Accepted Manuscript

Efficiency enhancement of solar chimney power plant by use of waste heat from
nuclear power plant

Nima Fathi, Patrick McDaniel, Seyed Sobhan Aleyasin, Matthew Robinson, Peter
Vorobieff, Salvador Rodriguez, Cassiano de Oliveira

PII: S0959-6526(18)30154-9
DOI: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.01.132
Reference: JCLP 11812

To appear in: Journal of Cleaner Production

Received Date: 18 December 2016

Revised Date: 26 November 2017
Accepted Date: 17 January 2018

Please cite this article as: Fathi N, McDaniel P, Aleyasin SS, Robinson M, Vorobieff P, Rodriguez S,
Oliveira Cd, Efficiency enhancement of solar chimney power plant by use of waste heat from nuclear
power plant, Journal of Cleaner Production (2018), doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.01.132.

This is a PDF file of an unedited manuscript that has been accepted for publication. As a service to
our customers we are providing this early version of the manuscript. The manuscript will undergo
copyediting, typesetting, and review of the resulting proof before it is published in its final form. Please
note that during the production process errors may be discovered which could affect the content, and all
legal disclaimers that apply to the journal pertain.
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

Efficiency Enhancement of Solar Chimney Power Plant

by Use of Waste Heat from Nuclear Power Plant

PT
Nima Fathia,∗, Patrick McDaniela , Seyed Sobhan Aleyasinb , Matthew
Robinsona , Peter Vorobieffa , Salvador Rodriguezc , Cassiano de Oliveiraa

RI
a
University of New Mexico
b
University of Manitoba
c
Sandia National Laboratories

SC
Abstract

U
AN
A solar chimney power plant (SCPP) offers an efficient method of convert-

ing solar irradiation to electrical power. It can be combined with a nuclear

M
power plant to improve its efficiency and minimize its environmental impact.
D

Rather than dumping the waste heat rejected by a nuclear power plant to a

wet cooling tower, a better solution may be to connect it to an SCPP. This is

TE

particularly true in arid regions. The SCPP can serve the function of a dry
EP

cooling tower and produce additional electrical power. In a solar chimney

power plant, the energy of buoyant hot air is converted to electrical energy.
C

SCPP includes a collector at ground level covered with a transparent roof.

AC

The sun heats the air inside the collector and the ground underneath. A

tall chimney is placed at the center of the collector, with a turbine located

∗
Corresponding author. Email: [email protected]

Preprint submitted to Journal of Cleaner Production, Elsevier November 26, 2017

 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

at the base of the chimney. In this investigation, the surplus heat from the

nuclear cycle is used to increase the temperature of the air in the collector

PT
and therefore produce more electricity in the solar chimney power plant. The

RI
efficiency of the nuclear plant will be lowered due to the higher temperature

of the condenser, but the loss can be made up by the increased power of

SC
the solar chimney. Heat from the sun is always free once the solar plant

U
has been constructed and is not normally considered in the efficiency cal-

AN
culation. Computational fluid dynamics (CFD) and thermal analysis have

been performed to apply the available surplus heat from the nuclear cycle
M
and to measure the available kinetic energy of air for the turbine of the solar

chimney power plant system. The feasibility of the system is evaluated, and
D

the thermal efficiency of the combined power plant has been computed. By
TE

applying this idea to a typical 1000 MW nuclear power plant with a nom-
EP

inal 35.3% thermal efficiency, its efficiency can be increased to 42.0%. The

combined cycle as presented is advantageous in environments where water

C

is scarce. The cooling tower is replaced by the solar chimney power plant
AC

utilizing the surplus heat from the available warm steam in the secondary

loop of the reactor.

Keywords:

2
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

Nuclear Power Plant, Combined Cycle, Solar Chimney Power Plant, Water

Shortage Problem

PT
Nomenclature

RI
V ariables

SC
 dissipation rate (per unit mass), m2 /s3

η efficiancy

U
g acceleration due to gravity, m/s2

h height, m
AN
turbulence kinetic energy (per unit mass), m2 /s2
M
k

ṁ air mass flow rate, kg/s

D

µ dynamic viscosity
TE

p pressure, N/m2

q heat transfer per unit mass, J/kg

EP

q 00 heat flux, W/m2

C

Ẇ flow power, W
AC

R air specific gas constant, J/kg.K

S user defined source term

T temperature,K

3
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

ρ density, kg/m3

PT
u velocity component, m/s

cp specific heat capacity, J/kg.K

RI
σ diffusion term

SC
x spatial component, m

Subscripts

U
th thermal

Abbreviations AN
ASM E American Society of Mechanical Engineers
M
CF D computational fluid dynamics
D

CHT computational heat transfer

TE

CSP concentrating solar power

CAM customer adoption model

EP

DER distribution energy resource

EOS equation of state

C

HES hybrid energy system

AC

F SI fluid solid interaction

ISO independent system operator

LW R light water reactor

4
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

M SR molten salt reactor

PT
PV photovoltaic

RP S renewable portfolio standard

RI
SRQ system response quantity

SC
TTD terminal temperature difference

M &S modeling and simulation

U
SCP P solar chimney power plant

V HT R AN
very high temperature reactor

V PP virtual power plant

M
D

1. Introduction
TE

1.1. Motivation and Background

EP

While renewable energy systems are steadily improving their global share

[1], the challenge is to convince the industry and governments to invest more
C

money in the renewable energy field and to make it more attractive by de-
AC

creasing the capital cost. Until recently, uncertainties in funding have limited

renewable energy development, especially in the US. That limitation has been

one of the barriers to progress. Another limitation of many renewable en-

5
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

ergy systems is the variability in their output, which makes them unsuitable

for baseline power production. Therefore, fossil fuels are still the dominant

PT
source of energy globally. The estimated US energy consumption in 2015

RI
relied heavily on fossil fuels which accounted for about 82% of US primary

energy. Coal provided 58% of the energy used for power and most oil (71%)

SC
was used for transportation. Nuclear energy provided around 8% of the total

U
primary energy consumption and all of it was used for electricity generation,

AN
as shown in Fig. 1 [2]. The share of nuclear energy in electricity generation

was around 21%. Fossil fuels have two major limitations. First, the supply
M
is finite. There is no balance between the fuel consumption and discovery of

new fossil reserves around the world [3]. Second and more importantly, the
D

consumption of fossil fuels, which accounts for 60% of the global greenhouse
TE

gas emissions [4], has negative impacts on both environment and human
EP

health. Receding glaciers [5], rises in sea level, desertification, and formation

of hurricanes are some of the destructive impacts of greenhouse gas emissions-

C

dominated climate change on the environment [6]. On the other hand, every
AC

year thousands of premature deaths and various diseases such as allergies

and asthma [7] due to air pollution are reported worldwide. Only in the

US, the Environmental Protection Agency estimated that in 2010 there were

6
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

more than 160,000 premature deaths due to air pollution [8]. To tackle these

issues, many countries have introduced renewable energy plans and aim to

PT
supply a part of their energy from renewable resources such as wind, solar,

RI
biomass and geothermal. In 2014, the share of solar and wind power in the

net electricity consumption in the European Union was 12%; however, this

SC
share in Denmark and Portugal was 37% and 27% respectively [9].

U
Multiple technologies are required to extract electrical energy from solar

AN
energy. Solar chimney power plants are one of the available technologies

which has been studied since the 1970s.

M
The share of solar energy in 2016 US electricity generation was just 0.9%.

This is a dramatically small share for solar energy. Solar energy incident
D

upon the earth is considerable. However, it is diffuse, and approximately 23%

TE

of the incident energy is absorbed by the atmosphere. There are different

EP

types of solar energy systems including flat-plate collectors like photovoltaic

(PV), focusing collectors like solar concentrated towers (SCT) and SCPP.
C

One of the systems which has not been studied comprehensively is SCPP
AC

cycle combined with other primary power plant cycles.

Solar chimney plants are one of the rare examples of renewable energy

power plants that can produce a reliable baseline power. In a solar chimney

7
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

PT
RI
U SC
AN
M
D
TE
EP

Fig. 1. Estimated US energy flows in 2015. Values are in quadrillions of British thermal
C

units (quads). Total energy input is 98.3 Quads.

AC

plant, the energy of buoyant hot air is converted to electrical energy. The

plant consists of a collector at the base covered with a transparent roof

that collects the solar radiation, heating up the air inside and the ground

8
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

underneath. In the center of the collector, there is a tower, and a turbine is

located at the base. The hot air flows up the tower as a result of the buoyancy

PT
effect, and its energy is extracted and converted to electrical energy by means

RI
of the turbine. A typical solar chimney is shown in Fig. 2.

U SC
AN
M
D
TE

Fig. 2. Schematic of an SCPPS (left), Manzanares prototype (right).

EP

During the day, the sun heats the ground under the collectors, and at

night, the heated ground warms the air, thus sustaining the power-generating
C

updraft flow.
AC

The primary goal of this research is a fundamental feasibility study of

combining an SCPP with a nuclear reactor power plant as a replacement for

the usual cooling tower. Consequently, the effect of this combined cycle on

9
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

the power plant efficiency was also investigated. The secondary objective

of this investigation is to detect the possible increase of SCCP efficiency by

PT
utilizing the available waste heat. It was observed that the performance of

RI
solar chimney systems increases as they utilize an available source of waste

heat. This makes it possible to build commercially viable SCPPs on a smaller

SC
scale.

U
1.2. Previous Work
AN
The first prototype of a solar chimney power plant was constructed in

Manzanares, Spain. This plant operated between 1982 and 1989, and its
M
electricity was used as a part of the local electrical network [10]. The infor-
D

mation from the Manzanares prototype has been used for extrapolation to
TE

larger models for SCPPs [11]. In 1991 Yan et al. developed a detailed model

for an SCPP by using a practical correlation. They considered several key

EP

parameters, such as air velocity, air flow rate, output power, and thermal

efficiency [12]. Several researchers studied the effect of different geometrical

C

parameters on plant efficiency. In 1995 Schlaich et al. reported that accord-

AC

ing to the mathematical model, there were no optimal dimensions for a solar

chimney; however, by considering construction costs, a thermo-economically

optimal plant configuration might exist [13].

10
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

One of the important aspects of solar chimneys is that to provide 24/7

power and to be economically competitive, they must be built on a large

PT
scale, requiring corresponding upfront investment. The efficiency of SCPP is

RI
extremely low, ranging from 0.5 to 10% of the solar energy input. Therefore,

considerable research efforts have been made to enhance the efficiency of

SC
SCPPs. As the ground under the collector has a certain thermal storage

U
capacity, during night time, an SCPP cannot work as efficiently as during

AN
the daytime. Kreetz [14] introduced the concept of water-filled tubes/tanks

under the collector roof to increase the thermal storage capacity. This idea
M
helps to smooth out the generation of warm air to drive the turbine and

improve the power output after sunset [15]. In an attempt to improve the
D

SCPP function at night, a double-roof collector was proposed by Pretorius

TE

[16]. This gives the plant the ability to store and release energy to regulate
EP

the output power.

It is usually assumed that the tall chimney follows a conventional design

C

(rigid construction, foundation, guy wires, etc.). Such a construction on the

AC

scale suitable for a commercially viable SCPP is not only very expensive but

also presents a challenge in terms of surviving an extreme weather event. To

address this issue, a free-standing inflatable design was proposed to reduce

11
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

the construction costs and increase the survivability of a solar chimney [17].

The prototype was able to withstand hurricane-strength winds [18]. The

PT
chimney outlet air velocity was measured experimentally to support and

RI
validate the numerical simulation results [19].

Over the last few years, concentrating solar power system projects have

SC
been rapidly increasing [20]. In these systems, solar radiation is concentrated

U
onto a focal point or line using mirrors or lenses. The same approach could

AN
be used to enhance the efficiency of extracting solar energy in SCPPs.

Fig. 3 depicts the open air Brayton cycle of an SCPP. The concept pre-
M
sented here is a combined cycle adding the SCPP to a power plant system

to utilize the surplus heat and produce more electricity. In principle, many
D

combined cycles using the same concept are possible, including SCPP instal-
TE

lations combined with an array of traditional PV collectors, with an array

EP

of algal bioreactors, or even installed over a landfill to utilize its waste heat.

Several examples of combined cycles have been described and studied to

C

address sustainability challenges that the energy industry faces [21]. This
AC

technology has broad application to all thermal power plants. Several inves-

tigations have proposed combined cycle power plants that utilize available

heat from a high temperature reactor or a fossil fuel plant [22]. Simplified

12
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

mathematical models have been developed to study the thermal power plant

system. A typical system has the heat recovery steam generator (HRSG) fed

PT
by the exhaust of the turbine. The HRSG provides heat to produce steam

RI
that drives a bottoming steam turbine for extra electric power production

[23]. In this article, the focus is on a typical nuclear power plant as the main

SC
element of this combined cycle. Current light water reactors (LWR) power

U
plants operate with thermal efficiencies in the range of 30 to 35%, rejecting

AN
65 to 70% of the energy consumed. Advanced molten salt reactors (MSRs)

and very high temperature reactors (VHTRs) will reach efficiencies in the
M
42 to 48% range [24]. The ratio of heat output from a power plant that is

actually converted into electrical energy is called the thermal efficiency ηth
D

of the system,
TE

Electrical Energy Generated

EP

ηth = . (1)
Heat P roduced by the Reactor

By combining the solar chimney tower system with a nuclear power plant,
C

the overall thermal efficiency will increase because of the extra electrical
AC

power produced by the turbine in the SCPP (Fig. 4). The issue is how to

apply the waste heat from the nuclear power plants, such as the pressurized

water reactor (PWR), MSR, or VHTR. The authors suggest replacing the

13
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

cooling tower with an SCPP to extract more heat from the overall system.

This would make it possible to build smaller solar chimney plants and con-

PT
sequently decrease the upfront cost, producing a competitive levelized cost

RI
of electricity.

SC
1.3. Utilization by Grid

The SCPP technology can be added to the mix of generation resources.

U
The SCPP could enter the grid at several levels. The first would be to provide
AN
electricity locally for the power plant (pumps, fans, etc.). Secondly, it can be

employed for direct use on the grid allowing the solar chimney to be used in
M
various ways and fit in with the future framework of the grid. The simplest
D

method by which the solar chimney can provide a service to the electrical
TE

grid is in economic dispatch mode. When the demand is high, the output

power from a solar chimney power plant can be dispatched to the grid before
EP

expensive peaking plants are used. However, this does not lend itself to day-

ahead resource planning due to the solar chimney output being a function
C

of weather and cooling tower output, both of which are subject to random
AC

fluctuations.

In either scenario, potential output of the SCPP can be used in forecast-

ing to allow for optimization of the resources available locally or grid-wide.

14
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

Presently, the grid is beginning a transformation from a centralized genera-

tion scheme to a distributed paradigm.

PT
There are many reasons for this development such as increased penetra-

RI
tion of rooftop solar, the emergence of renewable energy portfolio standards

(RPS), which requires a certain percentage of electricity generation from re-

SC
newable sources, and an overall concern over reliability and sustainability

U
of energy resources for consumers. The shift from centralized to distributed

AN
generation has led to changes in how loads are met in certain areas of the US

(independent system operators), and developments continue to be proposed.

M
An important recent concept that must be mentioned here is the virtual

power plant (VPP) [25]. The idea of a VPP is to aggregate generation re-
D

sources that may be small in capacity or intermittent (or both) and to let
TE

them act as a collective to meet the load (or perform another grid service).
EP

Another important development for the future of the grid comes from hy-

brid energy systems (HES). This concept decouples the pairings between the
C

traditional sources and sinks, such as coal only for generation of electricity
AC

[26]. Fig. 5 illustrates the solar chimney as a resource in a VPP scheme. The

resources are aggregated and with forecasts and current demand on the grid,

a dispatch schedule is produced for each resource to satisfy the agreed bid to

15
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

the independent system operator (ISO).

As the numbers of distributed resources continue to increase, there are

PT
several studies that show how the grid can benefit and continue to be stable.

RI
One example uses the distributed energy resource customer adoption model

(DER-CAM). DER-CAM was initially designed to increase investment in

SC
distributed energy systems and provide a scheduling service for the resources

U
[27]. As research continued, it was found that what is best for one customer

AN
may not be optimal for the operation of the entire grid. For example, if there

are several cold water storage units on a grid, the optimal time to charge the
M
individual units (for the customer) would be early morning before a time-of-

use tariff or demand charge can be recorded. However, if all the individual
D

customers do this, there will be a spike on that portion of the grid. DER-
TE

CAM was used to solve this issue by performing a collective optimization to

EP

save money for the consumer and smooth the spike [28].
C

2. Modeling and Simulation

AC

2.1. CFD Analysis

To have a better understanding of the air flow behavior in an SCPP and

its relationship with the available heat flux at the collector, computational

16
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

PT
RI
U SC
AN
M
D
TE
EP

Fig. 3. Schematic diagram of a pressurized water reactor and the steam turbine that

convert work into electrical energy with a cooling tower.

C

fluid dynamics (CFD) analysis was applied. A CFD simulation using finite
AC

volume method was employed to investigate the sensitivity of turbine output

power to different values of the available heat flux at the collector part. This

numerical flow calculation helps us to evaluate the nuclear-solar combined

17
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

PT
RI
U SC
AN
M
D
TE
C EP
AC

Fig. 4. Block diagram of an open air-Brayton cycle of SCCPS (instead of cooling tower)

combined with a pressurized water reactor.

18
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

PT
RI
U SC
AN
M
D
TE
EP

Fig. 5. Example process of producing a schedule given base load generators, solar chimney,
C

and other distributed energy resources (DERs) such as photovoltaic arrays, wind farms,
AC

etc.

cycle when the SCPP is used to replace a conventional cooling tower. To

date, numerous numerical models with various couplings between the collec-

19
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

tor, turbine, and chimney have been introduced to evaluate the SCPP [29].

To measure the reliability of the CFD results, due to the limited available

PT
experimental data for validation, analytical correlations and mathematical

RI
models have been applied. The analytical correlation for output power for

an SCPP was studied, and the modified form of that was compared against

SC
CFD and available experimental data from the Manzanares prototype [30].

U
In the present investigation, the Manzanares prototype was modeled and sim-

AN
ulated by considering the real dimensions and available operating conditions

with respect to the available reports [2]. Table 1 presents the dimensions of
M
the Manzanares prototype.
D

Prototype component Size (m)

TE

Mean collector radius 122.00

Collector height 1.85

EP

Chimney radius 5.08

C

Chimney height 196

AC

Rotor blade length 5

table. 1. Manzanares prototype dimensions.

In the numerical analysis, the heat flux was calibrated with respect to

20
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

the actual values from the available experimental data. The mass flow rate

obtained from the CFD results, along with other parameters, was used to

PT
evaluate the maximum mechanical power for each case. ANSYS ICEM (In-

RI
tegrated Computer Engineering and Manufacturing) CFD was employed to

generate a quadrilateral cell mesh. The calculations were carried out on an

SC
eight-core (Opteron), 32GB RAM computer. Table 2 presents the applied

U
boundary conditions in our numerical flow calculation.

AN
To perform this steady-state CFD simulation, the standard k −  two-

equation model was applied. The standard k −  model has been a common
M
turbulence model in industrial CFD since it was proposed by Launder and

Spalding [31]. This is due to its robustness, economy, and reasonable accu-
D

racy in simulation of turbulent flows in engineering applications. However,

TE

unless special measures are taken, k− models are not suitable for the evalua-
EP

tion of flows where adverse pressure gradients or separation are present. They

typically predict a delayed and reduced separation compared to observations.

C

This can result in overly optimistic design evaluations for flows which sepa-
AC

rate from smooth surfaces (aerodynamic bodies, diffusers, etc.). The k − 

model is therefore not widely used in external aerodynamics. Applying a

wall function helps the accuracy of the standard k −  model, which includes

21
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

two extra transport equations: one for turbulence kinetic energy (k) and the

other for dissipation rate (). The model transport equation for k is adjusted

PT
from the exact equation based on experimental data. However, the model

RI
transport equation for  bears little resemblance to its mathematically exact

counterpart. The standard k −  is suitable for high Reynolds-number flows,

SC
and the setup we investigate here definitely falls within the high Reynolds

U
number range, especially in the tower, where the Reynolds number exceeds

10,000. AN
Model component Boundary condition
M

Collector ground Thermal flux

D

Chimney wall Adiabatic

TE

Collector roof Adiabatic

Chimney center line Axis

EP

Collector inlet Zero gauge pressure

C

Collector outlet Zero gauge pressure

AC

table. 2. Applied boundary conditions in CFD analysis

22
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

∂ρ ∂
+ [ρuj ] = 0 (2)

PT
∂t ∂xj

RI
 
∂ ∂ 0 0 ∂uj ∂p
(ρui ) + ρui uj + ui − νSij + = 0, i = 1, 2, 3 (3)
∂t ∂xj ∂xj ∂xi

SC
Here ui is the local velocity and u0i represents the velocity fluctuation. Sij

U
is the mean strain rate calculated as follows:

AN
1

∂ui ∂uj

Sij = + (4)
2 ∂xj ∂xi
M
The equations for turbulence kinetic energy k and dissipation rate  are
D
TE

  
∂ ∂ ∂ µt ∂k
(ρk) + (ρkui ) = µ+ + Gk + Gb − ρ − YM + Sk (5)
∂t ∂xi ∂xj σk ∂xj
EP

2
  
∂ ∂ ∂ µt ∂ 
(ρ)+ (ρui ) = µ+ +C1 (Gk + C3 Gb )−C2 ρ +S
C

∂t ∂xi ∂xj σ ∂xj k k

(6)
AC

Here Gk and Gb denote the generation of turbulence kinetic energy due

to the mean velocity gradients and buoyancy respectively. YM represents

the contribution of the fluctuating dilation in compressible turbulence to the

23
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

overall dissipation rate. σk and σ are turbulent Prandtl numbers for k and

 respectively. C1 , C2 and C3 are constants. Sk and S are user-defined

PT
source terms.

RI
2.2. Thermal analysis

SC
In this investigation, the second part of modeling and simulation was

performed by means of numerical thermal simulation to identify the thermal

U
characteristics of the combined nuclear-solar cycle. Once the thermal charac-
AN
teristics of the systems have been identified, then a search can be undertaken

for off-the-shelf components that come close to meeting the requirements of

M
an optimal system. Fathi et al. reported the results of thermal power cycle
D

assessment of combined nuclear power plants for low-carbon grids recently by

TE

using a steady state thermal cycle modeling [32]. Here we provide a simple

example of a solar tower power plant coupled to a nuclear power plant. The
EP

nuclear power plant is modeled schematically, and the focus of the exercise is

on the effects of the coupling. Only one steam turbine is considered and no
C

nuclear feedwater heaters are included. Feedwater heaters would add to the
AC

cycle efficiency for the basic plant and the combined plant and their absence

does not detract from the essence of the analysis.

To perform the cycle modeling the techniques described in [33] were

24
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

followed. Scaling parameters given in [34] were applied for size estimates

for turbomachinery. Air compressor and turbine polytropic efficiencies follow

PT
the published scaling rules [33]. Steam turbines were simply set at a 90%

RI
isentropic efficiency. The heat exchanger was designed to meet a 1% pressure

drop and the effectiveness of 95%. The output power of the SCPP was

SC
considered as electrical power to the combined thermal cycle.

U
3. Results and Disscusion

3.1. CFD/Thermal Results

AN
M
In the following subsection, we present the results of the preliminary

analysis of combining a larger (200 MW) SCPP with a 1000 MW nuclear

D

power plant. The goal of the CFD analysis is to have a better understanding
TE

of the air flow behavior with respect to the different rate of available heat
EP

flux (solar irradiation and nuclear waste heat). For this purpose, several

CFD simulations were performed for different values of heat flux to cover all
C

the cases. The minimum available solar radiation characterizes the winter
AC

case. From a typical 1000 MW nuclear reactor, 600 W/m2 extra added heat

flux can be obtained from the waste heat. A nominal output power for

the Manzanares prototype is about 50 kW based on the experimental data.

25
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

Fig. 6 presents a comparison of the available turbine output power based on

reported experimental data for the Manzanares power plant (experimental

PT
data in Fig. 6) and on our CFD results for the same setup, including the case

RI
when the solar output of the plant is boosted by adding 600 W/m2 from the

waste heat.

SC
In our numerical calculation, we have considered the turbine efficiency

U
at 85%. As shown in Fig. 6, the output in the light blue area (200-400

AN
W/m2 ) represents the winter case. The same case boosted by 600 W/m2

from the available surplus heat is represented by the light orange zone, and
M
is roughly the same as the unboosted summer case. Note that the available

surplus heat from the secondary cooling loop of the reactor, considering the
D

operating range of heat exchanger effectiveness, may be appreciably greater

TE

than 600 W/m2 . However, with respect to the reported characteristics of

EP

the Manzanares prototype, the above-mentioned flux value is chosen as the

designed shift range of heat flux [30]. For the summer case, it is assumed that
C

the amount of power increase can be zero for the maximum available reported
AC

solar irradiation of 1000 W/m2 , to be more conservative in our evaluation.

By considering both the summer and winter cases using the Manzanares

SCPP as a model, we obtain a range from 0 to 300% increase in the output

26
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

electricity of the turbine of the solar chimney power plant. For the annual

added power, 150% is chosen, ignoring the power increases during fall and

PT
spring cases to be on the conservative side. By building a bigger prototype

RI
on the order of 1 km height, power generation from the turbine can be raised

from 100 to 200 MW. That makes the presented idea more economically

SC
beneficial and decreases the capital cost of both the SCPP and the nuclear

U
power plant as well.

AN
3.2. A Nominal LWR Nuclear Power Cycle

A brief outline of the approach to the thermal analysis was set forth in
M
the modeling and simulation part. The presentation of the current investi-
D

gation and results will follow a simple coupled nuclear-solar cycle. Start by
TE

considering a nominal standard day at 15 ◦ C. A nominal nuclear power plant

that produces saturated steam at 7.2 M P a and 288 ◦ C will give a reactor
EP

output enthalpy of 2769.9 kJ/kg and an entropy of 5.80029 kJ/(kg K).

Expanding the steam isentropically to an average day condenser pressure

C

of 6.58 kPa and a temperature of 38 ◦ C gives a final enthalpy of 1793.3 kJ/kg.

AC

The nominal terminal temperature difference (TTD) across the condenser is

23 ◦ C. The ideal enthalpy drop across the turbine is 976.6 kJ/kg. For a 95%

efficient steam turbine, the net work will be 927.7 kJ/kg, resulting in steam

27
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

PT
RI
U SC
AN
M
D
TE
EP

Fig. 6. Experimental and numerical comparative representation of the output turbine

power of Manzanares prototype vs a range of available heat flux and the effect of applying
C

heat waste to the solar cycle.

AC

28
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

quality of 69.8% and enthalpy of 1842.2 kJ/kg at turbine exit. To return

the saturated water to 7.2 MPa, 9.1 kJ/kg is required for an 80% efficient

PT
pump, or 918.7 kJ/kg net energy produced. Then to raise the temperature

RI
to 288 ◦ C requires 2602.3 kJ/kg. This gives a thermodynamic efficiency of

918.7/2602.3 = 35.3%. A 1000 MW(e) power plant will require a heat input

SC
of 2832.8 MW(t) and a heat dump to the circulating water system of 1832.8

U
MW(t).

AN
Now consider a hot day when the water reservoir is at 30 ◦ C and the
M
condenser maintains the same TTD. The condenser conditions are now 53

◦
C and 14.2 kPa. This gives a turbine work of 830.3 kJ/kg and a steam
D

turbine exit quality of 71.3%. The efficiency drops to 33.3%. The electrical
TE

power output is now 942.7 MW(e) and the circulating water heat dump is
EP

1888.2 MW(t).

Consider also a nighttime temperature of 5 ◦ C. The efficiency will be

C

36.7%. The electrical power output will be 1038.4 MW(e) with a circulating
AC

water heat dump of 1794.1 MW(t).

29
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

3.3. The SCPP in a Combined Cycle

Now let us add a solar tower to the nominal LWR nuclear power plant

PT
to perform the function of waste heat removal. For a nominal 1000 MW(e)

RI
nuclear plant we will add a 200 MW(e) solar plant to dissipate waste heat

and produce additional electricity. Nominal conversion efficiency for the solar

SC
energy absorbed will be 8%. We will assume that the TTD for the collector

U
of the solar tower is the same at 23 ◦ C. We are now cooling the steam with

AN
air, but the heat exchanger (solar collector) is very large. However, the solar

collector will heat the air by an additional 20 ◦ C, and the solar collector heat
M
exchanger surface is another 10 ◦ C above the peak air temperature. So the

minimum condenser water temperature will be 23 + 20 + 10 = 53◦ C. Accord-

D

ingly, on a 30 ◦ C day the condenser steam temperature will be 83 ◦ C, and

TE

the pressure will be 53.2 kPa. The reactor will produce 828.6 MW(e) and
EP

the reactor efficiency will drop to 29.2%. But by rejecting the waste heat

to the solar collector, the solar system will now produce 360.3 MW(e) for a
C

nominal 200 MW solar tower. The total station power output will be 1188.9
AC

MW(e).

This gives a combined efficiency for the nuclear plus solar plant of 42.0%,

30
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

PT
RI
U SC
AN
M
D

Fig. 7. Thermal Power Plant efficiencies vs. Ambient Temperature.

TE

treating the solar energy input as free. The increase in efficiency is 8.7%

relative to the stand-alone nuclear plant.

EP

Similar efficiencies as a function of ambient temperatures are plotted in

C

Fig. 7 for the basic nuclear plant, the nuclear and solar plants combined
AC

during daylight operation, and the nuclear and solar plants combined during

nighttime operation. At the night time condition of 5 ◦ C, when the solar

tower receives no solar gain, the power produced by the SCPPS will be

31
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

146.6 MW(e) because it is being driven by the waste heat from the nuclear

plant that would normally go to the circulating water system. This gives an

PT
overall plant efficiency of 40.5%, or an increase of 3.8% over the stand-alone

RI
nuclear plant operating at night-time temperatures. These calculations are

summarized in Table 3. It is noteworthy that Fig. 7 shows a decrease for

SC
efficiency improvement with the combined cycle as the ambient temperature

U
increases, which suggests that use of the combined cycle in hot and arid

AN
environments might be advantageous. This advantage may be made even

more important when increased temperature due to climate change [35] is

M
taken into consideration.

Nuclear only Nuclear hot day Nuclear night Combined nominal Combined hot day Combined night
D

Ambient temperature (◦C) 15 30 5 15 30 5

TE

Throttle enthalpy (kJ/kg) 2769.9 2769.9 2769.9 2769.9 2769.9 2769.9

Condenser temperature (◦C) 38 53 28 68 83 38

Condensor pressure (kP a) 6.58 14.2 3.75 28.4 53.2 6.58

EP

Turbine exit quality 0.698 0.713 0.688 0.728 0.742 0.698

Nuclear plant efficiency 0.353 0.333 0.366 0.313 0.293 0.353

Combined efficiency 0.353 0.333 0.366 0.438 0.420 0.405

C

Nuclear plant power (M W (e)) 1000 942.7 1038.4 885.6 828.6 1000

Solar plant power (M W (e)) 0 0 0 355.8 360.3 146.6

AC

Total power (M W (e)) 1000 942.7 1038.4 1241.3 1188.9 1146.6

table. 3. Comparison of nuclear only power plant with combined nuclear and SCPPS

32
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

This analysis can be extended to smaller ratios of the SCPP power to

the power produced by the nuclear plant. The results are plotted in Fig. 8.

PT
One can see that the combined daytime efficiency increase falls considerably

RI
with a decrease in the solar plant design power. Realistic considerations for

sizing the SCPP should include efficiency (favoring larger sizes) and cost.

SC
Here applying the inflatable towers [8] could make larger solar components

U
more feasible by lowering the cost of construction.

AN
M
D
TE
C EP
AC

Fig. 8. Increase in efficiency vs. the output power of SCPPS.

33
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

It is interesting to note that even at night, the efficiency increases, but

the increase remains constant at about 4% even for smaller ratios of the solar

PT
tower power to the nuclear plant power. Only when the collector cooling can

RI
no longer maintain an exit TTD of 23 ◦ C will the efficiency gain drop. Given

the size of the required collectors, this will likely hold true down to relatively

SC
small SCPP. By adding the solar tower as both an energy producer and waste

U
heat absorber, the combined system has eliminated the need for a circulating

AN
water system. Thus the requirement to be located near a water supply has

been eliminated.
M
3.4. Economic Considerations
D

As the results in the previous subsection show, even a modestly-sized

TE

SCPP can increase the efficiency of a nuclear power plant – both during

the day and night-time operation. The boost in overall efficiency increases
EP

with the size of the SCPP, but from practical considerations, an optimal

size for the SCPP component of the combined plant likely exists. In fully
C

assessing the economic feasibility of the proposed combined cycle, costs must
AC

be compared between a power plant with a traditional cooling tower and

with a solar chimney. A full comparison should consider construction costs,

operation costs (including the cost of water), and the levelized electricity

34
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

cost, and deserves a thorough future study. Here we present a preliminary

assessment showing that the cycle we describe is likely not merely viable,

PT
but attractive from an economic standpoint. Here capital costs are the most

RI
important factor because they account for up to 74 % of the levelized cost of

nuclear power [36].

SC
Capital costs of modern nuclear power plants vary significantly – from

U
USD 2 billion to USD 9 billion per unit, and have undergone a dramatic

AN
recent escalation, particularly in the US and in France [37]. Thus providing

a realistic general capital-cost estimate for a nuclear power plant presents a

M
considerable challenge. A study of a large number of nuclear power plants,

both existing and under construction in the US and in Europe [38], provides
D

an average capital cost estimate of GBP 4,613 (USD 7,381 using the 2012
TE

conversion rate) per kW. For a 1000-MW power plant, that would mean the
EP

cost of USD 7.381 billion. Costs beyond the proper reactor, including the

land and the cooling tower, can account for up to half of the total amount [39].
C

Assuming a conservative estimate of the cooling tower and related systems

AC

comprising 15% of the cost of the plant, we arrive at a cost of USD 1.108

billion. Section 3 describes utilizing a 200-MW SCPP to dissipate the waste

heat. A careful 2005 estimate of the cost of a 200-MW SCPP using a rigid

35
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

tower is EU 606 million [40] (USD 770 million using the 2005 conversion rate,

or USD 960 million adjusted for inflation to 2017).

PT
Thus the capital cost of a traditional cooling tower and the cost of a rigid

RI
solar chimney-based cooling system are comparable. However, this does not

take into account the savings that can be achieved by switching to a non-

SC
rigid tower design. The rigid tower accounts for at least 28% of the total

U
cost of the SCPP [40] (USD 269 million). A cost estimate for a replacement

AN
inflatable tower serving the same 200-MW plant is USD 5 to 30 million

[17]. Replacing the traditional chimney with an inflatable one will also bring
M
considerable savings in foundation construction and transport costs. Thus

a solar chimney setup with an inflatable tower has the potential of both
D

increasing efficiency and decreasing the capital cost.

TE

3.5. Future Work

EP

Our immediate goal is to design a platform based on numerical and an-

alytical studies of all the components of the combined nuclear-solar thermal

C

cycle. Specifically, we will consider the waste heat recovery heat exchanger
AC

that gets the surplus heat from the cooling loop of the nuclear thermal cycle

and transfers it to the open air Brayton cycle of the SCPP. To have a better

understanding of the performance of the whole combined cycle, thermal/CFD

36
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

analysis will be performed for each of the components of the combined power

plant cycle (Fig. 9).

PT
The thermal analysis will be performed by applying an open source object-

RI
oriented package, Modelicablock diagram thermal analysis. MATLAB ther-

mal simulation also will be applied to perform code to code verification to

SC
evaluate the fidelity of our results. After performing the overall thermal/CFD

U
analysis with respect to the available thermal hydraulics values, the waste

AN
heat recovery heat exchanger (Fig. 4) will be designed, rated and simulated

based on ASME standards. Three-dimensional CFD/CHT simulations will

M
be performed to have a better understanding of this heat exchanger and

its thermal characteristics. Thermal/Structural fluid-solid interaction (FSI)

D

simulation will be performed to observe the thermal stresses and evaluate the
TE

exchanger for all cases. As a final note, tube buckling and leakage analysis
EP

will be performed with respect to the CFD/CHT outputs to have a reliable

design for the heat exchanger.

C
AC

4. Conclusion

A novel idea to use the available surplus heat (waste heat) from ther-

mal power plants for a solar chimney was presented to enhance the system

37
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

PT
RI
U SC
AN
M
D

Fig. 9. MATLAB thermal simulation block diagram for a typical steam power plant
TE

cycle.

efficiency compared to the traditional cooling setup. The possibility of this

EP

combined cycle was studied for a typical nuclear power plant. There also
C

exists a possibility of reducing the capital cost of combined cycles for power
AC

plants, such as nuclear power plants plus solar chimney power plants. The

total thermal efficiency of the combined thermal system can increase by up

to 8.7%, which is considerable for the electrical power industry and should

38
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

have a significant effect on capital cost and development of new generations

of power plants. Utilizing the harvestable power increases the output power

PT
of the Manzanares-type SCPP up to 150% annually. Another important ad-

RI
vantage of the combined thermal system described here is that it does not

require a body of water to provide cooling, and thus can be better suited for

SC
arid environments. This feature may become more important in the immedi-

U
ate future, as climate change is expected to lead to higher desertification of

AN
large areas. A detailed comparison of the technological complexity and cost

of operation of the SCPP versus the traditional nuclear plant cooling sys-
M
tem remains a task for the future, along with considering redundancies that

would need to be built into the combined nuclear-solar power plant. Use
D

of the recently proposed inflatable, free-standing chimney design is highly

TE

recommendable here both because it greatly reduces the SCPP cost and in-
EP

creases its survivability to adverse weather events.

C

5. Acknowledgment
AC

We would like to show our gratitude to Dr. Charles Forsberg, Depart-

ment of Nuclear Science Engineering, Massachusetts Institute of Technology

(MIT), for sharing many valuable insights with us during our work on this

39
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

paper.

PT
References

RI
[1] Trancik, Jessika E. ”Renewable energy: Back the renewables boom.”

Nature 507, no. 7492 (2014): 300-302.

SC
[2] US Department of Energy. Quadrennial Technology Review report, vol.

U
II Technology Assessments (US Department of Energy, 2015).

AN
https://energy.gov/sites/prod/files/2015/09/f26/

Quadrennial-Technology-Review-2015_0.pdf
M

[3] Hossin, Khaled, and Khamid Mahkamov. ”Performance Evaluation for

D

a 10 kW Solar Organic Rankine Cycle Power System to Operate in the

TE

UK Climate Conditions.” The European Conference on Sustainability,

Energy & the Environment 2015 Official Conference Proceedings.

EP

http://papers.iafor.org/papers/ecsee2015/ECSEE2015_15907.
C

pdf
AC

[4] Y. Hua, M. Oliphant and E. J. Hu, ”Development of renewable energy in

Australia and China: A comparison of policies and status,” Renewable

Energy, vol. 85, pp. 1044-1051, 2016.

40
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

[5] R. A. Kerr, ”Is battered arctic sea ice down for the count?,” Science,

vol. 318, pp. 33-34, 2007.

PT
[6] X. Zhou, F. Wang and R. M. Ochieng, ”A review of solar chimney power

RI
technology,” Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, vol. 14, p.

SC
23152338, 2010.

[7] K.-H. Kim, S. A. Jahan and E. Kabir, ”A review on human health

U
perspective of air pollution with respect to allergies and asthma,” Envi-
AN
ronment international, vol. 59, pp. 41-52, 2013.
M
[8] F. Caiazzo, A. Ashok, I. A. Waitz, S. H. Yim and S. R. Barrett, ”Air

pollution and early deaths in the United States. Part I: Quantifying the
D

impact of major sectors in 2005,” Atmospheric Environment, vol. 79,

TE

pp. 198-208, 2013.

EP

[9] A. Buttler, F. Dinkel, S. Franz and H. Spliethoff, ”Variability of wind

and solar powerAn assessment of the current situation in the European

C

Union based on the year 2014,” Energy, vol. 106, pp. 147-161, 2016.
AC

[10] X. Zhou, F. Wang and R. M. Ochieng, ”A review of solar chimney power

technology,” Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, vol. 14, p.

23152338, 2010.

41
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

[11] Padki, M. M., and S. A. Sherif. ”On a simple analytical model for solar

chimneys.” International Journal of Energy Research 23, no. 4 (1999):

PT
345-349.

RI
[12] Yan, M. Q., S. A. Sherif, G. T. Kridli, S. S. Lee, and M. M. Padki.

SC
”Thermo-fluid analysis of solar chimneys.” In Industrial Applications of

Fluid Mechanics-1991. Proceedings of the 112th ASME winter annual

U
meeting, Atlanta, GA, pp. 125-130. 1991.
AN
[13] Schlaich, J., R. Bergermann, W. Schiel, and G. Weinrebe. ”Design
M
of commercial solar updraft tower systems-Utilization of solar in-

duced convective flows for power generation.” Journal of Solar Energy

D

Engineering-Transactions of The ASME 127, no. 1 (2005): 117-124.

TE

[14] H. Kreetz, Theoretische Untersuchungen und Auslegung eines tempor-

EP

ren Wasserspeichers fr das Aufwindkraftwerk, Berlin: Technical Univer-

sity Berlin, 1997.

C

[15] A. B. Kasaeian, S. Molana, K. Rahmani and D. Wen, ”A review on solar

AC

chimney systems,” Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, vol. 67,

pp. 954-987, 2017.

42
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

[16] J. P. Pretorius, Optimization and control of a large-scale solar chimney

power plant, Stellenbosch: University of Stellenbosch, 2007.

PT
[17] Putkaradze, Vakhtang, Peter Vorobieff, Andrea Mammoli, and Nima

RI
Fathi. ”Inflatable free-standing flexible solar towers.” Solar Energy 98

SC
(2013): 85-98.

[18] Vorobieff, Peter, Andrea Mammoli, Nima Fathi, and Vakhtang

U
Putkaradze. ”Free-standing inflatable solar chimney: experiment and
AN
theory.” Bulletin of the American Physical Society 59 (2014).
M
[19] Nima Fathi, Peter Vorobief, Seyed Sobhan Aleyasin. ”V&V Exercise for

a Solar Tower Power Plant.” ASME Verication and Validation Sympo-

D

sium (2014).
TE

https://cstools.asme.org/csconnect/FileUpload.cfm?View=yes&
EP

ID=44167

[20] G. Manente, S. Rech and A. Lazzaretto, ”Optimum choice and place-

C

ment of concentrating solar power technologies in integrated solar com-

AC

bined cycle systems,” Renewable Energy, vol. 96, pp. 172-189, 2016.

[21] Forsberg, Charles W. ”Sustainability by combining nuclear, fossil, and

43
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

renewable energy sources.” Progress in Nuclear energy 51, no. 1 (2009):

192-200.

PT
[22] Forsberg, Charles, Lin-wen Hu, Per Peterson, and Kumar Sridharan.

RI
Fluoride-salt-cooled high-temperature reactor (FHR) for power and pro-

SC
cess heat. No. DOE/NEUP–11-3272; MIT-ANP-TR–157. Massachusetts

Inst. of Technology (MIT), Cambridge, MA (United States), 2015.

U
[23] Conklin, James C., and Charles W. Forsberg. ”Base-Load and Peak
AN
Electricity from a Combined Nuclear Heat and Fossil Combined-Cycle
M
Plant.” In Proceedings of GLOBAL 2007 conference on advanced nuclear

fuel cycles and systems. 2007.

D

[24] Zohuri, Bahman, and Nima Fathi. Thermal-hydraulic analysis of nuclear

TE

reactors. Springer International Publishing Switzerland., 2015.

EP

[25] Nikonowicz, Lukasz Bartosz, and Jaroslaw Milewski. ”Virtual Power

Plants-general review: structure, application and optimization.” Journal

C

of Power Technologies 92, no. 3 (2012): 135.

AC

[26] Guerrero, Josep M., L. Garcia De Vicuna, Jos Matas, Miguel Castilla,

and Jaume Miret. ”A wireless controller to enhance dynamic perfor-

44
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

mance of parallel inverters in distributed generation systems.” IEEE

Transactions on power electronics 19, no. 5 (2004): 1205-1213.

PT
[27] Marnay, Chris, Giri Venkataramanan, Michael Stadler, Afzal S. Sid-

RI
diqui, Ryan Firestone, and Bala Chandran. ”Optimal technology selec-

SC
tion and operation of commercial-building microgrids.” IEEE Transac-

tions on Power Systems 23, no. 3 (2008): 975-982.

U
[28] Pensini, Alessandro, Matthew Robinson, Nicholas Heine, Michael
AN
Stadler, and Andrea Mammoli. ”Assessment of grid-friendly collective
M
optimization framework for distributed energy resources.” In Power and

Energy Society General Meeting (PESGM), 2016, pp. 1-5. IEEE, 2016.
D

[29] Ming, Tingzhen, Wei Liu, Yuan Pan, and Guoliang Xu. ”Numerical
TE

analysis of flow and heat transfer characteristics in solar chimney power

EP

plants with energy storage layer.” Energy Conversion and Management

49, no. 10 (2008): 2872-2879.

C

[30] Fathi, Nima, Seyed Sobhan Aleyasin, and Peter Vorobieff. ”Numeri-
AC

calanalytical assessment on Manzanares prototype.” Applied Thermal

Engineering 102 (2016): 243-250.

45
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

[31] Wilcox, David C. ”Turbulence modeling for CFD.” Vol. 2. La Canada,

CA: DCW industries, 1998.

PT
[32] Fathi, Nima, Patrick McDaniel, Charles Forsberg, and Cassiano

RI
de Oliveira. ”Nuclear Systems for a Low Carbon Electrical Grid.”

SC
In 2016 24th International Conference on Nuclear Engineering, pp.

V001T03A007-V001T03A007. American Society of Mechanical Engi-

U
neers, 2016.

AN
[33] Wilson, David Gordon, and Theodosios Korakianitis. ”The design of

high-efficiency turbomachinery and gas turbines.” MIT press, 2014.

M

[34] Walsh, Philip P., and Paul Fletcher. Gas turbine performance. John
D

Wiley & Sons, 2004.

TE

[35] Seager, Richard, Haibo Liu, Naomi Henderson, Isla Simpson, Colin Kel-
EP

ley, Tiffany Shaw, Yochanan Kushnir, and Mingfang Ting. ”Causes of

increasing aridification of the Mediterranean region in response to rising

C

greenhouse gases.” Journal of Climate 27, no. 12 (2014): 4655-4676.

AC

[36] US Energy Information Administration. “Levelized Cost and Levelized

Avoided Cost of New Generation Resources in the Annual Energy

Outlook 2017.” AEO2017 Levelized Costs (2017).

46
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

https://www.eia.gov/outlooks/aeo/pdf/electricity_

generation.pdf

PT
[37] Lovering, Jessica R., Arthur Yip, and Ted Nordhaus. ”Historical con-

RI
struction costs of global nuclear power reactors.” Energy Policy 91

SC
(2016): 371-382.

[38] Harris, Grant, Phil Heptonstall, Robert Gross, and David Handley.

U
”Cost estimates for nuclear power in the UK.” Energy Policy 62 (2013):

431-442.
AN
M
[39] Schlissel, David, and Bruce Biewald. ”Nuclear power plant construction

costs.” Synapse Energy Economics Inc (2008): 2008-07.

D
TE

[40] Schlaich, Jorg, Rudolf Bergermann, Wolfgang Schiel, and Gerhard Wein-

rebe. ”Design of commercial solar updraft tower systemsutilization of

EP

solar induced convective flows for power generation.” Journal of Solar

Energy Engineering 127, no. 1 (2005): 117-124.

C
AC

47
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

Highlights

 Solar chimney power plant system (SCPPS) was introduced to nuclear power plant
instead of cooling tower as a combined cycle.

PT
 Computational fluid dynamics (CFD) and thermal analysis were performed to model and

RI
simulate this combined cycle.

 By applying this idea to a typical 1000 MW nuclear power plant with a nominal 35.3%

SC
thermal efficiency, its efficiency can be increased to 42.0%.

 The presented combined cycle is advantageous in environments where water is scarce.

U
AN
M
D
TE
C EP
AC