increase in the overall complexity and costs of the process.17
Important aspects that should be considered when selecting suitable ther-
mochemical cycles for H2 O and CO2 splitting include the required cycle
operating conditions such as the temperatures and gaseous environments
needed to conduct the reaction steps involved, the achievable product yield
per mole of oxygen exchange material and cycle, the predicted energy and
exergy efficiency of the overall process, the conversion of the reactants to
products, the rates of the chemical reactions involved, the possibility of
undesired side-reactions, the number, cost, availability, toxicity, and envi-
ronmental safety of the chemical species involved, the ease of separation of
the chemical species, their compatibility with reactor materials, and suit-
able reactor designs to conduct the process steps.17 In the following sections
we describe selected work that has been done to address some of the above
research questions for the most prominent cycles.
3.1 Two-Step Redox Cycles

The chemical reactions in two-step redox cycles based on metal oxide redox
pairs can be represented by:
Thermal reduction step (endothermic):
1
xMOox → xMOred + O2 . (14)
2
Fuel production step (exothermic):
xMOred + yH2 O + (1 − y)CO2

→ xMOox + yH2 + (1 − y)CO, 0 y 1. (15)
The temperature of the reduction step can be lowered through the use
of a reducing agent (e.g. carbon particles or methane). The overall net
reaction is:
1
yH2 O + (1 − y)CO2 → yH2 + (1 − y)CO + O2 . (16)
2
Metal oxide materials that have been considered for two-step redox cycles
can be grouped into volatile and non-volatile materials, depending on
whether the material evaporates or remains solid during the thermal reduc-
tion step. Non-volatile materials can be further grouped into stoichiometric
and non-stoichiometric material systems, depending on the stoichiometry
of the redox material in the cycle. An overview of the different categories,
names, and common examples of two-step redox material pairs is given in
Table 1.19–21
A benefit of the volatile candidate materials is that they undergo a
stoichiometric change in their oxygen content, resulting in a relatively high
theoretical fuel productivity per mole of redox material and cycle. Non-
volatile materials typically undergo smaller changes in their oxygen content.
A drawback of volatile processes is the need to separate the product gases of
the reduction step, for example via quenching, to avoid their recombination.
This challenge is avoided with non-volatile materials.
Not all metal oxide redox material pairs that have been considered
were found to be useful. Many candidate metal oxides reduce at exces-
sively high temperatures. For example, for TiO2 , Al2 O3 , SiO2 , and CaO,
Table 1: Main categories and examples of metal oxide redox material pairs used in
two-step thermochemical H2 O/CO2 -splitting cycles. Adopted from Ref. 19 with modi-
fications,20,21 Copyright (2014), with permission from Elsevier.
Category Name Redox pair
Volatile, Zinc oxide ZnO(s)/Zn(g)

stoichiometric Tin oxide SnO2 (s)/SnO(g)
Germanium oxide GeO2 (s)/GeO(g)
Non-volatile, Ferrite Mx Fe3−x O4 /xMO+(3 − x)FeO; M: Co, Ni,

stoichiometric Zn, Mg, Mn
Hercynite Mx Fe3−x O4 +3Al2 O3 /xMAl2 O4
+(3 − x)FeAl2 O4 ; M: Co
Non-volatile, non- Ceria Mx Ce1−x O2 /Mx Ce1−x O2−δ , M: 1+: Li;

stoichiometric 2+: Mg, Ca, Sr; 3+: Sc, Y, Pr, Sm, Gd,
Dy, La; 4+: Zr, Hf; 5+: Ta; 6+: Cr
Perovskite ABO3 /ABO3−δ , A: Sr, Ba, La; B: Al, Mn,
Fe, Co
Fig. 6. Gibbs free energy for selected thermal reduction (a) and fuel production (b)
reactions as functions of temperature at atmospheric pressure. Reprinted from Ref. 1,
Copyright (2007), with permission from the American Chemical Society.
T∆G=0 > 4000 K.4 Other materials were found to be unsuitable for water
splitting. This is illustrated for the three candidate metal oxide redox pairs
Fe3 O4 /FeO, Mn3 O4 /MnO, and Co3 O4 /CoO. As can be seen from Fig. 6(a),
all three metal oxides are reducible in oxygen at temperatures above approx-
imately 1000 K, 1900 K, and 2500 K, respectively. However, Fig. 6(b) shows
that only FeO is able to react with water to form H2 . For the two other
metal oxides, MnO and CoO, ∆Grxn of the fuel production reaction is pos-
itive at all temperatures.1
In the remainder of this section, our goal is to discuss some of the key
research and engineering work that has been done in the area of two-step
thermochemical H2 O and CO2 splitting, focusing on the most widely stud-
ied cycles. In view of the large amount of research that has been published
over the last 15 years, a complete treatment of the literature in this area is
beyond the scope of this text. References are provided to refer the interested
reader to the primary literature.
3.1.1 Zinc oxide cycle

The zinc oxide cycle proceeds according to the following steps:22
Thermal reduction:
1
ZnO(s) → Zn(g) + O2 , ∆H298K = 350.5 kJ mol−1 , (17)
2
Fuel production:
Zn(s) + yH2 O + (1 − y)CO2 → ZnO(s) + yH2 + (1 − y)CO, 0 y 1,

− 67.5 kJ mol−1 < ∆H298 K < −64.7 kJ mol−1 . (18)
For the thermal reduction step at ambient pressure, T∆G=0 = 2235 K,4
whereas the boiling point of zinc is 1179 K. Hence, a gaseous mixture of
zinc and oxygen is obtained. Somewhat lower reduction temperatures can
be achieved if the product gases are diluted with inert gas to shift the
equilibrium of reaction (17) to the right.22 The fuel production step is ther-
modynamically favorable at temperatures below 1400 K at 1 bar,23 and is
usually carried out in the temperature range of 573–1273 K and at ambient
pressure, i.e. below or slightly above the boiling point of zinc.
A second-law analysis of the zinc oxide cycle has been conducted by
Loutzenhiser et al.22 according to the process model shown in Fig. 7,
to determine the theoretical thermal efficiency of the cycle. Thermal
reduction is carried out in a solar reactor in the temperature range
Treactor=1900–2300 K
Qsolar
Solar
Reactor
Qre-radiation
Zn+½O2 (+Ar) at
ZnO (+Ar) at Treactor =1900–2300 K
Tamb= 298 K
Zn at Quench
QZn oxidizer Zn
Qquench
Tamb =298 K Unit
Oxidizer
CO+(1- )H2 at ½O2 (+Ar) at
CO2 + (1- )H2O at
Tamb= 298 K Tamb= 298 K Tamb =298 K
Fuel Gas Ar at
Cell ½O2 at Separator Tamb =298 K
Tamb =298 K
WFC QFC
Wseparator Qseparator
Fig. 7. Process model for the thermodynamic analysis of the zinc oxide cycle; β denotes
the molar fractions ṅCO2 /(ṅCO2 + ṅH2 O ) at the inlet and ṅCO /(ṅCO + ṅH2 ) at the out-
let of the zinc oxidizer. Reprinted from Ref. 22, Copyright (2011), with permission from
Elsevier.
1900 K Treactor 2300 K and at ambient pressure. The solar reactor is

modelled as a blackbody cavity receiver with a solar concentration ratio
across the aperture of 5000. Convection and conduction losses are neglected.
The product gas mixture of the thermal reduction step is separated via
quenching to ambient temperature, Tamb = 298 K. At temperatures below
T∆G=0 , argon is used as inert gas in the solar reactor to shift the equilib-
rium of reaction (17) to the right-hand side. This increases the heat input
required to heat the reactants from Tamb to Treactor and introduces a work
requirement to separate Ar and O2 . Zinc is reacted with a variable mixture
of CO2 and H2 O in the zinc oxidizer, with reactants and products enter-
ing and exiting at Tamb . The produced fuel, a mixture of CO and H2 , and
O2 from the thermal reduction step are recombined in an ideal fuel cell
operating at Tamb , generating a work output equivalent to the Gibbs free
energy of the recombination reaction. The thermal efficiency of the cycle is
defined as:
Ẇnet
ηth = , (19)
Q̇solar
where Ẇnet = ẆFC − Ẇseparator and Q̇solar are the net mechanical power
output and the solar heat rate supplied to the cycle, respectively.
The thermal efficiency is shown in Fig. 8. In the absence of heat
recovery, the maximum thermal efficiency is between 30–34% and peaks
at T∆G=0 . Somewhat higher efficiencies are obtained with CO2 than with
H2 O, due to the lower entropy generation in the fuel cell with CO than with
H2 fuel. Decreasing Treactor below T∆G=0 leads to increasing inert gas flow
rate through the solar reactor which leads to increasing heat rejection in the
quench unit, resulting in decreasing efficiency. Above T∆G=0 , inert gas is
not used, but reradiation losses and the heat rejection by the quench unit
increase with increasing Treactor, resulting in decreasing efficiency. If the
heat rejected by the quench unit and the zinc oxidizer is completely recu-
perated to preheat the reactants to the solar reactor, the energy penalty
associated with the use of inert gas is reduced. In this case, the thermal
efficiency reaches 50–55% and peaks below T∆G=0 , at 2070 K.
Schunk et al.24 conducted the thermal reduction step (17) in a solar-
driven thermogravimeter to measure the thermal dissociation rate under
heat and mass transfer conditions closely approximating those in a directly
irradiated solar reactor. Experiments were carried out in a windowed solar
cavity receiver, purged with argon sweep gas. Samples of 12 mm-thick
packed beds of micrometer-sized ZnO particles (sample mass 6.2 g) were
Fig. 8. Thermal efficiency of the cycle shown in Fig. 7, with (dashed lines) and without
(solid lines) heat recovery from the quench unit and the zinc oxidizer. Reprinted from
Ref. 22, Copyright (2011), with permission from Elsevier.
heated to different dissociation temperatures in the range of 1834–2109 K

by direct exposure to concentrated solar radiation in excess of 2 MW m−2 ,
supplied by a solar furnace. Samples were heated at a rapid rate of 150 K s−1
to 1300 K and at 20 K s−1 above 1300 K. The mass change of the sample
was measured on-line with 0.01 g accuracy. The temperature of the irra-
diated surface of the sample was measured with a solar-blind pyrometer
(operational wavelength 1.39 µm). A porosity change from 70% to 40% was
observed due to sintering during the heating period up to 1800 K, creat-
ing a thin dense layer on the irradiated surface, but no appreciable weight
change of the sample. At all dissociation temperatures, a linear weight
loss was observed, characteristic of an ablation regime: The endothermic
reaction occurred near the irradiated surface, because heat transfer to the
surface, predominantly by radiation, proceeded faster than heat conduc-
tion into the packed bed. Hence, a zero-order Arrhenius rate equation was
used. The apparent activation energy and frequency factor were calculated
to Ea = 361 ± 53 kJ mol−1 K−1 and k0 = 14.03 × 106 ± 2.73 × 106 kg m−2
(at 95% confidence), consistent with previous work. As already observed
in an earlier thermogravimetric study,25 the reaction rate depends on gas-
phase mass transport. Therefore, L’vov’s theory was applied to predict the
frequency factor as a function of the convective flow conditions.
Fig. 9. A 100 kW pilot-scale solar reactor for the thermal dissociation of ZnO par-
ticles under direct concentrated solar irradiation: (a) Lateral cross-section, (b) frontal
cross-section, and (c) 3-D rendering of the experimental setup. Reprinted from Ref. 29,
Copyright (2014), with permission from the American Society of Mechanical Engineers.
A pilot-scale solar reactor, shown schematically in Fig. 9, has been

developed to conduct the thermal dissociation of ZnO particles.26–29 The
reactor consists of a rotating cylindrical cavity receiver with a windowed
aperture to control the gas atmosphere inside the reactor. Particles are fed
into the reactor by a screw feeder and are distributed over the cylindrical
wall of the cavity by its rotating motion, where the particles are directly
exposed to concentrated solar radiation. The reactor front, the window, and
the frustum are water-cooled. Argon sweep gas is injected through radial
and tangential nozzles near the window and around the frustum, generating
a vortex flow that protects the window from zinc deposits and carries the
gaseous products out of the reactor. Product gases exit the reactor through
an annular outlet at the back of the reactor that forms a water-cooled
quench unit in which up to 1500 L min−1 of argon are injected to quench the
products to avoid their recombination. The cavity wall comprises several
layers. The innermost layer consists of 64-mm-thick 16%-porous alumina
(corundum) bricks, bonded with high-temperature adhesive mortar. Max-
imum allowable temperature on the cavity inner wall is limited to about
2000 K, to avoid the formation of a eutectic phase of alumina and ZnO.
The alumina cavity is lined with porous alumino-silicate insulation mate-
rial, which is surrounded by a layer of 25-mm-thick fracture-tough cal-
cium silicate. Mechanical rigidity of the assembly is enhanced with radially
extending fire bricks connecting the alumina cavity and the calcium silicate
plates. The entire reactor is encapsulated in a 5-mm-thick aluminium shell.
The shell has a hexagonal cross-section to prevent slipping of the insulation
assembly due to the rotating motion of the reactor.29
The reactor was tested in the 1 MW solar furnace in Odeillo, France.
The solar power input to the reactor was in the range 115–140 kW, cor-
responding to mean solar concentration ratios over the reactor’s aperture
of 3682–4477 kW m−2 . The solar power input was determined from a set of
measured heat flux maps, obtained with an array of 5 Gardon-type heat flux
gauges. Reactor temperatures were measured at 14 locations throughout the
reactor, as indicated by the dots in Fig. 9(a). The pressure inside the reac-
tor was maintained at 10 mbar above ambient pressure with a proportional-
integral-derivative (PID) controller using a pressure transducer at the out-
let of the reactor. Product gas composition was measured on-line with gas
chromatography. Zinc particles were collected downstream of the quench
unit with polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE) membrane filters. Reactant and
product particles were characterized with respect to their physicochemical
properties. The particle size distribution was measured by laser scattering.
Specific surface area, cumulative pore volume, and average pore diameter
were determined with a BET surface area analyzer. The molar fraction of
zinc in the product particles was determined by dissolving the particles in
HCl and quantifying the evolved H2 due to the reaction of zinc with HCl
(Zn + 2HCl → ZnCl2 + H2 ). The particle morphology was examined by
scanning electron microscopy (SEM).
Table 2: Physicochemical properties of reactant and product par-

ticles from a typical experiment with the 100 kW pilot-scale reactor
shown in Fig. 9. Reprinted from Ref. 29, Copyright (2014), with
permission from the American Society of Mechanical Engineers.
Reactant Product
Mean particle diameter (µm) 5.6 25.8

BET specific surface area (m2 g−1 ) 4.0 27.1
Pore volume (cm3 g−1 ) 8 74
Pore diameter (nm) 8.1 11.1
Zn molar content in particle (%) — 36.5
Fig. 10. Experimental results obtained with the 100 kW pilot-scale reactor shown in
Fig. 9. Tcavity — cavity temperature measured at position B3 in Fig. 9(a); Qsolar —
solar power input to the reactor; mAr,quench — quench gas flow rate; “O2 ” — molar rate
of oxygen evolving from the dissociation of ZnO in the reaction. Reprinted from Ref. 29,
Copyright (2014), with permission from the American Society of Mechanical Engineers.
The measured physicochemical properties of the particles from a typ-

ical experiment are listed in Table 2. The higher specific surface area of
the product particles is due to their highly porous foam-like microstruc-
ture, as confirmed by SEM. Figure 10 shows temperature and product gas
measurements from a typical experiment. The experimental run consisted
of the 3 phases heat-up, experiment, and cool-down. The reactor was heated
at a slow rate of approximately 4 K min−1 to a maximum cavity temper-
ature of 1791 K by successively focusing additional heliostats, to prevent
damage of the reactor due to thermal shock. Once the target reactor tem-
perature was reached, a clean particle filter was put in place and the argon
quench gas flow rate was rapidly increased to 1070 L min−1 , resulting in a
rapid increase of the oxygen content in the product gas stream. The exper-
iment was continued for as long as the weather conditions were suitable.
The experiment was terminated by defocusing the heliostats and replacing
the sample filter. The total amount of dissociated ZnO in the experiment
illustrated in Fig. 10 was 157 g.
Different reactors have been used to conduct the fuel production
step (18). Berman et al.30 performed the reaction by bubbling water vapor
in argon carrier gas through liquid zinc at 450–500◦C (melting point 420◦ C)
and water partial pressures in the range of 65–560 mbar. They studied the
reaction kinetics and found that the reaction rate increased with increasing
water partial pressure, with a reaction order between 0 and 1 with respect
to the water partial pressure. They further found that with increasing water
partial pressure, the thickness of the ZnO layer forming around the water
bubbles increases and at high water partial pressures diffusion through this
layer becomes the rate limiting step. The continuous removal of solid ZnO
product may be another challenge with this reactor type.
Hydrolysis of zinc particles was found to be characterized by an initial
fast reaction rate followed by a slow reaction regime. In the initial phase,
fast reaction occurs at the surface of the zinc particles. This results in the
formation of a dense ZnO passivation layer surrounding the particle that
inhibits further reaction of the zinc below.31 Due to this reaction mecha-
nism, small zinc particles with high surface-to-volume ratio are advanta-
geous. An aerosol flow reactor was developed for the in situ formation and
oxidation of zinc nanoparticles with H2 O and CO2 .23,32–35 A schematic of
the reactor is shown in Fig. 11. Zinc is evaporated from an alumina cru-
cible contained in an electrically heated furnace and resting on a balance
for on-line measuring of the evaporation rate. Zinc vapour is carried by
a N2 gas flow into a narrow 25-cm long quench unit where it is mixed
with a preheated mixture of H2 O and N2 to form nanoparticles. After the
quench zone, the flow is expanded into a 50-cm long temperature-controlled
stainless steel tube, which serves as the reaction zone for the oxidation of
the nanoparticles. Product gases are analysed with a gas chromatograph.
Product particles are collected with a glass-fiber filter and analyzed with
Fig. 11. Aerosol flow reactor for the in situ formation and oxidation of zinc nanoparti-
cles. Reprinted from Ref. 34, Copyright (2009), with permission from Elsevier.
XRD, BET, and SEM. The reactor performance was measured in terms of
the overall chemical conversion of the evaporated zinc, the fraction of the
evaporated zinc ending up on the filter (particle yield), and the ZnO mole
fraction in the particles collected at different locations inside the reactor.
At the baseline conditions (evaporation zone temperature 1223 K, reaction
zone temperature 673 K, quench gas flow rate 20 ln min−1 , steam flow rate
20 gh−1 , N2 carrier gas flow 2 ln min−1 ), the chemical conversion was 70%,
the particle yield was 41%, and the ZnO mole fraction in particles collected
on the filter was 22%. Hence, the majority of H2 derived from hydroly-
sis of zinc deposits on the reactor walls. Decreasing the quench gas flow
rate to 1 ln min−1 while maintaining all other parameters at the baseline
values increased the chemical conversion to 95% but reduced the particle
yield and the ZnO mole fraction in the product particles to below 20%.
When the reaction zone temperature was increased from 573 to 873 K (Zn
melting point 693 K), while all other parameters remained at the baseline
values, the overall chemical conversion increased from 42 to 66%, the ZnO
mole fraction in the particles increased from 10% to 50%, but the parti-
cle yield decreased from 52% to 28%. In all experiments, less than 25%
of the evaporated zinc was hydrolyzed via the formation of zinc particles.
The majority of the H2 was produced via hydrolysis of zinc deposits on the
reactor walls.34 Zinc deposition on the reactor walls was also the primary
concern when CO2 was used as the gaseous reactant.35
3.1.2 Ferrite cycle

H2 O and CO2 splitting via two-step redox cycling with ferrite materials
can be represented by:
Thermal reduction:
1
Mx Fe3−x O4 → xMO + (3 − x)FeO + O2 , (20)
2
Fuel production:
xMO+(3−x)FeO+yH2 O+(1−y)CO2 → Mx Fe3−x O4 +yH2 +(1−y)CO,

(21)
where Mx denotes the dopant concentration, x = 0 . . . 1. For pure iron oxide
(x = 0) at 1 bar total pressure, the thermal reduction reaction (20) proceeds
spontaneously above T∆G=0 = 2500 K, which is higher than the melting
point of both Fe3 O4 (1870 K) and FeO (1650 K).1,36 If the oxygen partial
pressure is reduced to 10−7 bar, the thermal reduction step proceeds at
around 1623 K, i.e. below the melting point of Fe3 O4 and FeO.1,36,37 The
fuel production reaction (21) with H2 O proceeds spontaneously below 650 K
and the product H2 /H2 O ratio increases with decreasing temperature.36
A thermodynamic process analysis was performed by Steinfeld et al.38
to evaluate the theoretical thermal efficiency of the ferrite cycle operated
with pure iron oxide, analogous to that conducted by Loutzenhiser et al.22
for the zinc oxide cycle. Chemical equilibrium compositions are taken into
account, assuming the condensed phase to be an ideal solution. Thermal
reduction is conducted at temperatures between 1900 and 2500 K in air,
with air/Fe3 O4 ratios of 0, 1, and 10. The fuel production step is conducted
at ambient temperature. The system is at a uniform total pressure of 1 bar.
The thermal efficiency strongly depends on whether the heat rejected in

the quench unit is recovered. Without heat recovery, the predicted ther-
mal efficiency is below 8% (energy efficiency <10%1 ). If the heat rejected
in the quench unit is converted to work with an ideal Carnot engine, pre-
dicted efficiencies are up to 61%. In another thermodynamic analysis, Diver
et al.39 estimated energy efficiencies of 36% and 76% without and with heat
recovery, respectively. However, these results were obtained by assuming
complete conversion of the iron oxide in both process steps and neglecting
reradiation losses from the high-temperature solar reactor.
In practice, continuous H2 O/CO2 splitting using undoped ferrite mate-
rials is inhibited by material sintering and melting during heating to the
thermal reduction temperature, followed by solidification during cooling of
the reduced iron oxide to the fuel production temperature. This results in a
loss of the material’s reactivity and complicates the handling of the mate-
rial, as the solid reduced iron oxide needs to be ground into small particles
to effect the fuel production step.40,41 Lowering the oxygen partial pressure
to 10−7 bar to operate the thermal reduction step at temperatures below
the melting points of Fe3 O4 and FeO can theoretically avoid the sintering
problem and reduces the energy input required to heat the reactants to the
thermal reduction temperature, but requires either a high flow rate of sweep
gas in the solar reactor or vacuum pumping, which increases the auxiliary
energy consumption and the complexity of the process.1
Allendorf et al.42 calculated the equilibrium compositions via Gibbs free
energy minimization for the metal ferrites Mx Fe3−x O4 with M = Fe, Co, Ni,
and Zn. Each ferrite exhibits a distinct temperature, above which the ferrite
decomposes (Fig. 12(a)), and a narrow temperature band within which
a transition takes place between the solid MeO solution and liquid slag
phases (Fig. 12(b)). For undoped ferrite, complete dissociation of the ferrite
phase occurs above 1730 K, whereas liquid slag phases are formed above
1700 K. Therefore, it is not possible to completely reduce Fe3 O4 without
sintering. In contrast, for both CoFe2 O4 and NiFe2 O4 , dissociation of the
ferrite occurs at a lower temperature than the formation of slag phases.
CoFe2 O4 dissociates completely above 1690 K, while slag phases occur only
above 1815 K. For NiFe2 O4 , the corresponding temperatures are 1700 K
and 1795 K. Hence, CoFe2 O4 and NiFe2 O4 offer a temperature window of
approximately 100 K in which the ferrite completely dissociates without
the formation of slag phases and hence without sintering. This makes these
ferrites more promising candidates for redox cycling. The dissociation of
ZnFe2 O4 differs from the other ferrites shown. Heating ZnFe2 O4 leads to
Fig. 12. Equilibrium composition as a function of temperature for the metal ferrites
Mx Fe3−x O4 , with M = Fe, Co, Ni and Zn: (a) solid ferrite and gaseous oxygen; (b) MeO
solid solution, Zn, and liquid slag phase. Dash-dotted lines — undoped ferrite, solid
lines — CoFe2 O4 , and dotted lines — NiFe2 O4 . Inputs: 1 mol Mx Fe3−x O4 , 104 mol Ar.
Reprinted from Ref. 42, Copyright (2008), with permission from the American Chemical
Society.
the release of gaseous zinc and zinc-depleted ferrite at temperatures below

1760 K. Above 1760 K, the zinc-depleted ferrite melts to form a Zn–Fe–O
slag. In practice, inert sweep gas flow or vacuum pumping is used to lower
the oxygen partial pressure in the gas phase. Hence, the high zinc vapour
concentration would result in rapid depletion of the zinc contained in the
system, resulting in the formation of pure iron ferrite. Therefore, ZnFe2 O4
is not a suitable candidate material for H2 O/CO2 splitting via reactions
(20) and (21).42
Mixed iron oxides, Mx Fe3−x O4 , with M = Mg, Mn, Co, Ni, Zn, and
x = 0 . . . 1, deposited on monoclinic zirconia (m-ZrO2 ) or yttrium-stabilized
zirconia (YSZ) support structures (particles, ceramic foams), have been
studied experimentally to increase the fuel productivity, lower the thermal
reduction temperature, and reduce material sintering.43 Kodama et al.1
found that NiFe2 O4 supported on m-ZrO2 resulted in a doubling of the
hydrogen productivity compared to undoped ferrite on m-ZrO2. They fur-
ther reported that supporting NiFe2 O4 on m-ZrO2 resulted in significantly
higher hydrogen production rate than unsupported NiFe2 O4 per unit mass,
despite a mass loading of NiFe2 O4 on m-ZrO2 of only 19 wt%, which indi-
cates that the support material promotes the reaction kinetics.
Different reactors have been designed to execute reactions (20)–(21).
A 100 kW pilot-scale solar reactor has been developed to conduct both
(a)
(b) (c)
Fig. 13. Solar receiver-reactor based on honeycomb absorber structure coated with
ferrite-based redox materials: (a) schematic of the reactor setup (reprinted from Ref. 44,
Copyright (2006), with permission from the American Society of Mechanical Engineers.);
(b) laboratory-scale prototype reactor (reprinted from Ref. 45. Copyright (2005), with
permission from Elsevier.); and (c) dual-chamber pilot-scale reactor (reprinted from
Ref. 46, Copyright (2011), with permission from Elsevier).
process steps sequentially in one reactor (Fig. 13).44–46 The redox material
is coated on a monolithic silicon carbide honeycomb structure contained
in a solar receiver and exposed to direct concentrated solar radiation. The
aperture of the receiver is covered with a quartz glass window. Gases enter
through inlet ports in the frustum of the receiver, flow through the axial
channels of the honeycomb structure, and are collected in a funnel at the

back of the reactor. Different Mn-, Ni-, and Zn-iron oxides were synthesized
via solid-state synthesis, self-propagating high-temperature synthesis, and
aerosol spray pyrolysis (ASP).44 The material reactivity was enhanced by
incorporating oxygen vacancies in the material during the synthesis process.
Highest hydrogen productivities of >3 mmol per gram of metal oxide were
observed for ASP-synthesized Zn- and NiZn-ferrites. The 100 kW pilot-scale
reactor shown in Fig. 13(c) was tested on a 1.5 MWth solar tower facility at
the Plataforma Solar de Almerı́a in Spain. The reactor consists of two sep-
arate reaction chambers. The thermal reduction and fuel production steps
were conducted in parallel in the two reaction chambers. Each cycle step
was conducted for 20–30 min. Target reactor temperatures during the ther-
mal reduction and fuel production steps were 1200◦C and 800◦ C, respec-
tively. Temperatures were controlled via heliostat focusing/defocusing. To
switch between thermal reduction and fuel production steps, a number of
the heliostats was refocused from the reaction chamber undergoing ther-
mal reduction to the reaction chamber undergoing oxidation. Two full H2 O
splitting cycles were conducted with H2 O conversion of up to 30%, resulting
in approximately 35 g of H2 produced.
Other reactors tested for H2 O/CO2 splitting with ferrite-based mate-
rials include fluidized bed reactors,47,48 and rotary-type reactors.39,49
3.1.3 Ceria cycle

The ceria cycle can be represented by:
Thermal reduction:
∆δ
Mx Ce1−x O2−δox (s) → Mx Ce1−x O2−δred (s) + O2 , (22)
2
Fuel production:
Mx Ce1−x O2−δred (s) + ∆δ(yH2 O + (1 − y)CO2 )

→ Mx Ce1−x O2−δox (s) + ∆δ(yH2 + (1 − y)CO). (23)
Mx denotes the dopant concentration; x = 0 for undoped ceria. δred

and δox denote the oxygen deficiency in the ceria lattice at the end of the
reduction and fuel production step, respectively, and ∆δ = δred − δox .
Initially, a stoichiometric reaction scheme with the redox pair
CeO2 /Ce2 O3 was proposed, with the reduction step operated at 2000◦C and
a slightly reduced total pressure of 100–200 mbar (T∆G=0 = 2350◦C50 ).51
Since the melting points of both metal oxides are well above 2000◦C (CeO2 :
2397◦ C; Ce2 O3 : 2177◦ C52 ), ceria would be expected to remain solid during
the process. However, intermediate phases with lower melting point and
higher volatility form during the reduction step, which resulted in melt-
ing at 1950◦C and excessive sublimation of ceria at temperatures above
1950◦ C. To solve the problem of material instability, Chueh et al.53 elu-
cidated the feasibility of a non-stoichiometric cycle in which solid ceria
undergoes changes in its oxygen content while remaining in the cubic fluo-
rite phase, i.e. without undergoing any phase change.
The lower oxygen exchange capacity of a non-stoichiometric cycle raised
the question of its theoretical efficiency, as less fuel is produced per mole of
redox material and cycle compared to stoichiometric cycles. Lapp et al.54
conducted a first-law analysis to calculate the theoretical energy and exergy
efficiencies for the model system shown in Fig. 14. A continuous stream of
undoped ceria (e.g. in the form of particles or a rotating cylinder) is cycled
between a reduction zone and a fuel production (oxidation) zone. The reduc-
tion step is carried out in a flow of 99 mol% nitrogen and 1 mol% oxygen at
temperatures in the range of Tred = 1400−2200 K. The fuel production step
is conducted with a pure stream of H2 O/CO2 at Tox = 1073 K, resulting
in δox ≈ 0. Inlet gas streams to the two reactor zones are preheated with
Fig. 14. Model system to calculate the energy and exergy efficiency of H2 O/CO2 split-
ting via non-stoichiometric redox cycling of undoped ceria. Reprinted from Ref. 54,
Copyright (2012), with permission from Elsevier.
the corresponding product gas streams in counterflow heat exchangers. In

addition, solid phase heat recovery between the two streams of ceria pass-
ing between the reaction zones is taken into account. The energy balance
further takes into account reradiation losses from a blackbody receiver at
Tred and a lumped heat loss term accounting for convective and radiative
heat losses from the hot outer surfaces of the reactor. The total pressure in
the reactor is 1 atm and pressure drop in the gas flow is omitted. Thermal
and chemical equilibrium between gas and solid are assumed in both steps.
The energy efficiency is calculated according to:
ṅH2 /CO |∆Hc◦ |
ηenergy = , (24)
Q̇solar
where |∆Hc◦ | is the higher heating value of the produced fuel.
Selected results are shown in Fig. 15. Results are valid for both H2 O and
CO2 splitting. As shown in Fig. 15(a), high efficiencies exceeding 50% are
theoretically possible with 100% heat recuperation from both the solid and
gas streams. In contrast, in the absence of any heat recovery, the theoret-
ical efficiency is below 6%. Figure 15(b) shows the influence of solid-phase
heat recovery on the efficiency for a realistic scenario with C = 3000 and
90% gas-phase heat recovery. Without solid-phase heat recovery, the maxi-
mum efficiency of the cycle is limited to less than 10% — hardly enough for
0.6 0.35
10,000
0.3
0.5
5000
Perfect Heat
Recovery 0.25 1.0
0.4 3000
0.2 0.95
0.9
0.3
ηth
ηth
0.8
0.15
C=
10 0.5
0.2 00
0.1 =0
ε CeO 2
0.1
10,000 0.05
No Heat Recovery 5000
C=1000 3000
0 0
1400 1600 1800 2000 2200 1400 1600 1800 2000 2200
Tred (K) Tred (K)
(a) (b)
Fig. 15. Energy efficiency calculated for the model system shown in Fig. 14: (a) limiting
cases with 0% and 100% gas- and solid-phase heat recovery; (b) gas-phase heat recovery
of 90% and variable solid-phase heat recovery, C = 3000. Dashed lines represent results
obtained with extrapolated non-stoichiometry data for ceria. Reprinted from Ref. 54,
Copyright (2012), with permission from Elsevier.
cost-effective solar fuel production. Only with solid-phase heat recuperation

of 95% or more can efficiencies beyond 20% be achieved. These results indi-
cate that efficient splitting of H2 O/CO2 with undoped non-stoichiometric
ceria in a temperature-swing cycle requires very high degrees of both gas-
and solid-phase heat recovery, which is technically challenging to realize.
To enhance the efficiency of non-stoichiometric redox cycles, the effect
of incorporating dopants into the cubic fluorite structure of ceria on fuel
productivity and fuel production rate has been examined. At a fixed dopant
concentration of 10 mol%, a trend of increasing reducibility with decreasing
ionic radius of the dopant has been observed for the dopants Dy, Y, Mg, Sc,
Zr, and Hf.55 For Zr-doped ceria, it has been shown experimentally that both
the oxygen yield and the fuel (H2 ) productivity increase significantly with
increasing dopant concentration up to 54 mol%.56,57 In the experiments by Le
Gal et al.56 with reduction and H2 production steps operated at 1400◦C and
1050◦ C, respectively, the oxygen release increased from 123 to 236 µ mol g−1
and the fuel productivity increased from 234 to 468 µ mol g−1 as the dopant
concentration was increased from 10 to 50 mol%. These results illustrate that
the higher oxygen deficiencies achievable with higher Zr concentrations can
be effectively used to split additional H2 O. However, it was observed that
the amount of oxygen released starts to level off at Zr concentrations above
25 mol%. This has been attributed to the increasing fraction of non-reducible
Zr cations in the ceria lattice.57 In addition, at Zr concentrations above
20 mol%, the formation of the tetragonal phase may occur, which is expected
to have lower oxygen storage capacity than the cubic fluorite structure.58
Furthermore, it has been observed both theoretically and experimentally
that Zr-doped ceria has lower reducing power to split H2 O than undoped
ceria, thus requiring higher amounts of excess steam and lower temperatures
during the fuel production step.19,58 These factors can have an impact on
the energy efficiency of the cycle. In addition, the results by Le Gal et al.56,59
suggest that Zr-doped ceria samples sinter upon repeated heating to 1400◦C,
which affects the cyclability of the material.
In contrast to Zr-doping, the incorporation of trivalent rare earth metals
(Y, La, Pr, Sm, Gd) into the ceria lattice did not improve the reducibility
or the H2 productivity compared to undoped ceria.57,59 However, doping
ceria with 10 mol% of La, Sm, and Gd resulted in redox materials with good
thermal stability upon repeated redox cycling.59 In addition, doping with
trivalent rare earth metals (Sc, Y, La, Pr, Sm, Gd) and Mg has been shown
to increase the ionic conductivity in the redox material.53,55,57 In order to
combine the enhanced fuel productivity of Zr-doped ceria with the enhanced
thermal stability and ionic conductivity obtained with rare earth metal
dopants, ternary oxides based on 25 mol% Zr-doped ceria, containing minor
concentrations of Y, La, or Gd, were tested. Like Zr-doped ceria, these
materials lead to significantly enhanced H2 productivity, but suffer from a
loss in reactivity upon repeated cycling, due to sintering.59
In order to eliminate the need for solid-phase heat recovery, Hao et al.60
demonstrated experimentally that the non-stoichiometric ceria cycle can
also be operated isothermally. This is possible if ceria is reduced at an
oxygen partial pressure lower than that during the fuel production step.
This was the motivation for another first-law analysis, similar to that by
Lapp et al.54 for isothermal and near-isothermal cycle operation.61 The
main difference between the two models lies in the way the reaction zones
are treated. Lapp et al.54 assumed that the oxygen partial pressure in the
reduction zone is uniform and equal to that at the gas outlet, whereas Bader
et al.61 assumed the gas and solid streams to be in a counterflow arrange-
ment in both reaction zones. This arrangement minimizes the sweep gas
and H2 O/CO2 gas flow rates, which reduces the heat losses via unrecov-
ered thermal energy in the product gas streams. However, even in this ideal
arrangement, high sweep gas flow rates are required to operate the pro-
cess isothermally, and hence the cycle efficiency strongly depends on high
extents of gas-phase heat recovery. For example, with Tred = Tox = 1773 K,
C = 3000, and 50% gas-phase heat recovery, the theoretical energy effi-
ciency is 1.1% with H2 O as the reactant and 2.6% with CO2 . An energy
efficiency of 10% for H2 O splitting (18% for CO2 ) requires 95.5% gas-phase
heat recovery. It was further shown that the efficiency can theoretically be
boosted to more than 30% if a small temperature difference Tred − Tox of
up to 150 K is introduced, mainly due to a reduction of the required sweep
gas flow rate.
Different reactors have been designed for both temperature-swing and
isothermal cycle operation. A solar cavity receiver-reactor has been devel-
oped to effect both cycle steps consecutively in a single reactor (Fig. 16).62
The reactor consists of an insulated cylindrical cavity containing a porous
ceria cylinder. Solar radiation enters the reactor through a conical frustum
and a compound parabolic secondary concentrator. Gases enter the reactor
through four radial inlet ports. The gases flow through the ceria structure
into the plenum of the reactor and exit through a central outlet port at the
bottom of the reactor. The reactor was tested in a high-flux solar simulator,
consisting of seven xenon short-arc lamps close-coupled to ellipsoidal reflec-
tors. Thermal reduction is conducted in argon purge gas at temperatures
Al2O3 insulation
CeO2 RPC
Quartz
window
Inconel
outer shell CPC
Fig. 16. Solar reactor to conduct the ceria cycle. Reprinted from Ref. 64, Copyright
(2012), with permission from the American Chemical Society.
between 1400 and 1650◦C, radiative power inputs of approximately 3–4 kW,
and solar concentration ratio of approximately 3000. The fuel production
step is conducted at 500–1000◦C with a radiative power input of 0.8 kW
and a flow of H2 O/CO2 diluted in argon carrier gas. Four consecutive fuel
production cycles were reported, resulting in relatively stable fuel produc-
tion. Experimentally determined energy efficiency of the reactor was in
the order of 1–2%. Energy losses are attributed mainly to thermal losses
by conduction and radiation.62–65 Figure 15 suggests that, in addition to
reducing thermal losses, a substantial improvement of the reactor efficiency
also requires heat recovery from the gas and solid-phases.
Another reactor concept for temperature-swing redox cycling of ceria
particles was proposed by Ermanoski et al.66 (Fig. 17). This reactor consists
of separate reaction chambers for the thermal reduction and fuel production
steps. In the thermal reduction reactor, a packed bed of particles is fed with
a conveyor auger to the sun-lit reduction zone. Hot reduced particles moving
down the center of the conveyor auger exchange heat with the oxidized par-
ticles that move up along the screw blades. The reaction chamber is sealed
and evacuated with a vacuum pump to lower the oxygen partial pressure.
The fuel production step is conducted off-sun at atmospheric pressure with
a flow of oxidant gas through the particle bed.
A solar reactor to realize near-isothermal cycles with gas-phase heat
recovery was proposed by Bader et al.67 and is shown in Fig. 18. This
Fig. 17. Reactor for temperature-swing cycling of redox particles. Reprinted from Ref.
66, Copyright (2013), with permission from the American Society of Mechanical Engi-
neers.
reactor consists of an insulated cylindrical cavity receiver lined with tubu-

lar reactive elements. Each reactive element consists of two concentric alu-
mina tubes (Fig. 18(b)). A packed bed of mm-sized porous ceria particles
is contained in the annular space between the tubes. The redox cycle is
conducted by alternating the gas flowing through the reactive elements
between high-purity nitrogen sweep gas to reduce the ceria and pure CO2
reactant gas. Gas enters the reactive element through the inner tube. The
flow direction of the gas is reversed at the domed end of the outer tube
where the preheated gas enters the packed bed of ceria particles. After pass-
ing through the packed bed, the gas leaves the reactor through the annu-
lar gap between the inner and outer alumina tubes. The reactive element
Fig. 18. Solar reactor for near-isothermal redox cycling of ceria: (a) reactor assembly,
(b) enlarged view of a single reactive element. Reprinted from Ref. 67, Copyright (2015),
with permission from the American Society of Mechanical Engineers.
tubes extend beyond the back of the reactor to form a ceramic foam-filled
tube-in-tube counterflow heat exchanger that implements gas-phase heat
recovery.68 This reactor can be operated either in batch mode or in quasi-
continuous mode. In the latter case, each reactive element is at a different
stage of the periodic two-step process, but the numbers of reactive elements
that are simultaneously undergoing reduction and oxidation, respectively,
are constant over time. This allows for a constant solar power input to the
reactor while maintaining a nearly constant reactor temperature.
3.1.4 Perovskite cycle

Recently, redox materials with the perovskite structure (ABO3 ) have been
considered for solar thermochemical H2 O/CO2 -splitting. This class of metal
oxide materials has long been used as electrolyte material in solid oxide fuel
cells due to their high oxygen exchange capacity. The perovskite cycle can
be represented by:
∆δ
ABO3−δox → ABO3−δred + O2 , (25)
2
ABO3−δred (s) + ∆δ(yH2 O + (1 − y)CO2 )
→ ABO3−δox (s) + ∆δ(yH2 + (1 − y)CO), (26)
where ∆δ = δred − δox . Similar to ceria, the A- and B-site metals

of the perovskite lattice can be substituted with dopants. McDaniel
et al.69 tested strontium- and manganese-doped lanthanum aluminates
(Srx La1−x Mny Al1−y O3−δ ) with three different compositions (x, y) with
respect to their oxygen release and uptake capacity and their potential to
split H2 O and CO2 and compared the results with those for undoped ceria.
The perovskites were shown to release several times more oxygen under the
same conditions (1350◦C, He sweep gas flow with O2 partial pressure of 0.2
mbar) compared to ceria. Subsequent re-oxidation of the perovskites with
40 vol% H2 O and CO2 at 1000◦ C yielded up to 9× and 6× more H2 and
CO, respectively, compared to ceria. The time to complete the re-oxidation
step was comparable for the two material classes. Redox cycling between
1350◦ C and 1000◦C over 80 cycles resulted in constant CO production of
125–150 µmol g−1 per cycle.
Scheffe et al.70 conducted a thermodynamic analysis of strontium-
doped lanthanum manganites (Srx La1−x MnO3−δ ). These perovskites
exhibit higher oxygen non-stoichiometry than ceria at identical condi-
tions (1773 K, oxygen partial pressure of 1 Pa), but lower reactivity with
H2 O/CO2 . Nevertheless, higher fuel productivity was obtained compared
to ceria.
Several additional perovskite materials with the compositions Lax Sr1−x
(Mn, Co, Fe)O3 , Bax Sr1−x (Co, Fe)O3 , LaSrCoO4 , and LaSrFeO4 have been
studied by Demont et al.71 Most of these materials were found to exhibit
higher oxygen exchange capacity compared to ceria at temperatures in the
range of 1000–1400◦C and noticeable access to metallic valence transitions
during re-oxidation in steam.71
3.2 Multi-Step Cycles

A thermodynamic analysis has shown that H2 O-splitting redox cycles oper-
ating below 723◦ C require at least three process steps.72 In fact, there are
no known two-step cycles that operate at temperatures below 1100◦C.17,73
Hence, H2 O/CO2 splitting at temperatures below 1100◦ C requires thermo-

chemical cycles with at least three process steps. Since state-of-the-art solar
concentrating systems can readily produce temperatures >1100◦C, two-step
cycles have been the primary focus of research in recent years, due to their
inherent potential to reach higher energy efficiencies and their lower com-
plexity. Therefore, thermochemical cycles with three or more cycle steps
are not discussed here. A review and discussion of multistep cycles can be
found in Kodama et al.1
4 Conversion of Carbonaceous Feedstocks

High-temperature solar thermal processing of carbonaceous feedstocks has
been proposed as a hybrid solar–fossil and near-term route to production
of solar fuels and carbonaceous commodity materials. Solar energy is used
as the exclusive source of process heat, and the carbonaceous feedstocks
are the source of carbon and hydrogen. The processes include gasification,
cracking and reforming.74 Chemical reaction equations presented in this sec-
tion are written for carbonaceous feedstocks containing exclusively carbon,
hydrogen and oxygen. Impurities and other elements are typically found
in fossil fuels and biomass, e.g. sulfur and nitrogen, and lead to formation
of additional product compounds as compared to those reported in this
section.
4.1 Gasification
Solar thermal gasification has been studied for a variety of carbona-
ceous feedstocks including coal, coke, biomass, bitumen and carbonaceous
wastes.75 While the use of biomass as the feedstock promises a carbon-
neutral fuel, the availability of biomass for energetic uses is limited. Coal
remains the most abundant fossil fuel resource in the world, with the total
recoverable reserves estimated in year 2008 to be 909 billion tons. The
United States share the largest portion of these reserves, which are 262.7
billion tons (29%). The main approach to coal utilization is the direct com-
bustion for electricity generation, which produces approximately 0.92 kg of
CO2 per 1 kWhe of electricity generated. In spite of environmental con-
cerns, coal is likely to remain one of the leading energy sources in future.
Coal gasification technologies can substantially reduce greenhouse gas emis-
sions through increased conversion efficiency. Further emission reductions
are possible, if the process heat required to drive the gasification process is
obtained from a CO2 -free energy source such as concentrated solar energy,
eliminating the need for combustion of a significant portion of the feed-

stock. In addition, elimination of internal combustion for supplying the
process heat mitigates contamination of the synthesis gas with the com-
bustion byproducts.5,74 The produced synthesis gas can then be used for
power generation via power cycles or for synthesis of hydrocarbon fuels.
Thermal gasification of carbonaceous materials is a complex chemical
process that involves several different intermediate reactions. Steam and
carbon dioxide are the common oxidizing agents. A simplified net reaction
of steam gasification was proposed by Zedtwitz and Steinfeld76 :
x
CHx Oy + (1 − y)H2 O = + 1 − y H2 + CO, (27)
2
where x and y are the molar ratio of hydrogen to carbon (H/C) and oxygen
to carbon (O/C), respectively. Analogously, a simplified net reaction of dry
gasification can be written as77 :
x
CHx Oy + (1 − y)CO2 = H2 + (2 − y)CO, (28)
2
Reactions (27) and (28) proceed endothermically under atmospheric pres-
sure at temperatures above 850 K and 900 K, respectively. Intermediate
reactions occurring in the simplified reactions given by Eqs. (27) and
(28) are:
Bouduard reaction:
C + CO2 = 2CO, (29)
Methane cracking–hydrogasification:
C + 2H2 = CH4 , (30)

Reforming–methanation:
CH4 + H2 O = CO + 3H2 , (31)
Water-gas shift:
CO + H2 O = CO2 + H2 . (32)
Reactions (29)–(32) are strongly dependent on temperature, pressure and

the C/O ratio. The composition of syngas, and thus its suitability for
production of synthetic fuels is highly dependent on the outcome of reac-
tions (29)–(32). Thermodynamic analyses of solar thermal gasification of
four types of coal, anthracite, bituminous, lignite and peat, were studied by
Zedtwitz and Steinfeld,76 and by Ng and Lipiński.77 Figures 19(a) and 19(b)
Fig. 19. Equilibrium composition for (a) steam and (b) dry gasification of anthracite
as a function of temperature. Reprinted from Ref. 77, Copyright (2012), with permission
from Elsevier.
show the equilibrium mole fractions of the main species for the steam and
dry gasification, respectively, of anthracite over the temperature range 700–
1500 K. For temperatures below 700 K, the intermediate reactions do not
take place. Thus, components such as C, CH4 , CO2 , H2 O are thermody-
namically stable at temperatures below 700 K. As the temperature increases
from 700 K to approximately 1200 K, rates of the intermediate reactions
increase and the fractions of C, CH4 , CO2 , and H2 O decrease. At tempera-
tures higher than 1200 K, both steam and dry gasification produce syngas
that only consists of H2 and CO with a constant H2 /CO ratio.
Kinetic models of solar thermal gasification processes have been pro-
posed in several studies.78–80 The models are typically based on the
Langmuir–Hinshelwood type of kinetic rate expressions for production and
consumption of each gas species.75 A detailed discussion of the kinetic anal-
yses and models is omitted from this work, and the reader is referred to the
cited literature references.
Solar reactors for gasification of carbonaceous feedstocks are among the
most mature reactor concepts in solar thermochemistry. Both directly- and
indirectly-irradiated reactors have been developed.75,81 The configurations
of the reacting two-phase solid–gas media include fluidized beds,82 entrained
particle flows,83 vortex flows,84 and packed bed reactors.85 Example solar
reactors containing reacting media of such configurations are depicted in
Fig. 20. More recently, reactors implementing more complex approaches to
solar thermal gasification have been proposed, which include gasification of
biomass in molten salts86 and with supercritical water.87 The solar reactor
from the latter study is shown in Fig. 21.
4.2 Cracking and Reforming

Solar-driven cracking of hydrocarbons to co-produce hydrogen and carbon
black can be represented by the simplified reaction:
y
Cx Hy = xC(gr) + H2 , (33)
2
The process is typically realized in the form of a directly-irradiated gas

flow laden with carbon particles,88–90 or an indirectly-irradiated flow in
tubes.91–94 The particles serve as radiant absorbers and provide surface to
the heterogeneous reaction. Figure 22 shows an example directly-irradiated
solar thermochemical reactor featuring a horizontal cylindrical reaction cav-
ity containing the reactive mixture of carbon particles and methane.88,89
(a) (b)
(c) (d)
Fig. 20. Examples of solar thermochemical reactors for thermal gasification of
carbonaceous materials: (a) a directly-irradiated fluidized bed reactor (reprinted from
Ref. 82, Copyright (2007), with permission from Elsevier); (b) an indirectly-irradiated
entrained particle flow reactor (reprinted from Ref. 83, Copyright (2009), with permis-
sion from Elsevier); (c) a directly-irradiated vortex-flow reactor (reprinted from Ref. 84,
Copyright (2006), with permission from Elsevier); and (d) an indirectly-irradiated packed
bed reactor (reprinted from Ref. 85, Copyright (2009), with permission from Elsevier).
Steam and dry reforming of hydrocarbons are given by the simplified

reactions:
y
Cx Hy + xH2 O = x + H2 + xCO, (34)
2
y
Cx Hy + xCO2 = H2 + 2xCO. (35)
2
Fig. 21. Solar thermochemical reactors for supercritical water gasification of biomass.
Reprinted from Ref. 87, Copyright (2010), with permission from Elsevier.
Fig. 22. Schematic of the solar reactor prototype, featuring a flow of methane laden
with carbon particles and directly exposed to concentrated solar radiation. Reprinted
from Ref. 88, Copyright (2009), with permission from Elsevier.
Figure 23 shows a directly-irradiated solar reactor for the solar reforming

of methane.95 The reactor uses a reticulate porous ceramics coated with
rhodium-based catalyst. This reactor has been scaled up to power levels
of 300 kW in a solar tower facility and used to conduct both steam- and
Fig. 23. A directly-irradiated solar reactor for the solar reforming of methane. Reprinted
from Ref. 95, Copyright (2001), with permission from the American Society of Mechanical
Engineers.
dry-reforming of methane.95–97 Selected design aspects of a solar reactor

for methane decomposition in both cracking and reforming processes based
on thermodynamic and kinetic analyses are discussed in the work by Ozalp
and Shilapuram.98
5 Production of Lime and Cement

The calcination of limestone (CaCO3 ) to lime (CaO) according to:
◦ −1
CaCO3 (s) → CaO(s) + CO2 , ∆H298 K = 178 kJ mol , (36)
is the main endothermic step in the production of lime and cement, and
is operated above 900◦C.8 In most lime kilns, process heat is supplied by
combustion of fossil fuels. The CO2 emissions from the lime industry are
approximately 1% of the global anthropogenic CO2 emissions.99 The CO2
emissions from the process can be mitigated by operating the process with
high-temperature solar process heat and sequestering the CO2 evolving
from the calcination reaction (36). The CO2 can be stored or used as a
feedstock in the production of solar fuels.
A 10 kW prototype solar-heated rotary kiln has been developed and
tested (Fig. 24).8,99,100 It consists of a 225 × 252 mm indirectly irradiated
absorber tubes
reactants inlet
pre-heating chamber
ceramic insulation
rotating cavity
products outlet
(a) (b)
Fig. 24. 10 kW prototype solar rotary kiln for the calcination of limestone. Reprinted
from Ref. 99, Copyright (2006), with permission from Elsevier.
cylindrical solar cavity receiver made from recrystallized silicon carbide

(maximum operating temperature 1600◦C). Solar radiation at a concentra-
tion ratio of approximately 2000, provided by a solar furnace, enters the
reactor through a 9 cm-dia. aperture in the water-cooled aluminum front.
1–5 mm large limestone particles are fed into the pre-heating chamber at
the back of the reactor. Due to the inclination and the rotation of the reac-
tor, the particles are moved into the 16 silicon carbide absorber tubes that
line the solar cavity. Calcined CaO particles are collected in a funnel at
the front of the reactor. The reactor has been tested on-sun for over 100 h,
producing up to 4 kg h−1 of lime at solar energy conversion efficiencies of
up to 35%. The cost of lime produced in a 20 MW solar calcination plant
has been estimated to amount to 131–158 $ t−1 , corresponding to two to
three times the current selling price.101
6 CO2 Capture
Operated in a closed cycle, the calcination of limestone followed by the
carbonation of lime can be utilized to capture CO2 from CO2 -rich flue gas
streams or from air according to:
CaCO3 (s) → CaO(s) + CO2 ◦

∆H298K = 178 kJmol−1 (37)
◦ −1
CaO(s) + CO2 → CaCO3 (s) ∆H298K = −178 kJmol (38)
To obtain a product stream of pure CO2 during the calcination step, the
reaction needs to be operated in a sweep gas flow of pure CO2 .
A thermodynamic process analysis has been conducted by Matthews
et al.102 to calculate the theoretical energy input required by the pro-
cess as a function of CO2 concentration in the flue gas and heat recov-
ery from the hot products. The energy requirement of the process (37)–
(38) strongly depends on the CO2 concentration in the inlet gas and on
gas-phase heat recovery, while solid-phase heat recovery is relatively unim-
portant. With 100% gas- and solid-phase heat recovery, 207 kJ of thermal
energy is required per mole of captured CO2 , irrespective of the CO2 con-
centration in the flue gas stream. In the absence of gas-phase and solid-
phase heat recovery, the energy requirement is between 45 MJ and 283 kJ
per mole of captured CO2 for initial CO2 concentrations spanning those
encountered in air (∼0.03%) and in flue gas (15%). For comparison, the
theoretical minimum work to separate CO2 from a binary gas mixture is
between 20 and 30 kJ mol−1 of captured CO2 at atmospheric CO2 concen-
trations and 7 kJ mol−1 of captured CO2 for an initial CO2 concentration
of 15%.
A packed-bed solar reactor has been designed to effect both process
steps (Fig. 25).103,104 The reactor has a beam-up configuration. Calcium
Fig. 25. Packed-bed solar reactor to capture CO2 via process (37)–(38). Reprinted from
Ref. 104, Copyright (2015), with permission from the American Society of Mechanical
Engineers.
carbonate particles are contained in an annular space surrounding a

downward-facing solar cavity receiver. The downward-facing orientation of
the reactor reduces convective heat losses from the open receiver aperture.
Calcium carbonate particles are calcined in a pure stream of CO2 with
solar heat input. During the carbonation step, flue gases or atmospheric
air flow through the particle bed. Due to the exothermicity of the chem-
ical reaction, solar heat input to the reactor is not required during the
carbonation step. Hence, two or more reactors could be operated in par-
allel and the solar energy input be switched between the reactors, e.g. by
changing the orientation of the heliostats of a solar tower plant like in
Roeb et al.46
Other reactors that have been examined to effect one or both of
the process steps (37)–(38) include rotary kilns (including the reactor
shown in Fig. 24),99,105 fluidized beds,105,106 and cyclone and vortex-flow
reactors.107–109
7 Other Processes
The high temperatures and heating rates that can be obtained with con-
centrating solar technologies facilitate development of further solar-driven
processes for production of material commodities and high-temperature
thermal energy storage. Ammonia production from nitrogen, water, and
solar energy has been proposed using metal nitride-based thermochemi-
cal redox cycles driven by concentrated solar radiation.110 Thermodynamic
and economic aspects of solar production of ammonia are discussed by
Gálvez et al.111 and Michalsky et al.112 Employing high-temperature solar
thermal technologies in metallurgical processing promises a green trans-
formation of one of the environmentally most challenging industrial sec-
tors. The temperatures achievable with state-of-the-art solar concentrators
allow for a reduction of the electricity input in electrolysis during extrac-
tion of some metals and semiconductors. Solar-driven carbothermal or/and
vacuum processing can alternatively be considered for metal extraction at
reduced temperatures. Solar production of metals, nitrides, and carbides
via solar carbothermal reduction of metal oxides is discussed by Murray
et al.113 More recent thermodynamic analyses of carbothermal reduction
of a range of metal oxides under vacuum were presented by Halmann
et al.114 The solar carbothermal production of silicon from silica under vac-
uum was studied by Loutzenhiser et al.115 Solar production of iron, copper,
nickel, chromium, aluminum, magnesium, cobalt, lithium, and other metals
promises substantial reduction of fossil fuel use in industry due to large

demand and the highly endothermic character of the metal-extractive pro-
cesses. Solar metallurgy is a particularly interesting research and industrial
field for geographical areas with co-located mineral and solar resources such
as Australia.
8 Summary and Conclusions

Solar energy is a vast source of highly-exergetic energy. If harvested with
state-of-the-art solar concentrators at temperatures of approximately 1000–
2000 K, about 70–80% of the collected energy can theoretically be converted
to work. Hence, solar energy can be used to efficiently produce energy-
related products, such as electricity and fuels. In addition, solar energy
can also be used as a source of high-temperature process heat to produce
sustainable materials. Solar-driven processes and reactors have been devel-
oped for various purposes, including H2 O/CO2 splitting, coal gasification,
methane cracking and reforming, lime production, and CO2 capture from
air and flue gases. Additional potential applications of solar energy include
fertilizer (ammonia, urea) production, metal extraction, seawater desalina-
tion, and more.
References
1. T. Kodama and N. Gokon, Chem. Rev. 107 (2007), pp. 4048–4077.
2. M. Romero and A. Steinfeld, Energy Environ. Sci. 5 (2012), pp. 9234–9245.
3. E.A. Fletcher, Journal of Solar Energy Engineering 123 (2001), pp. 63–74.
4. A. Steinfeld and R. Palumbo, Encycl. Phys. Sci. Technol. 15 (2001),
pp. 237–256.
5. T. Kodama, Progress in Energy and Combustion Science 29 (2003),
pp. 567–597.
6. A. Steinfeld, Annual Review of Heat Transfer (Begell House, 2012), pp. 255–
275.
7. J.A. Wurzbacher, C. Gebald and A. Steinfeld, Energy Environ. Sci. 4 (2011),
pp. 3584–3592.
8. A. Meier and A. Steinfeld, Encycl. Sustain. Sci. Technol. (2012), pp. 9588–
9619.
9. A. Rabl, Sol. Energy, 18 (1976), pp. 93–111.
10. E.A. Fletcher and R.L. Moen, Science 197 (1977), pp. 1050–1056.
11. M.E. Gálvez, P.G. Loutzenhiser, I. Hischier and A. Steinfeld, Energy & Fuels,
22 (2008), pp. 3544–3550.
12. A. Kogan, Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 23 (1998), pp. 89–98.
13. S. Ihara, Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 5 (1980), pp. 527–534.
14. E.A. Fletcher, Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 38 (1999), pp. 2275–2282.
15. R.B. Diver, S. Pederson, T. Kappauf and E.A. Fletcher, Energy 8 (1983),
pp. 947–955.
16. J. Lede and J. Villermaux, Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 12 (1987), pp. 3–11.
17. S. Abanades, P. Charvin, G. Flamant and P. Neveu, Energy 31 (2006),
pp. 2469–2486.
18. R. Perret, Sandia Report SAND2011-3622 (2011).
19. J.R. Scheffe and A. Steinfeld, Mater. Today 17 (2014), pp. 341–348.
20. C.L. Muhich, B.W. Evanko, K.C. Weston, P. Lichty, X. Liang, J. Martinek,
C.B. Musgrave and A.W. Weimer, Science 341 (2013), pp. 540–542.
21. C. Agrafiotis, M. Roeb and C. Sattler, Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 42
(2015), pp. 254–285.
22. P.G. Loutzenhiser and A. Steinfeld, Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 36 (2011),
pp. 12141–12147.
23. K. Wegner, H.C. Ly, R.J. Weiss, S.E. Pratsinis and A. Steinfeld, Int. J.
Hydrogen Energy 31 (2006), pp. 55–61.
24. L.O. Schunk and A. Steinfeld, AIChE J. 55 (2009), pp. 1497–1504.
25. A. Weidenkaff, A.W. Reller, A. Wokaun and A. Steinfeld, Thermochimica
Acta 359 69–75 (2000).
26. P. Haueter, S. Moeller, R. Palumbo and A. Steinfeld, Sol. Energy 67 (1999),
pp. 161–167.
27. L.O. Schunk, P. Haeberling, S. Wepf, D. Wuillemin, A. Meier and A. Stein-
feld, J. Sol. Energy Eng. 130 (2008), pp. 021009–1/6.
28. L.O. Schunk, W. Lipiński and A. Steinfeld, Chem. Eng. J. 150 (2009),
pp. 502–508.
29. W.Villasmil, M. Brkic, D. Wuillemin, A. Meier and A. Steinfeld, J. Sol.
Energy Eng. 136 (2014), pp. 011017–1/11.
30. A. Berman and M. Epstein, Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 25 (2000), pp. 957–967.
31. A. Stamatiou, P. G. Loutzenhiser and A. Steinfeld, Energy & Fuels 24
(2010), pp. 2716–2722.
32. R.J. Weiss, H.C. Ly, K. Wegner, S.E. Pratsinis and A. Steinfeld, AIChE J.
51 (2005), pp. 1966–1970.
33. F.O. Ernst, A. Tricoli, S.E. Pratsinis and A. Steinfeld, AIChE J. 52 (2006),
pp. 3297–3303.
34. T. Melchior, N. Piatkowski and A. Steinfeld, Chem. Eng. Sci. 64 (2009),
pp. 1095–1101.
35. P.G. Loutzenhiser, M.E. Gálvez, I. Hischier, A. Graf and A. Steinfeld, Chem.
Eng. Sci. 65 (2010), pp. 1855–1864.
36. T. Nakamura, Sol. Energy 19 (1977), pp. 467–475.
37. L.S. Darken and R.W. Gurry, J. Am. Chem. Soc. 68 (1946), pp. 798–816.
38. A. Steinfeld, S. Sanders, and R. Palumbo, Sol. Energy 65 (1999), pp. 43–53.
39. R.B. Diver, J.E. Miller, M.D. Allendorf, N.P. Siegel and R.E. Hogan, J. Sol.
Energy Eng. 130 (2008), pp. 041001–1/8.
40. T. Kodama, N. Gokon and R. Yamamoto, Sol. Energy 82 (2008),
pp. 73–79.
41. P. Charvin, S. Abanades, G. Flamant and F. Lemort, Energy 32 (2007),
pp. 1124–1133.
42. M.D. Allendorf, R.B. Diver, N.P. Siegel, and J.E. Miller, Energy & Fuels 22
(2008), pp. 4115–4124.
43. N. Gokon, H. Murayama, A. Nagasaki and T. Kodama, Solar Energy 83
(2009), pp. 527–537.
44. M. Roeb, C. Sattler, R. Klüser, N. Monnerie, L. de Oliveira, A.G. Konstan-
dopoulos, C. Agrafiotis, V.T. Zaspalis, L. Nalbandian, A. Steele and P.J.
Stobbe, Sol. Energy Eng. 28 (2006), pp. 125–133.
45. C. Agrafiotis, M. Roeb, A.G. Konstandopoulos, L. Nalbandian, V.T.
Zaspalis, C. Sattler, P. Stobbe and A.M. Steele, Solar Energy 79 (2005),
pp. 409–421.
46. M. Roeb, J.-P. Säck, P. Rietbrock, C. Prahl, H. Schreiber, M. Neises,
L. de Oliveira, D. Graf, M. Ebert, W. Reinalter, M. Meyer-Grünefeldt,
C. Sattler, A. Lopez, A. Vidal, A. Elsberg, P. Stobbe, D. Jones, A. Steele,
S. Lorentzou, C. Pagkoura, A. Zygogianni, C. Agrafiotis, A.G. Konstan-
dopoulos, Solar Energy 85 (2011), pp. 634–644.
47. N. Gokon, S. Takahashi, H. Yamamoto and T. Kodama, Int. J. Hydrogen
Energy 33 (2008), pp. 2189–2199.
48. N. Gokon, T. Mataga, N. Kondo and T. Kodama, T. Int. J. Hydrogen Energy
36 (2011), pp. 4757–4767.
49. H. Kaneko, T. Miura, A. Fuse, H. Ishihara, S. Taku, H. Fukuzumi,
Y. Naganuma and Y. Yamaura, Energy & Fuels 21 (2007), pp. 2287–2293.
50. J.E. Miller, M.D. Allendorf, R.B. Diver, L.R. Evans, N.P. Siegel J.N.
Stuecker, J. Mater. Sci. 43 (2008), pp. 4714–4728.
51. S. Abanades and G. Flamant, Solar Energy 80 (2006), pp. 1611–1623.
52. M. Binnewies and E. Milke, Thermochemical Data of Elements and Com-
pounds (Wiley-VCH Verlag GmbH, 2002).
53. W.C. Chueh and S.M. Haile, Philos. Trans. R. Soc. A Math. Phys. Eng.
Sci. 368 (2010), pp. 3269–3294.
54. J. Lapp, J.H. Davidson and W. Lipiński, Energy, 37 (2012), pp. 591–600.
55. Q.-L. Meng, C. Lee, T. Ishihara, H. Kaneko and Y. Tamaura, Int. J. Hydro-
gen Energy 36 (2011), pp. 13435–13441.
56. A. Le Gal and S. Abanades, Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 36 (2011), pp. 4739–
4748.
57. A. Le Gal, N. Bion, T. Mercier, Le and V. Harle, Energy & Fuels 27 (2013).
58. Y. Hao, C.-K. Yang and S.M. Haile, Chem. Mater. 26 (2014), pp. 6073–6082.
59. A. Le Gal and S. Abanades, J. Phys. Chem. C 116 (2012), pp. 13516–13523.
60. Y. Hao, C.-K. Yang and S.M. Haile, Phys. Chem. Chem. Phys. 15 (2013),
pp. 17084–92.
61. R. Bader, L.J. Venstrom, J.H. Davidson, W. Lipiński, Energy & Fuels 27
(2013), pp. 5533–5544.
62. W.C. Chueh, C. Falter, M. Abbott, D. Scipio, P. Furler, S.M. Haile, and
A. Steinfeld, Science 330 (2010), pp. 1797–1801.
63. P. Furler, J. Scheffe and A. Steinfeld, Energy Environ. Sci. 5 (2012),
pp. 6098–6103.
64. P. Furler, J. Scheffe, M. Gorbar, L. Moes, U. Vogt and A. Steinfeld, Energy
& Fuels 26 (2012), pp. 7051–7059.
65. P. Furler, J. Scheffe, D. Marxer, M. Gorbar, A. Bonk, U. Vogtam and

A. Steinfeld, Phys. Chem. Chem. Phys. 16 (2014), pp. 10503–10511.
66. I. Ermanoski, N.P. Siegel and E.B. Stechel, J. Sol. Energy Eng. 135 (2013),
pp. 031002–1/10.
67. R. Bader, R. Bala Chandran, S. Sedler, R. De Smith, L.J. Venstrom, A.
Banerjee, T.R. Chase, J.H. Davidson and W.J. Lipiński, Sol. Energy Eng.
137 (2015), pp. 031007–1/10.
68. A. Banerjee, R. Bala Chandran and J.H. Davidson, Appl. Therm. Eng. 75
(2015), pp. 889–895.
69. A.H. McDaniel, E.C. Miller, D. Arifin, A. Ambrosini, E.N. Coker, R.
O’Hayre, W.C. Chueh and J. Tong, Energy Environ. Sci. 6 (2013), p. 2424.
70. J.R. Scheffe, D. Weibel and A. Steinfeld, Energy & Fuels 27 (2013),
pp. 4250–4257.
71. A. Demont, S. Abanades and E. Beche, J. Phys. Chem. C 118 (2014),
pp. 12682–12692.
72. B.M. Abraham and F. Schreiner, Ind. Eng. Chem. Fundam. 13 (1974),
pp. 305–310.
73. J.E. Funk and R.M. Reinstrom, Ind. Eng. Chem. Process Des. Dev. 5 (1966),
pp. 336–342.
74. P. Von Zedtwitz, J. Petrasch, D. Trommer and A. Steinfeld, Solar Energy
80 (2006), pp. 1333–1337.
75. N. Piatkowski, C. Wieckert, A. W. Weimer and A. Steinfeld, Energy Environ.
Sci. 4 (2011), pp. 73–82.
76. P. Von Zedtwitz and A. Steinfeld, Energy 28 (2003), pp. 441–456.
77. Y.C. Ng and W. Lipiński, Energy 44 (2012), pp. 720–731.
78. R. Müller, P. von Zedtwitz, A. Wokaun and A. Steinfeld, Chem. Eng. Sci.
58 (2003), pp. 5111–5119.
79. D. Trommer and A. Steinfeld, Energy & Fuels 20 (2006), pp. 1250–1258.
80. D. Trommer, F. Noembrini, M. Fasciana, D. Rodriguez, A. Morales, M.
Romero and A. Steinfeld, Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 30 (2005), pp. 605–618.
81. W. Lipiński, J.H. Davidson, S. Haussener, J.F. Klausner, A.M. Mehdizadeh,
J. Petrasch, A. Steinfeld and L. Venstrom, J. Therm. Sci. Eng. Appl. 5
(2013), 021005.
82. P. Von Zedtwitz, W. Lipiński and A. Steinfeld, Chem. Eng. Sci. 62 (2007),
pp. 599–607.
83. T. Melchior, C. Perkins, P. Lichty, A.W. Weimer and A. Steinfeld, Chem.
Eng. Process. 48 (2009), pp. 1279–1287.
84. A. Z’Graggen, P. Haueter, D. Trommer, M. Romero, J.C. de Jesus and
A. Steinfeld, International Journal of Hydrogen Energy, 31(6) (2006),
pp. 797–811.
85. N. Piatkowski, C. Wieckert and A. Steinfeld, Fuel Process. Technol. 90
(2009), pp. 360–366.
86. B.J. Hathaway, J.H. Davidson and D.B. Kittelson, J. Sol. Energy Eng. 133
021011 (2011).
87. J. Chen, Y. Lu, L. Guo, X. Zhang and P. Xiao, Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 35
(2010), pp. 7134–7141.
88. G. Maag, W. Lipiński and A. Steinfeld, Int. J. Heat Mass Transf. 52 (2009),
pp. 4997–5004.
89. G. Maag, G. Zanganeh and A. Steinfeld, Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 34 (2009),
pp. 7676–7685.
90. A. Kogan, M. Kogan and S. Barak, Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 30 (2005),
pp. 35–43.
91. S. Abanades and G. Flamant, Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 32 (2007), pp. 1508–
1515.
92. J.K. Dahl, K.J. Buechler, A.W. Weimer, A. Lewandowski and C. Bingham,
Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 29 (2004), pp. 725–736.
93. J. Wyss, J. Martinek, M. Kerins, J.K. Dahl, A. Weimer, A. Lewandowski
and C. Bingham, Int. J. Chem. React. Eng. 5 (2007), p. A69.
94. S. Rodat, S. Abanades and G. Flamant, Int. J. Chem. React. Eng. 8 (2010),
p. A25.
95. R. Tamme, R. Buck, M. Epstein, U. Fisher and C. Sugarmen, Solar Upgrad-
ing of Fuels for Generation of Electricity. Journal of Solar Energy Engineer-
ing 123 (2001), pp. 160–163.
96. A. Wörner and R. Tamme, Catal. Today 46 (1998), pp. 165–174.
97. C. Agrafiotis, H. Von Storch, M. Roeb and C. Sattler, Renew. Sustain.
Energy Rev. 29 (2014), pp. 656–682.
98. N. Ozalp and V. Shilapuram, Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 35 (2010), pp. 4484–
4495.
99. A. Meier, N. Gremaud and A. Steinfeld, Energy Convers. Manag. 46 (2005),
pp. 905–926.
100. A. Meier, E. Bonaldi, G.M. Cella, W. Lipinski, D. Wuillemin and R.
Palumbo, Energy 29 (2004), pp. 811–821.
101. A. Meier, E. Bonaldi, G.M. Cella, W. Lipinski and D. Wuillemin, Solar
Energy 80 (2006), pp. 1355–1362.
102. L. Matthews and W. Lipinski, Energy 45 (2012), pp. 900–907.
103. L. Reich, R. Bader, T. Simon and W. Lipiński, Spec. Top. Rev. Porous Media
6 (2015).
104. L. Reich, L. Melmoth, R. Gresham, T. Simon and W. Lipiński, Proc. ASME
2015 Power & Energy Conf. (2015), Paper No. PowerEnergy2015-49507.
105. G. Flamant, D. Hernandez and C. Bonet, Solar Energy 24 (1980), pp. 385–
395.
106. V. Nikulshina, C. Gebald and A. Steinfeld, Chem. Eng. J. 146 (2009),
pp. 244–248.
107. A. Imhof, Sol. Energy Mater. 24 (1991), pp. 733–741.
108. A. Steinfeld, A. Imhof and D. Mischler, J. Sol. Energy Eng. 114 (1992),
pp. 171–174.
109. V. Nikulshina, M. Halmann and A. Steinfeld, Energy & Fuels 23 (2009), pp.
6207–6212.
110. R. Michalsky, P.H. Pfromm and A. Steinfeld, Interface Focus 5 (2015),
pp. 20140084, 1–10.
111. M.E. Gálvez, M. Halmann and A. Steinfeld, Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 46 (2007),
pp. 2042–2046.
112. R. Michalsky, B.J. Parman, V. Amanor-Boadu and P.H. Pfromm, Energy

42 (2012), pp. 251–260.
113. J.P. Murray, A. Steinfeld and E.A. Fletcher, Energy 20 (1995), pp. 695–704.
114. M. Halmann, A. Frei and A. Steinfeld, Miner. Process. Extr. Metall. Rev.
32 (2011), pp. 247–266.
115. P.G. Loutzenhiser, O. Tuerk and A. Steinfeld, JOM 62 (2010), pp. 49–54.
February 11, 2016 14:8 Solar Energy - 9in x 6in b2236-index page 395
Index
A bitumen, 379
absorption efficiency, 352 bituminous, 380
AC power of the PV system, 55 black body, 1, 359
aerosol flow reactor, 364 BoS losses, 147
air heating collectors, 305 Bouduard reaction, 380
air mass (AM), 2, 7, 34 Brayton cycle, 91, 102–104, 119
algae, 177, 192–193 Brazil, 172–176, 184, 191, 194–195
alumina, 362 breadbox integral collector storage
aluminum, 388 systems, 304
ammonia, 348, 388 buffer storages, 327
annual generation, 248 bypass diodes, 47
annual global solar radiation, 250
anthracite, 380 C
array capacity, 282 cabinet dryers, 318
array yield, 256 calcination, 348, 385
artificial photosynthesis system calcium carbonate, 388
(APS) institutes, 205 calcium-manganese center, 211
ATP, 207, 210–213, 227 Calvin cycle, 207, 211–213
Australia, 389 capacitive leakage currents, 131
azimuth angle (α), 52 capture losses, 146
carbides, 388
B carbon, 380
balance of system (BOS), 49, 146–148 carbon fixation, 205, 207, 211–213,
barriers, 19 216
batteries, 50 carbon taxes, 24
beam-up, 387 carbonaceous, 348
bi-directional inverter, 281 carbonaceous feedstocks, 379
Bikini tank combi-systems, 304 carbonaceous wastes, 379
biocatalysis, 224 carbonation, 348, 386
biodiesel, 174–175 carbothermal reduction, 348
biomass, 1, 7–8, 16, 20, 348, 379 Carnot, 367
395
396 Index
cavity, 359 cut off, 231

cavity receiver, 361 cyclone, 388
cellulosic, 171, 174–175, 185, 194–195
cellulosic ethanol, 184 D
cement, 349, 385 damage arising from water freezing,
central receiver (power tower), 87, 107 306
ceramic foam, 377 DC power of the PV system, 55
ceria, 370 decentralized, 10
charge controllers, 50, 276 demand-side management, 273
charge separation, 205, 211, 218–219, desalination, 389
224–225, 227, 229, 231, 234–236 diesel, 348
chemical reactions, 13 direct integrated solar steam (DISS),
chlorophyll, 208 84
chloroplasts, 214 direct solar gain, 307
chromium, 388 direct steam generation (DSG), 82,
closed cycle volumetric receiver, 93 86, 101
CO2 capture, 386 directly irradiated, 382
CO2 reduction, 218–223, 225, dish, 75, 79, 91, 93–95, 104
227–231, 233, 235 dishes, 13
coal, 348, 379 dissociation, 360
cobalt, 388 distributed generation, 243
coefficient of performance, 324 divestment, 20, 25
coke, 379 dopants, 373
collection losses, 144, 146 doping, 373
color ‘ripening’, 317 double-effect cycle absorption
Combi+ system, 305 technology, 333
combustion, 176, 179, 182 dry gasification, 380
commissioning, 125, 150–155 drying, 8
concentrating, 2, 6, 8–10, 13–15, 20 drying kinetics, 317
concentrating solar power (CSP), 70, due diligence, 158, 162
113 dye sensitized solar cells, 205, 207,
concentrating solar thermal, 13 214
concentrating solar thermal (CST)
technologies, 13 E
concentration factor (X), 40 economic viability and environmental
conduction band, 217 benefits of SAC, 330
conduction losses, 144 economics, 17
conservatory, 311 efficiency, 128–130, 132, 134, 143,
cooling towers, 327 145–147, 154
dry cooling towers, 327 efficiency losses, 130
copper, 388 electrical hazard, 134, 136
corrective maintenance, 153, 155 electricity, 175–176, 179, 182–185,
cost reduction, 97, 99, 112, 114–117 194–195
cracking, 348 electrochromic film, 310
cracking-hydrogasification, 380 electromagnetic spectrum, 209
Index 397
electron mediator, 222–223, 235 fuel production rate, 373

electron–hole, 220, 229 fuel productivity, 356, 373
electron–hole pair, 234 fuel use, 70
electron–hole recombination, 225, 229
electron-transfer, 209 G
elevation angle (β), 52 GSTC , 40
energy, 205–208, 210–213, 215, galvanic isolation, 130–132, 134–135
217–218, 222, 227, 234–235 gas turbine, 70, 86, 102–103
energy band gap (Ebg ), 218 gasification, 176, 178–180, 182, 348
energy conversion efficiency, 269 gasoline, 348
energy efficiency, 351 generation losses, 145
energy efficiency ratio, 324 Gibbs free energy of reaction, 349
energy payback time of PV systems, global losses, 144
61 graphene, 225–226, 231
energy performance of SAC, 328 graphene-TiO2 , 232
enthalpy of reaction, 348, 349 grid infrastructure, 7
equipment-protection, 133 grid parity, 157–158, 160
equipotential bonding, 293 grid-safety, 131
equivalent hours, 56 ground-mounted, 10
ethanol, 172–175, 180–182, 185, 187, grounded arrays, 132, 134–135
193–195 grounding, 293
European Union (EU), 175–176,
178–179, 192, 194–195 H
eucalyptus, 185, 191
H2 O oxidation, 206, 217–221, 223,
Europe, 172, 175, 183, 190, 194, 195
227, 235
evaporative cooling, 16
H2 O splitting, 218–220, 223–224, 227,
exergy, 6
234–235
exergy efficiency, 355
heat driven air-conditioning and
experience curve, 18
refrigeration systems, 324
heat exchangers, 372
F
heat pipe evacuated tube collector,
Feed-in Tariff (FiT), 22–23, 156–157, 300
305 heat recovery, 359, 367, 372
fermentation, 172, 180, 184–185 heat recovery steam generator
ferrite, 366, 367 (HRSG), 111
fertilizer, 389 heat transfer, 355
final yield, 256 heat transfer fluid (HTF), 80, 91, 96,
final yield factor (FY), 145 98, 111, 118
Fischer–Tropsch process, 348 heat traps, 8
fixed shading devices, 321 heating, 15–16
flat plate collectors, 300 heating value, 372
fluidized bed reactors, 370 heliostat field, 109, 111
freeze protection, 306 heliostats, 364
fuel cell, 359 heterogeneous, 206–207, 227–228
fuel production, 355 high turnover number, 205
398 Index
history, 7 beam or direct irradiance, 33

homogeneous, 228, 232 diffuse horizontal irradiance
honeycomb, 369 (DHI), 34
hot spot, 276 diffuse irradiance (D), 33
hybrid solar–fossil, 379 direct normal irradiance or DNI,
hybrid systems, 280 34
hydrocarbon fuels, 348 global horizontal irradiance
hydrogen, 346 (GHI), 33
hydrolysis, 364 in-plane irradiance, 35
reference irradiance, 40
I irradiation, 33, 215–216, 221–223,
I–V characteristic of a photovoltaic 230–232
module, 44 irradiation factor, 250
I–V curve of a solar cell, 38 irreversibilities, 355
ISC temperature coefficient (α), Islanding, 137, 140
41 islands, 10
Pmax temperature coefficient isolated solar gain, 312
(γ), 41 isothermal cycle, 374
VOC temperature coefficient (β), isothermally, 374
41
efficiency, 39 K
fill factor (FF), 39 kerosene, 348
maximum power point or MPP Kinetic models, 382
(Vm , Im ), 38
open circuit voltage (VOC ), 38 L
short circuit current (ISC ), 38
International Energy Agency’s La Chaux de Fonds in Switzerland,
Photovoltaic Power Systems 300
Programme (IEA PVPS), 11, 22 leakage currents, 131–132, 134–135
illumination, 207, 223, 232 levelized cost of electricity (LCOE),
in Watts peak (Wp ), 46 19–20, 158, 160–162, 272
indirectly irradiated, 382 levelized cost of electricity for PV
inert gas, 358 systems, 60
insulation resistance, 134, 152 Li-ion battery, 275
integral collection storage solar water life-cycle cost of an SAC system, 331
heaters, 304 life-cycle, 158–159
integrated solar combined cycle life-cycle cost (LCC), 158–161
system (ISCCS), 102–103 lignite, 380
intermittent, 24 lime, 385
inverter, 49, 268 limestone, 386
iron, 388 linear concentrator, 72
iron oxide, 366 linear Fresnel, 69, 75, 86–87
irradiance, 33 lithium, 388
albedo or reflected irradiance loss of load probability, 54, 259
(R), 34 losses, 131–132, 143–148, 163
Index 399
M open cycle volumetric receiver, 91

magnesium, 388 open sorption cycles, 326
maize, 172, 174, 178, 184, 195 operation and maintenance (O&M),
market, 82, 101, 105, 112–113, 152, 153, 159–160, 163
116–117, 119 operation and maintenance cost, 160
market opportunities for SAC, 335 optimal position, 249
market status of SAC, 332 optimum orientation of a PV array,
maximum power point trackers, 49 53
membranes, 354 overcurrents, 292
metal nitride, 348 overvoltage, 151, 293
metal oxide, 214, 218–219, 235, 348, oxygen, 379
356 oxygen exchange, 378
metals, 348, 388 oxygen exchange material, 355
miscanthus, 185, 188, 195 oxygen partial pressure, 367
mixed iron oxides, 368
module soiling losses, 146 P
molten salt, 82, 84, 90–91, 96–97, p/n junction, 37
101–102, 109, 111, 118, 382 packed beds, 359
MPP trackers, 49 parabolic trough, 13
multi-step cycles, 378 parabolic trough collector (PTC), 79,
82
N paraboloidal dish, 69, 91
NADP, 211 particle flow reactor, 383
NADP+ , 210–212 particles, 361
NADP/NADPH, 224 passive cooling of building, 320
NADPH, 210–212, 227 passive solar, 6, 8, 15–16, 23
nanobiocatalytic, 205–206, 224, 235 peak solar hours, 56
nanofluids, 15 peat, 380
natural cooling systems, 321 pellets, 178–179
near-isothermal cycles, 375 performance, 256
net metering, 23, 156–157, 164 performance index, 145
nickel, 388 performance ratio (PR), 56, 128–129,
nitrides, 388 143–145, 148, 256
nocturnal cooling, 322 perovskite, 377, 378
nominal operating cell temperature petcoke, 348
(NOCT), 47, 249 photoanodes, 235
non-concentrating photovoltaics, 7 photocatalysis, 213, 216–217, 220,
non-stoichiometric, 356 224
non-stoichiometric cycle, 371 photocatalyst, 214, 216, 218–219, 225,
non-volatile, 356 228–230, 232–233
photoelectrode, 214–215
O photoexcitation, 219–220, 232
off-grid, 12–13, 23 photolysis, 207, 213
ohmic losses, 147 photon, 208–209, 211, 213–214, 216,
oilseed(s), 172, 191 218–219, 227, 232, 234
400 Index
photooxidation, 216 PV solar water heating, 305

photoreduction, 228, 231, 233 PV system, 49
photosensitizers, 214, 216, 228, 232 PV system final yield, 55
photosynthesis, 17, 205–208, 210–214, PV system reference yield, 56
213, 216–217, 219, 222, 224–227, pyrolysis, 179–181
234, 229, 231, 234–236
Photosystem II (PS II), 206 Q
photovoltaic cell, 36 quantum efficiency, 224, 226
photovoltaic power systems quantum yield, 221, 226, 233
programme, 10 quenching, 354
photovoltaic-powered circulation
pump, 304 R
photovoltaic(s) (PV), 1, 6, 8–13, 31
radiation, 1–6, 15
physicochemical properties, 362
radical, 228, 231
pico-solar, 277
Rankine cycle, 82, 101–102
platinum, 214
reaction kinetics, 364
Point focus concentrator, 72, 90, 100
reactivity, 370
point of common coupling (PCC), reactor, 349
137 receiver thermal efficiency, 72–73
policy, 21–22 recombination, 213, 219–220, 222,
poplar, 181, 185, 189–190, 195 225, 231, 235–356
potable water extraction processes, redox, 214, 217, 221–223, 225–226,
314 234
power block, 85, 101, 109, 111, 117 redox cycles, 355
power tower, 69, 75, 87, 92, 107 redox pairs, 357
PPC, 141–142 reducibility, 373
preventive maintenance, 153–154 reference spectra, 41
Principles of Active Solar Cooling, reference yield, 256
322 reforming, 348
process heat, 14, 348 reforming-methanation, 380
production losses, 129 regulators, 24
project finance, 158, 162 regulatory changes, 24
promotion policies, 155, 163 reliability, 128, 136, 140, 148, 246
protection, 140, 142, 151 renewable portfolio standard, 23
protection devices, 152, 154 resistive leakage currents, 135
protection measures, 141 reticulate porous ceramics, 384
pump, 12, 15 ribulose-1,5-bisphosphate, 211
pumping, 8, 13 roadmap, 19
PV array, 49 Roman Empire, 8
PV cell production, 58 roof-space solar-energy collector, 312
PV Geographic Information System rooftop, 12, 19–20
(PVGIS), 149 rotary kilns, 388
PV installed capacity, 58 rotary-type reactors, 370
PV module, 42 (RuBP) regeneration, 211
PV module price, 60 rural electrification, 277
Index 401
S series resistance, 37
SAC costs and economics, 334 shunt resistance, 37
sacrificial electron donor, 218, 221 solar chimney, 75, 77–78
safety, 131–136, 140, 152–153, 291 solar cooling kits, 330
safety hazards, 151 solar collector, 75, 77, 97, 101
safety levels, 135 solar commodity materials, 346
safety performance, 150 solar concentration ratio, 353
safety standards, 151 solar concentrators, 353
safety voltage, 135 solar constant, 3, 32
second-law analysis, 358 solar cooking, 8
selective absorber, 15 solar cooling systems, 328
selective surface theory, 73 solar dryers, 317
self-consumption, 23, 156–157, 164, solar drying, 315
248 solar electricity driven cooling, 323
semiconductor, 214 solar energy, 205–206, 213–214
semiconductor photocatalyst, 214 solar energy generating system
separation, 355 (SEGS), 80
shading losses, 129, 252 solar fuels, 345
short circuits, 292 solar furnace, 360, 386
silicon, 388 solar home systems, 277
silicon carbide, 386 solar irradiation, 215–216, 220, 231
simulation, 143 solar metallurgy, 389
simulation tools, 147–149 solar panel, 42
Single-axis tracking solar thermal solar photon, 217–218, 221, 235
collectors, 333 solar pond, 75–76
sintering, 360, 367 solar processes, 349
sizing, 266 solar radiation, 32, 69–75, 78, 82, 89,
sizing tools, 148 107, 360
Skalierung euro trough (SKAL-ET), solar radiation and concentration, 71
82 solar radiation data, 251
slag, 368 solar receiver, 352
Social and Policy Aspects, 21 solar selective surfaces, 300
soft costs, 18 solar simulator, 46, 374
software tools, 285 solar spectrum, 32
solar, 205–208, 214–216, solar thermal, 8, 13–14, 19, 23
219–221, 225–226, 228, solar thermal pasteurization, 314
230–231, 234–235 solar thermal power plant, 69, 80, 85,
Solar Air-Conditioning and 105
Refrigeration technology (SAC), solar thermal processing, 379
323 solar thermochemical processes, 346
solar cell, 36 solar tower, 384
solar cell equivalent circuit solar trackers, 50
diode dark current, 37 solar water heaters, 300, 302
diode ideality factor, 37 climax solar water heater, 300
photogenerated current, 37 first solar water heater, 300
402 Index
pumped circulation solar water thermal storage, 69, 76, 91, 95–99,
heaters, 303 103–104, 117–118
thermosyphon solar water thermally driven chillers, 326
heaters, 301 thermochemical storage, 99
solar zenith angle, 34 thermochemical, 13–14, 354
specification losses, 146 thermochemical cycles, 354
spectra for solar irradiance, 74 thermochemical reactor, 351
spectral losses, 146 thermodynamic, 366
spectrum, 1–2, 6–7 thermogravimeter, 359
Standard Test Conditions (STC), 46 thermolysis, 346
Standard test conditions for solar thermosyphon, 15
cells, 41 TiO2 , 216, 218–219, 225–226,
steam gasification, 380 229–232, 234–235
steam turbine, 69–70, 94, 101, 103, TiO2 photoelectrodes, 215–216
109 topology, 281
stirling cycle, 101, 104 total demand distortion, 142
stoichiometric, 356 transformer losses, 130, 147
stoichiometric cycles, 371 Trombe–Michel wall, 311–312
storage, 14, 24, 275, 348 tube receiver, 80
storage capacity, 282 two-step cycles, 355
sugarcane, 172–174, 184, 187–189 types of PV systems, 51
supercritical water, 382 typical meteorological year (TMY),
supercritical water gasification, 384 35, 248
support structures, 368
sweep gas, 359, 362 U
swimming pool heating, 305 unavoidable, 144–145
switchgrass, 185–188 unavoidable losses, 144–145
syngas, 346, 348 ungrounded arrays, 132–135
synthetic fuels, 348, 380 unintentional islanding, 140
United States, 171–179, 183–184, 187,
T 189–193, 195
tank-in-tank solar combi-systems, 304 urban planning for solar access, 300
technical due diligence (TDD), 158, urea, 389
162–163 UV, 217, 221, 223
technical maturity of SAC, 326 UV irradiation, 220, 233
technical potentials of SAC, 333
temperature, 228 V
temperature-swing, 374 vacuum glazing, 307
tender and auctions, 156 vacuum pumping, 367
thermal, 1, 6, 9 valence band, 217
Thermal Capture losses, 262 value chain of PV technology, 61
thermal dissociation, 354 vapor compression cycles combined
thermal efficiency, 353 with photovoltaic systems, 335
thermal losses, 144 vegetable oils, 171, 175–177, 192
thermal reduction, 348 visible illumination, 218
Index 403
visible irradiation, 218 water splitting, 357

visible photons, 218 wavelength, 73–74
volatile, 356 willow, 178, 185, 190–191
voltage dip, 137–139 world radiation monitoring center, 4
volumetric receiver, 90–93, 111 worst month, 250
vortex flow reactor, 383
Z
W Z-scheme, 218, 222–223
water gas shift, 380 Z-scheme photocatalysis, 222
water heater, 8, 20 zinc, 358
water heating, 14–15 zinc oxide, 357–358
water PV pumping, 279 zirconia, 368

February 11, 2016 14:8 Solar Energy - 9in x 6in b2236-abt page 405
About the Contributors
Roman Bader received his B.Sc. (2007), M.Sc.

(2008), and Dr. Sc. (2011) degrees in Mechani-
cal Engineering from the Swiss Federal Institute
of Technology (ETH Zurich). He has over 8 years
of research experience with solar thermal tech-
nologies. From 2007 to 2012, he worked on the
development of a novel parabolic trough solar
field technology and a novel solar dish technol-
ogy (www.airlightenergy.com). From 2012 to 2013,
he was in charge of developing a prototype solar
reactor for efficient solar thermochemical CO2 and
H2 O splitting at the University of Minnesota. Since 2013, he has been a
Research Fellow in the Solar Thermal Group at the Australian National
University. He has designed the ANU high-flux solar simulator. He is cur-
rently in charge of developing solar thermochemical processes and reactors
for high-temperature energy storage and solar fuels production. He has
authored over 30 scientific publications and over 40 scientific presentations.
He has reviewed over 30 papers for over 10 journals, including Solar Energy,
Journal of Solar Energy Engineering, and Applied Energy. He has acted as
a session organizer at several international conferences. He is a member of
ASME, AIChE, ISES, and the ANU Energy Change Institute.
405
406 About the Contributors
Manfred Becker graduated from RWTH (Tech-

nical University) Aachen as Diplom-Ingenieur for
Mechanical Engineering and obtained a Ph.D.
there with an analysis of the transition regime
conditions between continuum and free molecular
flow. He had two leaves, both for one year in the
United States at Arnold Engineering Development
Center (AEDC), Tullahoma–Tennessee within an
exchange program of the Departments of Defense
of Germany and USA. The second was a post doc
position at the University of California, Depart-
ment of Mechanical Engineering. Dr. Becker also participated as a member
of DLR in the project Small Solar Power Systems (SSPS) by the Inter-
national Energy Agency including nine countries at Almeria, Spain. The
objective was to define the potential of Concentrating Solar Power (CSP) by
critically comparing, at a small scale, new concepts of tower and parabolic
trough collectors. Professor Becker was appointed Head of the Energy Tech-
nology Division of DLR-Cologne. He acted in the Solar Power and Chem-
ical Energy Systems (SolarPACES) project at first as operating agent for
technology and later as the German member of the Executive Commit-
tee. He was Speaker for the chemistry division of the AG Solar in North
Rhine–Westphalia and joined the European Union Renewable Energy Cen-
ters (EUREC) agency at Brussels. For five years up to 2001, he was member
of the EUREC Executive Bureau. Professor Becker had numerous publica-
tions including scientific studies and reports both as author and editor. At
the University of Wuppertal he gave lectures on Heat Transfer. In 2001,
Becker retired from DLR and began consulting for KfW, VDI, GIZ and
some solar companies in Germany. He received the Ernst Mach Award
1972 for his doctoral thesis and was honored by the SolarPACES Life Time
Award.
Estefanı́a Caamaño-Martı́n was born in

Madrid (Spain). She received her Ph.D. in
Telecommunications Engineering — Photovoltaic
Solar Energy Program from the Technical Univer-
sity of Madrid (1998). Since 2000, she has been an
Assistant Professor and Researcher at the Solar
Energy Institute of the same university, where
she has developed her research career in the field
of Photovoltaic Engineering. In particular, her
research interests include PV systems design, char-
acterization, performance evaluation, integration
in urban environments and intelligent management of PV electricity gener-
ation. Dr. Caamaño-Martı́n has participated in more than 50 national and
international Research & Development projects, in half of them as princi-
pal researcher. She is the author/co-author of 12 book chapters, 20 articles
in international journals of high impact index, and more than 50 contri-
butions to national and international scientific conferences related with
Photovoltaics and Distributed generation. She is also a member of the
Spanish standardization committees related to Electricity Supply systems
and Photovoltaic Solar Energy systems. From a training perspective, she
regularly teaches engineering and architecture students in degree courses
and post-graduate specialization courses at the Universidad Politécnica de
Madrid, in the field of Solar Energy systems.
Emilio Muñoz Cerón is a Researcher of the

Centre for Advanced Studies in Energy and Envi-
ronment at the University of Jaén. He graduated
in Industrial Engineering in 2008, obtaining the
Best Student Award of his promotion. During his
Engineering studies, he spent a semester at the
University of Texas at Austin and afterwards, in
his Ph.D. research period, he was awarded scien-
tific fellowships at the Research Centre for Smart
Buildings and Energy Efficiency (CeDint-UPM,
Madrid) and in Black-Photon Instruments GmbH
(Fraunhofer ISE spin-off) in Freiburg, Germany. His international experi-
ence has been also focused on cooperation projects in developing countries,
where he travelled to do field work in Bolivia, Peru and in the Saharan
Refugee Camps in Algeria. In 2014, he completed his Ph.D. at the Univer-

sity of Jaén, with Professors Juan Carlos Miñano and Gabino Almonacid as
doctoral advisors. He obtained the International Doctorate mention with
the thesis titled: “New trends in photovoltaic economy and development of
a different technological spectral approach in concentrator photovoltaics”.
At the Centre for Advanced Studies in Energy and Environment, he is
in charge of coordinating the scientific activity and the promotion of the
Centre through International funding and projects. He is also in charge of
the use and maintenance of the laboratories and equipment. Dr. Muñoz
Cerón has published around 20 papers in peer-reviewed scientific journals,
proceedings of international conferences and chapters of books.
Richard Corkish graduated from the Royal

Melbourne Institute of Technology in 1986
with B.Eng. in Communications Engineering
and researched satellite ground station antennas
with the Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial
Organisation for four years before studying for
the Ph.D. (Electrical Eng.) in photovoltaics at
University of New South Wales and graduating
in 1994. He has been working in photovoltaics
research and education, mainly at UNSW, since
1990. From 2003 to 2013, he was Head of School
of Photovoltaic & Renewable Energy Engineering at UNSW. Dr. Corkish
is currently Chief Operating officer of the Australian Centre for Advanced
Photovoltaics, an Advisor to the Indian National Centre for Photovoltaics
Research and Education, External Examiner for the Clean Energy Pro-
gram at Singapore Polytechnic, and an Editor for the IEEE Journal of
Photovoltaics.
Miguel A. Egido is a senior scientist with a

Ph.D. in stand-alone PV systems and a minor in
Telecommunication Engineering. All his research
activity has been carried out at the Instituto de
Energı́a Solar in Madrid and has focused on PV
systems: solar radiation, sizing, installation, stan-
dards normalization and rural electrification. He
has more than 20 years of experience in PV rural
electrification projects and programs (in Senegal,
Cabo Verde, Brazil, Bolivia, Cuba, Nicaragua, Perú, Panamá, etc.). In the
last few years, he has been working on Quality Control Assurance pro-
cedures for PV rural electrification. Dr. Egido has also taught about PV
systems at the Universidad Politécnica de Madrid since 1988.
Hans-Martin Henning is Professor and Deputy

Director of the Fraunhofer Institute for Solar
Energy Systems (ISE) in Freiburg, Germany and
Director of the division of Thermal Systems and
Building. He is also Professor for “Technical
energy systems” in the department of mechanical
engineering at the Karlsruhe Institute of Technol-
ogy. Professor Dr. Henning finished his Ph.D. in
1993 at the University of Oldenburg and started
his work at Fraunhofer ISI in Freiburg in 1994. Key
areas of his research are in the following topics:
solar cooling and refrigeration, adsorption technology, heat storage based
on sorption technology and phase change materials, heat pump technology
and in general, technical energy systems for buildings. He has been respon-
sible for many national and international research projects and in the years
1999 to 2011 he was the responsible Operating Agent for two large Tasks
whicxh were carried out in the framework of the Solar Heating and Cooling
programs of the International Energy Agency. Recently, Professor Henning
has been actively involved in the development of computer models for the
simulation of complex energy systems and their application to investigate
future German energy systems including all conversion technologies and
end-use sectors.
Wojciech Lipiński received his Magister Inżynier

degree from the Warsaw University of Technol-
ogy (2000), and doctorate (2004) and habilita-
tion (2009) from ETH Zurich. He is an Associate
Professor and the Leader of the Solar Thermal
Group at the Australian National University, and
a Privatdozent at ETH Zurich. He previously held
Senior Research Associate and University Lec-
turer positions in the Department of Mechanical
and Process Engineering at ETH Zurich, and an
Assistant Professor position in the Department of Mechanical Engineer-

ing at the University of Minnesota. His research interests are in thermal
and thermochemical sciences, optics, and energy, environmental and space
technology applications. Lipiński has published more than 100 articles in
peer-reviewed journals and conference proceedings, and contributed to sev-
eral books. He was awarded the 2006 Hilti Award for Innovative Research
from ETH Zurich, the College of Science and Engineering 2010–2011 Out-
standing Professor Award from the University of Minnesota, and the 2013
Elsevier/JQSRT Raymond Viskanta Award in Radiative Transfer. He has
served as the Associate Editor for the ASME Journal of Solar Energy Engi-
neering, and the Elected Member of the Scientific Council of the Interna-
tional Centre for Heat and Mass Transfer.
Daniel Mugnier has professional experience in

engineering solar thermal systems for large DHW
applications and above all solar heating and cool-
ing systems. Managing the Solar Cooling Depart-
ment of TECSOL — one of the French leading
solar engineering company — Daniel Mugnier
is involved as well in numerous R&D projects
on solar cooling at the national, European and
international level. He is also author of sev-
eral publications and presentations at interna-
tional conferences on solar cooling. TECSOL has
achieved more than 50 feasibility studies on solar cooling and designed
10 working installations at the moment since 1990 on solar heating and
cooling. He is currently Vice Chairman of the European Solar Thermal
Technology Platform and Operating Agent of the IEA Solar Heating and
Cooling Programme.
Professor Brian Norton is President of Dublin

Institute of Technology (DIT) in Ireland. He
received a B.Sc. in Physics from the University
of Nottingham in the UK in Physics and MSc
and Ph.D. in Energy Engineering from Cranfield
University also in the UK. He has also received
a D.Sc. from University of Nottingham. He is a
Chartered Engineer both in the UK and Ireland.
Professor Norton is the author or co-author of nine
books, over 420 papers principally in solar energy
research including 170 in major international learned journals. His work has
ranged from solar water, air and space heating, optical and luminescent
solar energy concentration, vacuum glazing, photovoltaic systems design,
energy storage and solar drying. Currently Professor Norton is elected to the
Council of Dublin Chamber of Commerce. He is a Director of The Green-
way, Ireland’s first green technology corridor, chairs “Action Renewables”
responsible for facilitating renewable energy development in Northern Ire-
land and is Vice-President of the European Sustainable Energy innovation
Alliance. He is a Fellow of the Energy Institute, Engineers Ireland and
the Higher Education Academy. Among his awards are the Napier Shaw
Medal of the Chartered Institute of Building Services Engineers and the
Roscoe Award of the Institute of Energy. He is an Honorary Fellow of
the Chartered Institute of Building Services Engineers and is a Fellow of
the Irish Academy of Engineering. He is an Honorary Professor of the Uni-
versity of Ulster, Harbin Institute of Technology, China and University of
Houston, USA.
Robert John Patterson graduated from the

Engineering Physics program at Queen’s Univer-
sity in Ontario, Canada in 2001. He then worked
for a company fabricating TEM samples by ion
beam micromachining for failure analysis of semi-
conductor devices and corrosion of superalloys. He
went on to do an M.Sc. in Physics at the Uni-
versity of Alberta in Canada studying colossal
magnetoresistance and magnetic phase changes in
doped transition metal oxides, graduating in 2005.
After two years in the department of physics at
the University of British Columbia in Vancouver Canada, Dr. Patterson
decided to move to renewable energy. He joined the School of Photovoltaic
and Renewable Energy Engineering (SPREE) at the University of New
South Wales (UNSW) in Sydney, Australia where he studied thermaliza-
tion energy loss via numerical modelling of the vibrational properties of
nanostructured materials for application to advanced photovoltaic cells. He
graduated with a Ph.D. in 2012 and is currently an ARENA postdoctoral
fellow at the Australian Centre for Advanced Photovoltaics in SPREE at
the UNSW.
Univ.-Prof. Dr.-Ing. Robert Pitz-Paal has

been one of two directors heading the Institute of
Solar Research with about 120 members of staff
since June 2011. His main research areas are the
technical analysis and optimization of concentrat-
ing solar power systems for generating electricity
and producing fuel. A challenge he finds particu-
larly exciting is that of coupled heat transfer prob-
lems involving radiation, convection, conduction
and chemical reactions. He has published more
than 100 papers, book chapters and conference
contributions out of which more than 60 are published in ISI journals. Born
in Kleve in 1963, Pitz-Paal read Physics at the Ludwig–Maximilian Univer-
sity in Munich from 1983 until 1988. In 1993, he obtained a Ph.D. from the
Department of Mechanical Engineering at Ruhr Universität Bochum with a
doctoral thesis on concentrating solar technology. In the same year he was
recruited by the German Aerospace Center in Cologne where he spent the
following years working in various positions at the Energy Technology Divi-
sion. In 2002, Pitz-Paal was appointed as head of Solar Research at the DLR
Institute of Technical Thermodynamics in Stuttgart, and held the post of
Deputy Director of the Institute from 2009 until 2010. Since 2003 Dr. Pitz-
Paal has been a professor for solar technology at RWTH Aachen. He also
spent the summer semester of 2008 as a guest professor at the Institute of
Energy Technology at ETH Zürich. His scientific publications won several
awards from the American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME). His
department was awarded Centre of Excellence status by the DLR Execu-
tive Board in 2006 and 2011 and 2014 in recognition of its work. Professor
Pitz-Paal is vice chairman of the executive committee of the international
network “Solar Power and Chemical Energy Systems (SolarPACES)”. He
is also chairman of the CSP (=Concentrated Solar Power) working group
of the European Academies of Science Advisory Council as well as heading
the Board of Trustees of the Jülich Solar Institute of the Aachen University
of Applied Sciences and is member of the board of the German association
of the CSP Industry (DCSP). He served as associate editor for the ASME
Journal on Solar Energy Engineering and is actually associated editor of
Journal of Solar Energy.
Gabino Almonacid Puche is Professor in the

Department of Electronic and Automatic Engi-
neering and Director of the Centre for Advanced
Studies in Energy and Environment at the Uni-
versity of Jaén. He graduated in Telecommunica-
tions Engineering at the Polytechnic University of
Madrid (UPM) in 1978. In 1987, he completed his
Ph.D. at UPM with Professor Antonio Luque as
doctoral advisor. At the University of Granada he
has been Director of the Polytechnic High School
(1986–1990), and at the University of Jaén he has
been Head of the Technology Transfer Office (1993–1997) and Head of the
Department of Electronic and Automatic Engineering (1999–2005). He is
currently member of the Management Team of ELAND Private Equity,
member of the Instituto de Estudios Giennenses and member of the Renew-
able Energy Institute of Andalusia. He established, in 1989, the Solar
Energy Research Group of the University of Jaén. This research group
comprises more than 50 researchers who have made relevant contributions
over the past 25 years to engineering and to technological development of
PV systems. Two of his most outstanding R&D projects are (a) UniVer
Project (a 200 kW PV generator integrated into the campus of the Univer-
sity of Jaén) and (b) REBUILD Project (EU pilot project for renewable
energies integrated into the historical city centers of Amsterdam, Coim-
bra, Corfú, Jaén, Perugia, Prato and Rhodes). He has published around 50
articles in peer-reviewed scientific journals and almost a hundred papers in
the proceedings of international conferences. In 2001, he was awarded the
Distinción San Alberto Magno of the Polytechnic High School of Jaén, a
special honor awarded to scholars who have made outstanding contributions
to sciences.
Peter K.J. Robertson is Professor of Chemi-

cal Engineering at Queen’s University Belfast. He
originally studied Chemistry and Economics at the
University of Ulster, where he also obtained his
D.Phil (1989) and D.Sc. (2013). On completing
his D.Phil in 1989, Professor Robertson joined the
Faraday Centre a spinout company from Carlow
Institute of Technology in Ireland. In March 1991,
he moved to the Northern Ireland Civil Service as
a Higher Scientific Officer attached to the Industrial Research and Tech-

nology Unit. Professor Robertson joined the staff of the School of Applied
Sciences at Robert Gordon University in September 1995 where he was
involved in teaching and research in environmental science and technology,
analytical science and photocatalysis. In July 2000 Professor Robertson
was appointed to the Chair of Energy and Environmental Engineering in
the School of Mechanical and Offshore Engineering at RGU where he estab-
lished the multidisciplinary Centre for Research in Energy and the Environ-
ment. Professor Robertson subsequently was appointed as Vice-Principal
and Pro Vice-Chancellor (Research and Commercialization) at Robert Gor-
don University in September 2006. In this role he had responsible for setting
and implementing the Research, Knowledge Transfer and Commercialisa-
tion Strategy for the University. In August 2012 his role at RGU was rede-
fined as Vice-Principal and Pro Vice-Chancellor (Research and Academic
Support Services). In January 2015 Prof. Robertson joined the School of
Chemistry and Chemical Engineering at Queen’s University Belfast as Pro-
fessor of Chemical Engineering. His main research interests are in semi-
conductor photochemistry for energy and environmental applications. He
has co-edited two books and authored over 90 peer reviewed journal arti-
cles and book chapters. Professor Robertson was a non-executive direc-
tor of Gas2 Ltd (2012–2014) and the Aberdeen Renewable Energy Group
(2006–2009). In 2013 he was appointed to the Detao Masters Academy
in Beijing as a Master in Photocatalytic Technology. Professor Robert-
son is a member of the editorial board of the International Journal of
Photoenergy, the Central European Journal of Engineering and Invited
Editor of The Handbook of Environmental Chemistry Series Published by
Springer Verlag, specifically co-editor of the Volumes on Environmental
Photochemistry. Professor Robertson is a Chartered Engineer, Chartered
Energy Engineer, Chartered Scientist and Chartered Chemist, a Fellow of
the Royal Society of Chemistry, the Institute of Chemistry in Ireland, the
Energy Institute and an Associate Fellow of the Institution of Chemical
Engineers.
Ignacio Rey-Stolle is a Professor at the Solar

Energy Institute of the Technical University of
Madrid (Madrid, Spain) since 2003. He got his
Ph.D. in 2001 from the Technical University of
Madrid working on high concentrator GaAs solar
cells. From his Ph.D. and on, Prof. Rey-Stolle has
accumulated more than 18 years working in the
field of Photovoltaic Solar Energy. In particular,
the research efforts of Prof. Rey-Stolle are focused
on III–V multi-junction solar cells doing material
growth by MOVPE, device design and simulation
and characterization and reliability studies. This work has resulted in sev-
eral world-record efficiency solar cell devices that have been produced
at Prof. Rey-Stolle’s research group. He has co-authored more than 100
scientific papers, three book chapters, has co-edited the Handbook on Con-
centrator Photovoltaic Technology, holds one patent and has given numer-
ous talks at Research Institutes and Photovoltaic Conferences worldwide.
He has been the principal investigator of eleven national and international
research projects, has participated as an associate researcher in more than
twenty projects, and has coordinated three technology transfer projects to
photovoltaic industries. In 2007, Prof. Rey-Stolle received the Best Young
Professor Award of the Technical University of Madrid for outstanding sci-
entific research and innovation. He teaches Electronics and Photovoltaic
Solar Energy at the Technical University of Madrid, where he also super-
vises graduate student research. Since 2011, Prof. Rey-Stolle is the director
of the Master of Science on Photovoltaic Solar Energy of the Technical
University of Madrid, a leading international Master program designed to
meet the intense demand for highly qualified professionals in the area of
photovoltaic engineering.
Nathan Skillen is a Research Fellow in the

School of Chemistry and Chemical Engineering at
Queen’s University Belfast (QUB). He obtained
his B.Sc. in Biology with Molecular Biosciences
from the Robert Gordon University in Aberdeen
(2009). In December 2009, he joined the Cen-
tre for Research in Energy and the Environment
(CRE+E) at RGU as a Ph.D. student under
the supervision of Professor Robertson. His Ph.D.
project was part of an Engineering and Physical Science Research Coun-

cil (EPSRC) funded collaborative project entitled “Enhancing Direct Pho-
toelectrochemical Conversion of Carbon Dioxide”. During this period,
Dr. Skillen collaborated with the University of St. Andrews and the
California Institute of Technology while developing a photocatalytic sys-
tem that was capable of generating alternative fuel using novel catalysts
and solar illumination. After completing his Ph.D. (2013), he continued to
work with Professor Robertson and CRE+E as a Research Fellow on the
EPSRC funded project entitled “Photocatalytic Bioethanol Production”.
In this project, he is responsible for the design and construction of multi-
stage photocatalytic systems which incorporate membrane technology. In
February 2015, Dr. Skillen joined the School of Chemistry and Chemical
Engineering at QUB, continuing his work on the EPSRC bioethanol project.
Under his current role, Dr. Skillen’s main responsibilities are research based
along with the supervision of bachelor and masters students during their
projects. His main research interestes are in the application of photocat-
alytic technology for use in energy production and environmental processes
inlcuding the investigation of reactor engineering, semiconductor materi-
als, catalyst platform and solar energy conversion. He has authored and
co-authored peer reviewed journal articles and a book chapter in the fields
of photocatalytic water splitting, photo-reactor engineering and photocat-
alytic applications. He is also an Associate Member of the Royal Society of
Chemistry.
Wes Stein is the Program Leader for Solar Tech-

nology at CSIRO (Commonwealth Scientific and
Industrial Research Organisation), Australia. He
leads a team of 45 engineers and scientists with
the majority of the work focusing on high tem-
perature concentrating solar power (CSP). This
includes optics, thermodynamics, materials, con-
trol systems, power cycles and modelling in order
to optimize the overall performance. He has also
established CSIRO’s National Solar Energy Centre
which is a pilot scale research facility comprising
two high flux solar towers, thermal storage and balance of plant. Wes has
a strong background in power station technology and a particular interest
to merge targeted advances in CSP with state-of-the-art power cycles to
provide competitive, market-scale electricity and solar fuels. To this end,
he has grown and manages an extensive portfolio of CSP research projects,
including optimization of central receivers and optics, high temperature

steam and thermal storage, solar air Brayton systems, advanced supercrit-
ical CO2 cycles and solarized fuels. Technology developed by his team has
been deployed in the form of a solar heliostat field for the Cyprus Insti-
tute, and in other international projects. Wes has championed the devel-
opment and implementation of CSP technology in Australia and continues
to provide leadership, strategic R&D, demonstration projects and innova-
tive energy strategies that foster the development of a national and global
sustainable energy industry. He is a member of the Australian Renewable
Energy Technology Advisory Committee, international member of EU-
SOLARIS Advisory Board for Technical and International Cooperation,
Australian member of the IEA’s SolarPACES Executive Committee (Solar
Power and Chemical Systems), member of the Australian Solar Thermal
Institute Project Management Committee and member of UNIDO Interna-
tional Solar Energy Centre for Technology Promotion and Transfer. He was
a Lead Author for the IPCC Special Report into Renewable Energy, 2011,
co-authored a study for the World Bank on the global Status and Opportu-
nities for Concentrating Solar Power and co-editor for Concentrating Solar
Power Technology (Woodhead Publishing 2012). He has been awarded an
Australian Institution of Engineers scholarship to develop high tempera-
ture solar cycles, and a Confederation of British Industry scholarship to
investigate solar thermal hybridization of coal and gas-fired power cycles,
and won the UK Rendel Award for his paper on “Global Energy Issues for
the next 30 years”.
Jorge Solórzano is a young researcher with a

Ph.D. and Master’s degree in photovoltaic solar
energy, specializing in Photovoltaic Systems. Both
of his degrees are from the Polytechnical Univer-
sity of Madrid. He is an engineer with more than
8 years of experience in photovoltaics. He has pub-
lished various articles in JCR indexed journals and
presented papers at international congresses. His
areas of research are mainly: optimization of PV
generation through DMPPT techniques (microin-
verters and power optimizers), quality control of
PV systems, PV generation forecasting and optimization of mini-grids. He
is also a lecturer in three different Masters programs related to renewable
energy.
Anthony Turhollow is a staff economist in the

Environmental Sciences Division of Oak Ridge
National Laboratory (1982–1993, 1998–present).
He received a Ph.D. in Agricultural Economics
from Iowa State University in 1982 and has been
working in the field of biomass for energy since
1980. His particular expertise is in the economics
(costs), logistics, energy and greenhouse balances,
and resource assessments of biomass energy crops.
From 1983 to 1993, he managed herbaceous energy
crop screening and selection research and rapeseed
research. He was one of the main authors on the 2005 Billion Ton Report
and 2011 Billion Ton Update. Economics analyses include estimating the
costs of producing herbaceous and short rotation woody energy crops. He
has estimated costs associated with the harvest, handling, transport and
storage of energy crops and crop residues. He has served on a number of US
Department of Energy and US Department of Agriculture panels to review
and select biomass-related research projects for funding.
Pedro Gómez Vidal is currently Professor and

Director of the Department of Electric Engineering
at the University of Jaén, Spain. He was Director
of the Polytechnic High School of the University
of Jaén from 1999 to 2006. Professor Gómez Vidal
graduated in Industrial Engineering at the Engi-
neering School of the University of Seville in 1982.
In 2000, he completed his Ph.D. at the University
of Jaén with Professor Gabino Almonacid as doc-
toral advisor. He is member of the Solar Energy
Research Group of the University of Jaén. His
research focuses on the areas of electrical hazards, safety and protection
as well as on grid-connection of PV systems. In 1999, he first introduced
floating DC systems along with new concepts and measures for improving
safety and protection in PV systems. Professor Gomez Vidal has published
over 25 articles in peer-reviewed scientific journals and over 60 papers in
the proceedings of international conferences.

Solar Energy by Gerard M Crawley

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Solar Energy by Gerard M Crawley

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Solar Energy by Gerard M Crawley

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

World Scientific Series in Current Energy Issues Volume 2

9637_9789814689496_TP.indd 1 2/2/16 2:42 PM

Vol. 1 Fossil Fuels: Current Status and Future Directions

Vol. 2 Solar Energy

Dipa - Solar Energy.indd 1 17/2/2016 2:22:03 PM

9637_9789814689496_TP.indd 2 2/2/16 2:42 PM

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data

British Library Cataloguing-in-Publication Data

Copyright © 2016 by World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd.

In-house Editor: Dipasri Sardar

Typeset by Stallion Press

Dipa - Solar Energy.indd 2 17/2/2016 2:22:03 PM

Foreword to the World Scientiﬁc Series on Current Energy Issues xv

1. Introduction to Solar Energy 1

2. Fundamentals of Photovoltaic Cells and Systems 31

4.3.3 Modeling the equilibrium cell temperature

7.5 Operational Hazards of PV Systems . . . . . . . . . . . 63

3. Large-Scale Solar Thermal Plants (CSP) 69

8.2 Cost Developments and Cost Reductions . . . . . . . . 115

4. Large-Scale Photovoltaic Power Plants 125

5 Commissioning. Operation & Maintenance . . . . . . . . . . 149

3 Thermal Processes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 179

6. Artiﬁcial Photosynthesis 205

3.2.3 Nanobiocatalytic assemblies . . . . . . . . . . . 224

7. Small-Scale PV Applications in Home and Business 243

6 Safety and Protections . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 291

8. Low Temperature Solar Thermal Applications 299

9. Solar Thermochemical Processes 345

3.1.2 Ferrite cycle . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 366

About the Contributors 405

Foreword to the World Scientific Series

xvi Foreword to the World Scientific Series on Current Energy Issues

Table 1: Primary Energy Use Per Capita in Million Btu (MMBtu).2

2007 2011 Percentage

Canada 416.1 393.7 −5.4

World 72.2 74.9 3.7

a Note 1 GJ = 0.947 MMBtu

Foreword to the World Scientific Series on Current Energy Issues xvii

oversight to allow it to be used safely and without damaging the environ-

xviii Foreword to the World Scientific Series on Current Energy Issues

Introduction to Solar Energy

R. Corkish,∗,† W. Lipiński‡ and R. J. Patterson∗

1 What is Solar Energy?

2 R. Corkish, W. Lipiński & R. J. Patterson

Figure 1 shows the spectrum of radiation from ultraviolet to infrared, as

1. AM1.5D: Direct Normal Incidence radiation is that received on earth

Introduction to Solar Energy 3

4 R. Corkish, W. Lipiński & R. J. Patterson

2 Advantages and Disadvantages Associated

6 R. Corkish, W. Lipiński & R. J. Patterson

Introduction to Solar Energy 7

3 History of Solar Energy Use

8 R. Corkish, W. Lipiński & R. J. Patterson

partner throughout the progress of mankind. The growth of agriculture

Introduction to Solar Energy 9

10 R. Corkish, W. Lipiński & R. J. Patterson

4 Modern Applications of Solar Energy

4.1 Photovoltaics for Large-Scale Electricity Production

Introduction to Solar Energy 11

Fig. 4. Part of a 9 MW utility scale photovoltaics installation at Stone Mills, Ontario