1 s2.0 S0960148124005627 Main

Renewable Energy 227 (2024) 120497
Contents lists available at ScienceDirect
Renewable Energy
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/renene
Techno-exergy-economic assessment of humidification-dehumidification/

reverse osmosis hybrid desalination system integrated with
concentrated photovoltaic/thermal
Mark M. Fares a, b, Xing Ju a, *, E. Elgendy c, M. Fatouh b, Heng Zhang a, Chao Xu a, Mostafa
M. Abd El-Samie b
a
Key Laboratory of Power Station Energy Transfer Conversion and System of MOE, North China Electric Power University, Beijing, 102206, PR China
b
Mechanical Power Engineering Department, Helwan University, Cairo, 11718, Egypt
c
Mechanical Engineering Department, College of Engineering and Technology-Cairo Campus, Arab Academy for Science, Technology and Maritime, Cairo, Egypt
A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T
Keywords: Desalination is a process used to generate water for human consumption, irrigation, or industrial purposes.
Solar hybrid desalination Assessment of desalination plants is crucial for freshwater productivity, energy consumption, exergy destruction,
Concentrated photovoltaic/thermal and economic feasibility calculations. Therefore, the study aims to conduct a technical, exergy, and economic
Humidification dehumidification
analysis of a concentrated photovoltaic/thermal hybrid humidification-dehumidification reverse osmosis desa
Reverse osmosis
lination system. The photovoltaic/thermal provides the electrical and thermal requirements for the hybrid
Exergy
Economics desalination unit. Theoretical models for each unit are developed and integrated using the Engineering Equation
Energy recovery Solver software. The sensitivity of system performance parameters was investigated under different climatic and
operation factors. The analysis shows that the system produces 860 L per hour at the lowest specific energy
consumption and water cost (3.3 kW-hours per cubic meter and 0.916 United States dollars per cubic meter),
respectively, with a cost payback period of only 12 years compared to other green-powered desalination systems.
The highest destruction portion of 84.6 % is at photovoltaic/thermal, while the largest cost portion of 68 % is at
reverse osmosis. Productivity, energy consumption, and water cost are influenced by feed salinity, while
destruction is most affected by solar irradiance. Ambient temperature, wind speed, and cooling fluid flow rate
slightly affect the techno-exergy-economics of the system.
and photovoltaic (PV)- reverse osmosis (RO) desalination were con

ducted to enhance the understanding of HDH-RO hybridization. The
1. Introduction
investigations explored the impact of seawater flow rate, HDH
condensation temperature, PV/T coolant flow rate, and CPV/T outlet
The increasing global demand for potable water, driven by popula
temperature on productivity and key performance parameters such as
tion growth, urbanization, industrialization, and agricultural needs, has
recovery ratio and specific energy consumption (SEC). Pourafshar et al.
focused on desalination as an effective solution in arid and semi-arid
[7] recommend a seawater flow rate of 0.15 kg/s and a condensation
regions [1]. Desalination processes efficiently produce clean water
temperature of 25 ◦ C for PV/T HDH in regions with abundant seawater,
from brackish or saline sources, offering a reliable, economical, and
aiming for optimal freshwater production and energy consumption.
sustainable solution to address the ongoing challenges of water scarcity
Anand and Murugavelh [8] developed a mathematical model of
worldwide [2,3]. Solar desalination has become a sustainable and
PV/T–HDH, indicating that higher flow rates decrease water outlet
friendly environmental solution at the intersection of energy and water
temperature, with a nominal effect on PV efficiency afar 110 kg/h. The
needs, especially in remote regions of developing countries [4]. Photo
PV/T-RO desalination system optimally combines electrical and thermal
voltaic/thermal (PV/T) produces electrical energy to drive membrane
energy, making it more efficient than the separate use of PV panels and
desalination, and the recovered thermal energy from PV cells can drive
solar thermal collectors for enhanced RO performance [9]. PV/T-RO
low-grade thermal desalination [5,6].
outperforms PV-RO, providing a 40 % increase in freshwater yield
Parametric studies of PV/T-humidification dehumidification (HDH)
* Corresponding author.
E-mail address: [email protected] (X. Ju).
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2024.120497
Received 29 December 2023; Received in revised form 12 March 2024; Accepted 12 April 2024
Available online 17 April 2024
0960-1481/© 2024 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
M.M. Fares et al. Renewable Energy 227 (2024) 120497
Abbreviations Tref Photovoltaic reference temperature (K)

h Specific enthalpy (J/kg)
CPV/T Concentrated photovoltaic/thermal q specific heat transfer (j/kg)
HDH Humidification dehumidification desalination unit Q̇H Heater thermal power (W)
RO Reverse osmosis desalination unit Ra2 Coefficient of multiple determinations
EES Engineering Equation Solver Ẇp Power (kW)
PV/T Photovoltaic/thermal Q Volume flow rate (L/h)
PV Photovoltaic RR Recovery Ratio
SEC Specific energy consumption ex Specific exergy (J/kg)
ERT Energy recovery turbine Ėx Total exergy rate (W)
PX Pressure exchanger s Specific entropy (J/kg.K)
SWRO Seawater reverse osmosis
ĖxD Exergy destruction rate (W)
HRSG Heat recovery steam generator
KU Radiation exergy factor
MED Multi-effect desalination
εpv Photovoltaic emittance
CEPCI Chemical engineering plant cost index
y(x) Best-fit factor
LCOW Levelized cost of water
ERD Energy recovery device f ν,c Geometric factor of the radiation emitted
PTC Parabolic trough collector fν Geometrical factor of concentrated solar radiation
CAOW Closed-air open water fs Geometrical factor of the solar disk
NaCl Sodium chloride PBp Payback period (years)
MR Water to air mass flow ratio fa Plant availability (%)
EVA Ethylene vinyl acetate i Actual interest rate (%)
GOR Gain output ratio ΔP Pressure difference (kPa)
SWM Spiral wound module Z Cost ($)
ε-NTU Effectiveness of the number of Transfer Units Can,tot Total annual cost ($/y)
ROSA Reverse osmosis system analysis AWP Annual freshwater productivity (m3/y)
FF Fouling factor n Plant lifetime (years)
TCF Temperature correction factor if Interest rate (%)
CPF Concentration polarization factor f Inflation rate (%)
C.V Control volume OMC Operation and maintenance cost
CRF Capital recovery factor CF Cash flow ($)
SV Salvage value Subscripts
Symbols abs Absorbed
ExD Exergy destruction rate (kW) g1 First glass cover
C Concentration ratio g2 Second glass cover
NC Number of PV panels g Glass
Rec Collector optical efficiency Cond Conduction
L Photovoltaic Length (m) Conv Convection
W Photovoltaic width (m) rad Radiation
T Temperature (0C) E1 First EVA layer
Si Salinity (kgs/kgw) E2 Second EVA layer
Sfw Freshwater salt concentration ratio (ppm) E3 Third EVA layer
RH Relative humidity (%) all all system
Ni Number of membrane elements amb Ambient
Se Membrane active area (m2) ref Reference
Aperm Membrane permeability (L/m2.h.bar) coll Collector
Bsalt Salt permeability (m/d) w Wall
p Pressure (N/m2) f Fluid
G Solar irradiance (W/m2) F Feed
ṁ Mass flow ratio (kg/h) i Insulation
hfg Latent heat of condensation (J/kg) fw Freshwater
hconv Convection heat transfer coefficient (W/m2) sw Seawater
hcond Conduction heat transfer coefficient (W/m2) RO Reverse osmosis desalination unit
hrad Radiation heat transfer coefficient (W/m2) HDH Humidification dehumidification desalination unit
hwind Wind heat transfer coefficient (W/m2) mu makeup saline water
Vwind Wind Speed (m/s) th Thermal
hf HTF’s heat transfer coefficient (W/m2) f,i HTF inlet
hi Radiation heat transfer coefficient at insulation(W/m2) f,o HTF outlet
Ud Overall heat transfer coefficient (W/K) PV Photovoltaic
Acoll Solar collector area (m2) e Electric
K Thermal conductivity (W/m.k) 1w Dehumidifier inlet saline water
Q̇th Thermal power (W) 2w Dehumidifier outlet saline water
Cp Specific heater (j/kg.k) 3w HDH Heater outlet
APV Photovoltaic surface area (m2) 4w HDH Brine outlet
5w HDH freshwater outlet
2
1a Dehumidifier inlet air m Motor

2a Dehumidifier outlet air ph Physical
R1 Makeup water inlet ch Chemical
R2 RO feed in PO Potential
R3 Fresh water outlet KE Kinetic
R4 Brine water disposal Q Heat transfer
C1 CPV/T inlet W Work
C2 CPV/T outlet II Second low
C3 CPV/T pump inlet op Optical
PX,1 PX low-pressure side inlet P Pump
PX,2 PX high-pressure side outlet use Useful
PX,3 PX low-pressure side outlet Mem Membrane
th thermal An annual
hum Humidifier PC Plant cost
deh Dehumidifier Fu Future
opt Optimum Greek Symbols
max Maximum β Temperature coefficient of PV (1/K)
tot Total α Absorbitivity
Cons Consumption τ Transmittance
RCP Recirculating pump ω Relative humidity (kgw/kga)
AB Air Blower ε Heat exchange effectiveness
F,RO Reverse Osmosis feed η Efficiency
P Permeate μi Chemical potential
b brine σ Boltzmann constant (J/K)
fb Feed to brine ρ Density (kg/m3)
HPP High-pressure pump ν Viscosity (pa.s)
ERD Energy recovery device π Osmotic pressure (bar)
hyd Hydraulic ρi The density of water at any salt concentration
with a 2 % reduction in energy consumption [10]. Kelly et al. [11] Ammous and Chaabene expose that PVT-RO is cheaper than PV-RO
investigated the coupling of concentrator mirrors with PV/T and desalination as low-cost cells can be used with cooling [22]. The inte
revealed that concentrated mirrors raised PV/T-RO freshwater output gration of PV/T with RO reduces collector area by up to 30 % compared
by 57 %. Moreover, the HDH-RO hybrid desalination system was found to standalone PV-RO setups, leading to cost savings [23].
to generate 38 % more freshwater compared to solar-powered RO sys The literature shows that integrating hybrid HDH-RO desalination
tems [12]. Utilizing the energy recovery turbine (ERT) and pressure with CPV/T excels in cost-effective, eco-friendly freshwater production
exchanger (PX) at the RO unit led to a significant reduction in the total and outperforms solar-driven RO systems in efficiency and output. Also,
power consumption of the seawater reverse osmosis (SWRO) desalina most performance evaluation parameters used before were freshwater
tion, with approximately 30 % and 50 % reductions, respectively [13]. productivity, SEC, and freshwater unit cost. Several research gaps need
From an exergic analysis perspective, the hybrid system, including to be addressed in this study. For example, (a) Multiple climatic and
the heat recovery steam generator (HRSG) and HDH desalination units, operation parameters not mentioned before requiring thorough inves
shows that the stack and afterburner are the most exergy-destructive tigation, (b) The techno-exergy analysis, (c) techno-economics aspects of
components, with values of 233.3 kW and 173.3 kW, respectively this system have not been previously addressed, (d) A sensitivity anal
[14]. RO desalination exergy efficiency improved by 49 % with ERT and ysis of the system’s performance evaluation indices concerning climatic
77 % with PX, leading to a 40 % reduction in exergy destruction for ERT and operating parameters.
and 53 % for PX [13]. In addition, the reverse osmosis unit achieves its The current study explores novel aspects and objectives in areas with
highest efficiency, approximately 16 %, when a pressure exchanger is limited existing research, specifically: (1) introducing an enhanced
employed as an energy recovery device [15]. Also, The combined power CPV/T standalone model for hybrid HDH-RO desalination utilizing mass
plant with multi-effect desalination (MED)-RO desalination has exergy and energy recovery (RO-PX) cascading, (2) Examine system perfor
efficiency of RO (19 %), MED plants (31 %), and condensers (34 %) [16]. mance evaluation parameters like productivity, freshwater salinity, and
A.E. Kabeel et al. revealed that, In summer, the exergy loss rate surpasses SEC under updated climatic factors, including ambient temperature and
autumn and spring by approximately 33 % and exceeds winter by wind speed, along with new operating parameters such as feed water
around 60 %. Additionally, the exergoeconomic parameter decreases as salinity and high-pressure pump efficiency, (3) Creating an exergy
the interest rates increase [17]. Moreover, the hybrid HDH-RO system, model to perform exergy balance and techno-exergy analysis, (4)
incorporating a pressure exchanger, achieves the highest gained output Creating an economic model to perform cost balance and techno-
ratio and second-law efficiency, surpassing HDH-RO with a Pelton tur economic analysis under accurate equipment cost values using the
bine and simple HDH-RO [18]. chemical engineering plant cost index (CEPCI), (5) A sensitivity analysis
The studies conclude that the integration of HDH and RO with CPV/T of system most crucial evaluation parameters such as Productivity, SEC,
technologies offers a cost-effective and ecologically sustainable exergy destruction (ExD), and levelized cost of water (LCOW) under
approach. PV/T panels demonstrate more economic feasibility different climatic and operating parameters.
compared to traditional solar thermal systems, particularly in regions The paper is organized as follows. Section 2 provides a detailed
with high electricity costs [8,19,20]. The CPV/T HDH system is a system description and configuration of the CPV/T hybrid HDH-RO
cost-competitive option for small-scale applications, outperforming desalination unit. In section 3, energy, exergy, and economic modeling
other HDH systems and solar stills [21]. PV/T HDH systems provide a of the CPV/T hybrid HDH-RO system are created. Section 4 defines the
cost-effective solution for freshwater and power production [7,19]. current system performance evaluation parameters. Section 5 presents
3
Fig. 1. Schematic diagram of the proposed system.
the solution procedure and the sensitivity analysis of the present work. 2.1. Concentrated photovoltaic/thermal collectors
Section 6 validates the proposed model and provides results and dis
cussions. Finally, in section 7, the conclusions and findings of this study The CPV/T unit comprises a solar concentrator, specifically a com
are summarized. pound parabolic concentrated (CPC), and a receiver (PV/T module)
divided into six sections, as illustrated in Fig. 2a [25]. Solar irradiance
2. System description and configuration concentrated by the CPC is directed onto the PV/T panel, generating
electricity. Cooling water on the back of the monocrystalline PV cells
In this section, details of the CPV/T hybrid HDH-RO system are dissipates heat, which improves electric performance and prevents
introduced. The present study investigates a hybrid desalination system overheating. The waste heat that can be recovered from this process is a
of humidification, dehumidification, and reverse osmosis driven by valuable low-grade energy source. More details, such as geometrical and
concentrated photovoltaic/thermal to desalinate seawater. Saline water optical specifications, are given by Mark M. Fares et al. [24,25].
enters the HDH desalination system at inlet feed water conditions. The
excess heat and saline water from the HDH process were combined with
make-up saline water and fed to the RO system with an energy recovery 2.2. Humidification-dehumidification unit
device (ERD) system as the inlet feed, enhancing the RO system’s per
formance. The system schematic diagram of those three subsystems is The closed-air open water (CAOW) HDH system comprises two
shown in Fig. 1. The CPV/T module, with a direct cooling method, loops: a water loop and an air loop, as shown in Fig. 1 under subsystem
powers a single-stage water-heated HDH system and a three-membrane (2). Saline water undergoes pretreatment via micron filtration to remove
module RO system with an ERD in the form of a pressure exchanger (PX) suspended solids. It is then preheated in the dehumidifier pipes at state
[24]. Next, comprehensive explanations and models will be provided for point (1W), recovering thermal energy from humid air. After preheating,
each subsystem. the water flows to the CPV/T HDH heat exchanger, connecting the CPV/
T and HDH systems and picking up heat from the CPV/T cooling process.
Hot water exits the heater at state point (3W) and is sprayed in the
4
Table 2
CPV/T hybrid HDH-RO desalination system energy balance and modeling
equations.
Energy Balance Description and notes
Concentrated photovoltaic/thermal [25] -Energy balance at

C.V1: qabs,g1 + qcond,PV− g1 = qconv,1 + qrad,1 qabs,g1 = first glass C.V1
Rec .C.G.αg , qcond,PV− g1 = Ug (TPV − Tg1 )qconv,1 = Absorption, convection,
hwind (Tg1 − Tamb ), hwind = 2.8 + 3Vwind , qrad,1 = hg (Tg1 − and radiation at first
( 4 ) glass cover (g1).
Tg1 − T4sky
Tsky ), Tsky = 0.0552T1.5 amb hg = σ .εg1 . -Energy balance at
Tg1 − Tsky
second glass C.V2
C.V2: qabs,PV = qcond,PV− + qcond,PV− g2 qabs,PV = Rec .C.G.
g1 Energy absorbed by the
τg .αPV .(1 − ηe,PV ), qcond,PV−
g2 = Uc .(TPV − Tg2 ) PV cell and conduction
C.V3: qcond,PV− g2 = qcond,g2− w qcond,g2− w = Ug2− w .(Tg2 − bet. the second glass
( )
lg2 lE3 lw − 1 cover (g2) and PV.
Tw ), Ug2− w = + +
kg2 kE3 kw -Energy balance at the
C.V4: qcond,g2− w = qconv,w− f + qcond,w− i , qcond,w− i = Uw− i . PV C.V3
(
lw
)
li − 1 The second cover glass
(Tw − Ti ), qconv,w− f = hf .(Tw − Tf )Uw− i = + , Conduction with PV and
kw ki
Nuf .kf cooling structure wall
hf = (w)
Dh
ṁc .Cp .dTf -Energy balance at the
C.V5: qf,i + qconv,w− f = qf,o qf,o − qf,i = cooling fluid C.V4
W.dx
C.V6: qcond,w− i = qconv,i + qrad,i qconv,i = hwind (Ti − Tamb ), Conduction bet wall and
( 4
Ti − T4amb
) insulation, convection
qrad,i = hi (Ti − Tamb )hi = σ.εi . bet. cooling fluid and
Ti − Tamb
cooling structure wall
Q̇th = ṁc .Cp .(Tf,o − Tf,i )
(w)
Pelec = Rec .C.G.APV .ηe,PV
-Energy balance at the
ṁc .Cp .(Tf,o − Tf,i )
ηth = cooling structure wall
C.G.AColl (w) C.V5
ηelec = ηref .[1 − β(TPV − Tref )] Differential heat
transfer flux of HTF at
inlet and outlet of CPV/
Fig. 2. CPV/T subsystem (a) Layout. (b) Heat balance theoretical model. T (Mass balance ṁf,i =
ṁf,o )
-Energy balance at
Table 1 insulation C.V6
Convection and
CPV/T HDH-RO main specification and input known parameters [24].
radiation bet. insulation
Input Variable Value Unit and ambient.
-CPV/T thermal power
CPV/T
output
•Number of PV panels (NC) (series x parallel) 6 x 5 = 30 cell
-CPV/T electric power
•Concentration Ratio (C) 3
output
•Collector optical efficiency (Rec) 88 %
-CPV/T thermal
•Length of the cell (L) 1.56 m
efficiency
•Width of the cell (W) 0.156 m
-CPV/T electric power
•CPV/T & cooling fluid properties (k, α, τ, ε,.etc) Ref. [25] –
output
HDH
0 Humidification dehumidification [29] ṁa .(h2a − -Energy balance at the
•Evaporative temperature (T3w) 55 C
h1a ) = ṁ1w .(h2w − h1w ) + ṁ5w .h5w dehumidifier (Mass
•Feed water salinity (S1w) 35–50 gs/kgw
ṁa .(h2a − h1a ) = ṁ3w h3w − ṁ4w .h4w balance ṁ5w = ṁa .
•Humidifier effectiveness (εhum) 85 %
ṁsw .(h3w − h2w ) = ṁc .Cp .(Tf,o − Tf,i ) (ω2a − ω1a ))
•Dehumidifier effectiveness (εdeh) 85 %
T3w − T2w -Energy balances at
•Relative humidity (RH) 90 % MR = ṁ1w /ṁa , εHeater = , εdeh = max〈
Tf,o − T2w the humidifier (Mass
RO h2a − h1a h2w − h1w h2a − h1a balance ṁ4w = ṁ3w −
, 〉, εhum = max〈 ,
•Number of membrane elements (Ni) in series 3 Units h2a − h1a,ideal h2w,ideal − h1w h2a,ideal − h1a ṁ5w )
•Membrane active area (Se) 35 m2 h3w − h4w -Energy balance at the
•Membrane permeability (Aperm) 3.039E7 m3/m2.h.bar h3w − h4w,ideal
〉 heater (Mass balance
•Salt permeability (Bsalt) 1.7E-8 m/h QHeater = ṁ1w .(h3w − h2w ) ṁfw,HDH = ṁ5w = ṁa .(ω2a − ṁ3w = ṁ2w , ṁC2 = ṁC3 )
•Feed pressure (pf) 50 bars ω1a ) -Mass ratio, heater,
•Permeate pressure (pp) 1 bar ṁfw,HDH ṁfw,HDH ∗ hfg,HDH dehumidifier, and
•High-pressure pump efficiency (ηHPP ) 60 to 82 % RRHDH = , GORHDH = , humidifier
ṁ1W QHeater
•Pressure exchanger efficiency (ηPX ) 95 % Qfw,HDH effectiveness.
SECHDH = -Heater thermal power
Pin,HDH
-Freshwater
humidifier, where some evaporates to humidify the air, and the rest productivity
-Recovery ratio, gain
becomes brine at point (4W). The humid air exits at point (2a) and enters
output ratio, and
the dehumidifier, where water vapor condenses into freshwater at point specific energy
(5W). The dry air is recirculated to the humidifier to repeat the cycle. consumption
Reverse osmosis [30] -Freshwater volume

2.3. Reverse osmosis unit (
Qfw,RO = Aperm .Se .TCF.FF. Pf,RO −
ΔPfb
− Pfw,RO −
flow rate
2 -Freshwater salinity
πf,RO + πb )
CPF. -Temperature
A mixing chamber connects the HDH and RO units, facilitating the 2
+ πfw,RO
correction factor and
recovery of brine water and thermal energy from HDH, thus raising the
(continued on next page)
temperature of the RO feedwater and enhancing RO productivity. The
5
Table 2 (continued ) • The effectiveness of the humidifier and dehumidifier is 85 %, while

Energy Balance Description and notes the heat exchanger is 80 % [24,32].
( )] • The inlet feed seawater has a 30–50 g/kg salinity based on NaCl salt
[ Sfb concentration
Sfw,RO = Bsalt .Se .TCF. CPF. TCF =
polarization factor
analysis [24,33].
Qfw,RO
⎧ [ (
1 1
) ]
-The osmotic pressure • In the absorber (humidifier), saline water and air are at counter-
⎪ exp 2640 , Tf,RO > 25o C
⎪
⎨ −
298 273 + Tf,RO and pressure drop along current flow, brine exits from the bottom of the column, hot humid
[ ( ) ], RO membrane air exits from the top, and then enters the dehumidifier with relative
⎩ exp 3020 1 − 1
⎪
⎪
, Tf,RO < 25o C elements.
298 273 + Tf,RO humidity of 90 % [24].
-Pressure exchanger
CPF = e(0.7RRRO ) efficiency • All control volumes are analyzed based on the adiabatic condition
⎧ Si (T + 320)
⎪
⎨ , Si < 20000ppm -RO mass salt balance assumption [29,34].
491000
πi = , Δpfb = Mass balance (ṁf,RO = • The compressor and pump operate with specific values of isentropic
⎩ 0.117Si − 34 (T + 320)
⎪
ṁfw,RO + ṁb )
14.23
.
345
, Si > 20000ppm efficiencies [24].
-RO recovery ratio and
( )
Qf,RO + Qb 1.7 • The minimum inlet seawater temperature to the dehumidifier ranges
0.756 specific energy
2 consumption from 10 to 40 ◦ C, and the maximum water temperature is 55 ◦ C [24,
∑
(V̇P) 35].
out
ηpx = ∑ ṁf,RO Sf,RO = ṁfw,RO Sfw,RO + ṁb Sfw,RO • Solar irradiance availability is assumed to be 10 h daily for calcu
(V̇P)
in
lation purposes [36].
ṁfw,RO Qfw,RO
RRRO = , SECRO =
ṁf,RO Pin,RO
3.1.1. Concentrated photovoltaic/thermal unit

model includes a single-stage three-element SWRO system with a pres
Thirty CPV/T cells in series/parallel configurations were used to drive
sure exchanger (PX) as the energy recovery device, illustrated in Fig. 1
the hybrid desalination system based on specific considerations. Six CPV/
subsystem three. Spiral-wound Filmtec (SW30HR-380) membranes are
T cells are connected in series to satisfy the thermal energy demands of the
used, and detailed membrane properties can be found on the Filmetec
HDH system under typical conditions. Furthermore, five CPV/T cells are
company website and in the Dow handbook [26]. Mixing brine and
connected in parallel to guarantee the power provided for high-pressure
thermal waste from HDH with saline makeup water at (R1) results in an
pump operation in the RO system [24]. Haiping et al. [25] formulated
increased RO feedwater temperature at (R2), improving recovery and
thermodynamic and heat transfer models for CPV/T, which are employed
reducing brine disposal for a lower environmental impact. A
in this system. The governing equations and heat balance employed in
high-pressure pump pressurizes the stream for desalination, producing
these models are detailed in Table 2 and Fig. 2b, respectively.
permeate water at (R3), while the rejected saline water is discharged to
PX to recover the brine hydraulic power and then disposed into the
3.1.2. Humidification dehumidification (water heated) unit
environment at (R4).
The HDH model was constructed by applying mass and energy bal
The CPV/T hybrid HDH-RO desalination main specifications and
ance analyses on each HDH component. The equations utilized in this
input parameters are further evaluated and summarized in Table 1.
mathematical analysis are outlined in Table 2. Parameters such as
dehumidifier inlet water temperature (minimum temperature), humid
3. Mathematical modeling
ifier inlet water temperature (maximum evaporated temperature), hu
midifier effectiveness, and dehumidifier effectiveness are taken into
The CPV/T hybrid HDH-RO theoretical model was developed by
account when evaluating freshwater productivity and other perfor
employing mass, energy, and exergy balance equations to the EES
mance indicators for the HDH unit. The thermal analysis of the heat
software [27,28]. This model assesses the hybrid system from a
exchanger has been assessed using the ε-NTU method. Consequently, the
techno-exergy-economic perspective.
effectiveness of the heater (εHeater) and the energy balance equation are
provided by Mark M. Fares et al. [24].
3.1. Energy analysis GOR plays a pivotal role in assessing the performance of the HDH
unit. Numerous GOR-dependent parameters, including inlet feed water
The energy model is created through mass and energy balance temperature (T1w), maximum evaporative temperature (T3w), dehu
equations for each subsystem component, as listed in Table 2. The midifier effectiveness (εdeh), humidifier effectiveness (εhum), and mass
detailed calculation flow chart offers a comprehensive illustration of the ratio (MR), were taken into account. A novel polynomial parametric
mathematical modeling process, including input data and variable pa equation has been developed to determine the optimal MR at which the
rameters presented by Mark. M. Fares et al. [24]. The feed saline water is maximum GOR is achieved, with a high multi-correlation factor (Ra2) of
described by two primary characteristics: temperature and salinity. 0.99, as Mark M. Fares et al. [24] mentioned. The optimized model es
Salinity measurements are obtained through Sodium chloride (NaCl) timates MRopt for specific conditions, including humidifier and dehu
analysis. Additionally, the model takes into account significant envi midifier effectiveness of 0.85, a maximum evaporative temperature of
ronmental factors that influence the system’s operation, such as solar 55 ◦ C, and saline feed water temperature ranging from 10 to 40 ◦ C at
irradiance, inlet seawater temperature, ambient temperature, and wind various CPV/T thermal power.
speed [24].
Energy calculations for the CPV/T hybrid HDH-RO desalination 3.1.3. Reverse osmosis unit
system were made according to the following assumptions. Rooted in mass and energy balance, delineate RO mixer design for
mulas. In RO systems, where constant pressure and variable solar-
• All thermodynamic processes operate at steady state conditions [29, powered electrical input are the norm, the feed flow rate of saline
31]. water to the RO is linked to the electrical power input to the RO system,
• Negligible heat losses from ducts/pipes, humidifier, dehumidifier, as discussed by Mark M. Fares et al. [24]. The RO model calculates
and the sides of CPVT collectors [21]. freshwater productivity, accounting for CPV/T electrical output power
• The condensed water in the dehumidifier is at a temperature that while subtracting HDH and CPV/T auxiliary power consumption. The
equals the average of the exit air’s dry-bulb temperature and the mathematical equations for determining freshwater productivity,
dew-point temperature of the air at the inlet [31]. salinity, and recovery ratio can be found in Table 2, created by Ahmed
• No air or water leakage from the system [21]. Altaee [30].
6
Table 3
Table 5
Eq (11) constants.
Model economic parameters.
Constant Value
Parameter Symbol Initial value Ref.
a 1.332
b 26.665 Plant lifetime n 20 (years) [49,51–53,63]
c 34.520 Plant availability fav 90 % [55]
d 287.365 Interest rate if 10 % [18]
e 352.334 Inflation rate f 4.4 % [56]
f − 302.764
g − 723.871
h 43.879
i 335.755 Table 6
j − 13.253 Economic model values at a specific point of (G = 800W/m2, Tamb = 270C, Vwind
= 1 m/s, T1w = 250C, S1w = 35 g/kg, Qc = 70L/h, ηHPP = 70 %).
Parameter Unit Values
Table 4 Total plant cost $ 25,194
CEPCI values of system equipment based on a specific year. Real interest rate % 5.36
Capital recovery factor – 0.082
Equipment Base year CEPCI Ref.
Annual plant cost $ 2084
CPV/T receiver 2006 478.7 [53] Annual operational & maintenance cost $ 416.9
CPV/T-HDH feed Pump 2013 567.3 [58] Future salvage value $ 5039
Dehumidifier 2020 610 [49] Sink fund factor – 0.029
Humidifier 2020 610 [49] Annual Salvage value $ 146.6
Blower 2001 396 [59] Annual production m3 /y 2569
Heat Exchanger 2023 756 [60] Water cost $/m3 0.916
RO treatment 2018 603.1 [61] Payback period Years 12
High-pressure Pump 2013 567.3 [62]
RO Membrane 2013 567.3 [62]
Pressure exchanger (PX) 2013 567.3 [62]
Ėx = ṁ ∗ ex (5)
3.2. Exergy analysis Exergy functions are determined by both the initial system state and
the environmental state. Nevertheless, when the environmental state is
Exergy represents the maximum potential work achievable during a defined (P0, T0, S0), exergy depends exclusively on the system’s initial
system’s transition from its initial state to the environmental (dead) conditions (Pi, Ti, Si).
state. The point at which the system reaches the environmental state is Following the second law of thermodynamics, Eq. (6) mathemati
considered the dead state. Total exergy consists of four components: cally represents the exergy balance.
physical, chemical, potential, and kinetic exergy. Neglect both potential ∑ ∑
ĖxQ + ṁin exin = ṁout exout + ĖxW + ĖxD (6)
and kinetic exergy as neglecting both potential and kinetic energies and
consider both physical and chemical exergy as described by Eq. (1).
Where the ĖxQ is the exergy rate of the heat transfer in (W), the ĖxW is
Physical exergy accounts for work attainable due to temperature and
pressure adjustments to environmental values (T0, p0) without concen the exergy rate of the work in (W), the ĖxD is the exergy destruction rate
tration changes, and chemical exergy quantifies work potential resulting in (W), and ex is inlet and outlet specific exergy in (J/Kg).
from concentration changes to match environmental conditions. The general exergy efficiency formula can be expressed as follows.
exT = exph + exch (1) ηII =

ΣĖxout ΣĖxin − ΣĖxD
= (7)
ΣĖxin ΣĖxin
Where exph , exch , exPO , and exKE are the specific physical, chemical
Exergy calculations for the current system were made according to
exergy, potential exergy, and kinetic exergy, respectively.
the following assumptions.
Air and pure water have a single flow exergy component of physical
exergy (exph ), while seawater exergy (exsw ) has a multi-component
• Heat losses from ducts, pipes, humidifier, dehumidifier, and CPVT
exergy of physical and chemical exergy that the following equation
collector sides are neglected [21].
can calculate,
• The dead state for feedwater is defined as the condition of inlet
exsw = exph + exch (2) feedwater at atmospheric pressure, with a temperature of 21 ◦ C and a
salinity of 35 g/kg [37], while the dead state for air is characterized
The specific physical exergy (exph ) can be rewritten as,
by standard conditions of atmospheric pressure and a temperature of
exph = (h − ho ) − To (s − so ) (3) 25 ◦ C [15].
• Kinetic and potential energy are neglected in the energy or exergy
Where h is specific enthalpy in (J/Kg), s is specific entropy in (J/kg.K), balance equations [38].
and T0 is dead point temperature in (K).
The specific chemical exergy (exch ) can be estimated as,
∑
n 3.2.1. CPV/T exergy
( )
exch = Si μi − μ0i (4) The exergy model of the CPV/T system is established through mass
i=1 and exergy balance analyses. Assuming the sun is an infinite thermal
source, Petela determined the exergy of the solar irradiance absorbed by
Where, Si is stream salinity in (Kgs/Kgw), μi is stream chemical potential
the system [39]. Considering the maximum inlet work (Ėxin ) achievable
in (J/Kg) at stream conditions (pi, Ti, Si), μ0i is dead state chemical po
from a non-blackbody and a non-fully concentrated receiver (Ėxsun ) at
tential in (J/Kg) at dead point conditions (p0, T0, S0).
sun temperature, the sun radiation exergy can be expressed as follows
The total exergy rate (Ėx) in (W) can be expressed as, [40].
7
Fig. 3. (a) CPV/T theoretical results with experimental results reported by Chen H. et al. (b); HDH theoretical results versus mathematical results reported by
Narayan G. P. et al.; and (c) RO theoretical results with ROSA WAVE data results.
Ėxin = Ėxsun = G.APV,t .KU (8) Where y(αpv ) and y(εpv ) is the best-fit factor for photovoltaic absorptance
and emittance, respectively, f ν,c is the geometric factor of the radiation
Where, Tsun is the sun’s temperature is equal to 6000K [40], KU is the
radiation exergy factor for a non-blackbody and non-fully concentrated emitted over the whole hemisphere by the plane surface equal to 1, f ν is
receiver defined by the following equation. the geometrical factor of concentrated solar radiation, those factors are
calculated as follows.
( ) [ ( ) ]( )4
4 Tamb ( ) 4 ( ) f ν,c Tamb
KU = 1 − + y αpv + αpv − 1 + − y εpv − εpv f v = f sC (10)
3 Tsun 3 fν Tsun
(9)
Where, f s is the geometrical factor of the solar disk equal to 2.17˖10− 5.
8
Fig. 4(a). Freshwater productivity variation with solar irradiance increments of the proposed system compared to Ref. [71] compared to Ref. [24]. (b); specific
energy consumption changes of the current system with solar irradiance compared to Ref. [24].
a + cx + ex2 + gx3 + ix4

y(x) = (11) ĖxD,CPV/T = Ėxsun − Ėxopt,loss − ĖxCPVT− sun − Ėxth,loss − Pe,PV + ĖxC2 − ĖxC1
1 + bx + dx2 + fx3 + hx4 + jx5
+ ĖxCPV/T,p
Where, a, b, c, d, e, f, g, h, i, and j are equation (11) constants, those (17)
values are listed in Table 3.
The rate of exergy destruction at CPV/T is composed of four com The exergy efficiency of CPV/T is described by the following equa
ponents: optical losses, the temperature difference between the receiver tion [42].
and the sun’s temperature, differences in stream flow temperature, and Ėxin − ĖxD,CPV/T Ėxsun − ĖxD,CPV/T
thermal losses at the first glass cover. These components can be defined ηII,CPV/T = = ∗ 100% (18)
Ėxin Ėxsun
by Eqs. (12)–(15) as mentioned by I.K. Karathanassis et al. [41].
Optical exergy (Ėxopt,loss ) can be described by the following equation. 3.2.2. HDH exergy
( )(
Ėxop,loss = G.APV,t .KU . 1 − ηopt 1 − τg αpv
)
(12) HDH exergy model is calculated through exergy balance analysis at
each component, as mentioned in the literature [14,43,44]. The exergy
Exergy due to temperature difference between receiver and sun destruction and second-law efficiency at each HDH system component
temperature (ĖxCPVT− sun ) is expressed by, are expressed by Eq.(19)–(29) [43]:
( ) Exergy destruction formula:
1 1
ĖxCPVT− sun = GAPV,t Tamb − (13)
Tpv Tsun ĖxD = ΣĖxout − ΣĖxin (19)
The lower part of the cell is insulated, so exergy due to thermal losses Exergy balance for the humidifier:
(Ėxth,loss ) on the first glass cover can be defined as follows.
ĖxD,hum = Ėx3w + Ėx1a − Ėx4w − Ėx2a (20)
( )
Tamb
Ėxth,loss = Qg1,loss 1 − (14) Exergy efficiency at the humidifier:
Tg1
ΣĖxout,hum Ėx4w + Ėx2a
Where Qg1,loss is the rate of heat losses at the first glass cover in (W). ηII,hum = = (21)
ΣĖxin,hum Ėx3w + Ėx1a
The following mathematical equations can show the difference be
tween inlet and outlet flow exergy (ΔĖxC1− C2 ). Exergy balance for the dehumidifier:
ΔĖxC1− = ĖxC2 − ĖxC1 = ṁc (exC2 − exC1 ) (15) ĖxD,deh = Ėx1w + Ėx2a − Ėx2w − Ėx5w − Ėx1a (22)
C2
Exergy efficiency at the dehumidifier:

Where exC1 and exC2 are the physical exergy of the CPV/T cooling
structure at the inlet and exit. ΣĖxout,deh Ėx2w + Ėx5w + Ėx1a
ηII,deh = = (23)
Pump exergy destruction (ĖxCPV/T,p ) is estimated as follows. ΣĖxin,deh Ėx1w + Ėx2a
ĖxCPV/T,p = PCPV/T,p + ĖxC3 − ĖxC1 (16) Exergy balance for the heater:
Applying exergy balance on CPV/T, the following mathematical ĖxD,Heater = ĖxC2 + Ėx2w − ĖxC3 − Ėx3w (24)
equation calculates the total exergy destruction at CPV/T (ĖxD,CPV/T ). Exergy efficiency at the heater:
9
Fig. 5. (a) CPV/T temperatures, (b) Freshwater productivity and salinity, (c) Specific energy consumption and recovery ratio changes with solar irradi
ance variations.
ΣĖxout,Heater ĖxC3 + Ėx3w

ηII,Heater = = (25) ĖxD,HDH− P = Ėx0w − Ėx1w + PP,cons (28)
ΣĖxin,Heater ĖxC2 + Ėx2w
Exergy balance for the blower: Where, PP,cons is HDH pump electric power consumption in (W).
Exergy efficiency at HDH pump:
ĖxD,Blower = Ėx1a,i − Ėx1a,o + PB,cons (26)
ΣĖxuse Ėx0w − Ėx1w
Exergy efficiency at the blower: ηII,HDH− P = = (29)
Pin PP,cons
ηII,B =
ΣĖxuse Ėx1a,o − Ėx1a,i
= (27) The total exergy destruction at HDH (ĖxD,HDH ) is the sum of all exergy
Pin PB,cons destruction at each component, as written in the following equation.
Where, PB,cons is blower electric power consumption in (W). ĖxD,HDH = ĖxD,hum + ĖxD,deh + ĖxD,Heater + ĖxD,Blower + ηII,HDH− P (30)
Exergy balance for the HDH pump:
10
Fig. 6. (a) CPV/T temperatures, (b) Freshwater productivity and salinity, (c) Specific energy consumption and recovery ratio changes with inlet seawater tem
perature variations.
3.2.3. RO exergy Where ṁf,HPP is the mass flow rate fed to HPP in (kg/s), PHPP is HPP
RO unit involves both pure water and seawater streams. The physical electric power consumption (W).
and chemical exergy of these streams are calculated using function Exergy efficiency at the HPP:
correlations at EES software, validated with a maximum deviation of ( )
ΣĖxuse ṁf ,HPP exHPP,o − exHPP,i
±1.5 % according to Sharqawy et al. [45]. ηII,HPP = = (32)
Pin PHPP
RO exergy model is calculated through exergy balance analysis at
each component as mentioned by Ahmed Khouya [46]. The exergy Exergy balance for the RO membrane element:
destruction and second-law efficiency at each system component are
ExD,Mem = ṁR2 exR2 − ṁR3 exR3 − ṁR4 exR4 (33)
expressed as follows.
Exergy balance for the HPP: Exergy efficiency at the RO membrane element:
( )
ExD,HPP = PHPP + ṁf ,HPP exHPP,i − exHPP,o (31)
11
Fig. 7. (a) CPV/T temperatures, (b) Freshwater productivity and salinity, (c) Specific energy consumption and recovery ratio changes with ambient tempera
ture variations.
ΣĖxout,Mem ṁR3 exR3 + ṁR4 exR4 The total exergy destruction at RO (ĖxD,RO ) is the sum of all exergy
ηII,Mem = = (34)
ΣĖxin,Mem ṁR2 exR2 destruction at each component, as written in the following equation.
Exergy balance for the PX: ĖxD,RO = ĖxD,HPP + ĖxD,Mem + ĖxD,PX (37)
( ) ( )
ExD,PX = ṁPX,f exPX,1 − exPX,2 + ṁR4 exR4 − exPX,3 (35)
3.3. Economics analysis
Where ṁf,PX and ṁR4 is the mass flow rate fed to the PX inlet at low
pressure and high pressure, respectively in (kg/s). Economic modeling is essential in decision-making to determine the
Exergy efficiency at the PX: viability and feasibility of any desalination system. This section dis
cusses the initial investment and presents an economic analysis of the
ΣĖxout,PX ṁR4 exPX,3 + ṁPX,f exPX,2 current system. A simplified financial analysis has been conducted to
ηII,PX = = (36)
ΣĖxin,PX ṁPX,f exPX,1 + ṁR4 exR4 assess the cost-effectiveness of the proposed system, utilizing economic
12
Fig. 8. (a) CPV/T temperatures, (b) Freshwater productivity and salinity, (c) Specific energy consumption and recovery ratio changes with wind speed changes.
evaluation parameters such as the levelized cost of water and the • No pretreatment costs are considered, and land costs are neglected,
payback period. assuming an outdoor location and operation in a rural (deserted)
The economic study is conducted with the following assumptions. area [38].
• Operational and maintenance cost is 20 % of the total annual unit
• The dehumidifier has a constant overall heat transfer coefficient (Ud) cost [55].
of 1400 W/m2.K [47].
• All components of the plant have an average life expectancy of 20
years [20,48–51], [52,53]except RO membrane elements 5 years 3.3.1. Equipment cost
[36,54]. The cost functions of the system components belonging to different
• The plant availability (fa) is 90 % [55], the interest rate (i) is 10 % years were evaluated with the economic indicator called the chemical
[18], and the inflation (f) rate is 4.4 % [56]. engineering plant cost index (CEPCI). In this direction, the CEPCI values
are listed in Table 4 based on a specific year, so the actual value of the
equipment in the present year 2023 is estimated using Eq. (38) [57].
13
Fig. 9. (a) Freshwater productivity and salinity, (b) Specific energy consumption and recovery ratio changes with cooling fluid flow rate.
Fig. 10. (a) Freshwater productivity and salinity, (b) Specific energy consumption and recovery ratio changes with HPP efficiency.
( / )
Zcomponent = Zbose CEPCI2023 CEPCIbaseyear (38) ( )0.8
ZCPV/T,p = 1120 Ẇ p (40)
The initial capital cost of the main system equipment and the total
investment in ($) can be expressed by the following equations. Where, Ẇp is pump power consumption in (kW).
The investment cost of the CPV/T (ZCPV/T ) is estimated by Ref. [53]: The investment cost of the dehumidifier (Zdeh ) and humidifier (Zhum )
ZCPV/T = 850(APV ) (39) are expressed by Ref. [49]:
[ ]0.514
(ṁ2w h2w − ṁ1w h1w ) ln[(T2a − T2w )/(T1a − T1w )]
Where, APV is PV surface area in (m2). Zdeh = 2143 × (41)
Ud (T2a − T2w ) − (T1a − T1w )
The investment cost of the CPV/T and HDH feed pump (ZCPV/T,p ) is
calculated by Ref. [58]:
14
Fig. 11. (a) Freshwater productivity and salinity, (b) Specific energy consumption and recovery ratio changes with feed water salinity changes.
Fig. 12. (a) Portion of subsystems in the total exergy destruction, (b) Exergy destruction in each component of HDH, (c) Exergy destruction in each component of RO.
15
ZHEX = 235(Q̇H )0.75 (44)
Where, Q̇H is heat transfer at the heat exchanger in (kW).

The pre-treatment and post-treatment cost (Ztre,RO ) is expressed by
Ref. [61]:
( )0.8
Ztre,RO = 996 × Qf (45)
Where, Qf is the volume flow rate fed to the RO unit in (m3/day).

The investment cost of the HPP is estimated by Ref. [62]:
( )
ZHPP = 52 ΔPHPP QHPP,in (46)
Where QHPP,in is the HPP inlet volume flow rate in (m3/h), ΔPHPP is the
pressure difference at HPP in (bars).
The investment cost of the membrane is calculated by Ref. [62]:
ZRO,m = Ni × PCRO,m ; PCRO,m = 10 × Ae (47)
Where Ni is the number of membrane elements, Ae is the membrane

surface area in (m2).
The investment cost of the PX as ERD is expressed by Ref. [62]:
Fig. 13. CPV/T hybrid desalination exergy destruction and exergy efficiency
ZRO,PX = 3134.7(QC )0.58 (48)
with solar irradiance variations.
Where QC is the PX inlet volume flow rate in (m3/h).
The total capital investment cost of the CPV/T HDH-RO hybrid
desalination system can be calculated using the following mathematical
equation. Furthermore, CEPCI values of system equipment based on a
specific year are summarized in Table 4.
ZPC,t = ZCPV/T + ZCPV/T,p + Zdeh + Zhum + ZBlower + ZHEX + ZHDH,p
(49)
+Ztre,RO + ZHPP + ZRO,m + ZRO,PX
3.3.2. Economic model

An economic model is created to evaluate the economic feasibility
and viability of the CPV/T Hybrid HDH-RO desalination system through
LCOW and PBP evaluation under different technical, climatic, operating,
and economic parameters. The economic parameter used in this model is
listed in Table 5.
The levelized cost of water LCOW in ($/m3) is defined as the ratio of
the annual total cost of the plant (Can,tot ) in [$/y] to the annual fresh
water productivity (AWP) in [m3/y] as expressed by Eq. (50) [64].
Can,tot
LCOW = (50)
AWP
The AWP in (m3/y) can be estimated by the following equation based
on 10 h a day (daily operating hours) and plant availability in year fav of
90 % [20,65].
Fig. 14. CPV/T hybrid desalination exergy destruction and exergy efficiency
with inlet seawater temperature variations.
[ / ]
AWP = ṁfw,all m3 hr ∗ 10[hrs / day] ∗ (365.fav ) (51)
[ ] The annual total cost of the plant includes an annual capital cost
(T3w − T4w )0.57
Zhum = 746.749 × ṁ0.79
3w × [0.022 × T2a + 0.39]2.447 (42) (Can,P ), operation & maintenance cost (OMCan,P ), and an annual salvage
(T3w − T2a )0.9924 value of the plant (SVan ) values, which can be calculated through the
series calculation methods using Eqs. (52)–(58) as mentioned by A.H.
Where, ṁ is mass flow rates are in (kg/s), T is point temperature in (0C), Shafaghat et al. [36] and D. U. Lawal et al. [66].
h is point specific enthalpy in (J/kg), and Ud is overall heat transfer
coefficient in (W/m2.K). Can,tot = Can,P + OMCan,P − SVan (52)
The investment cost of the blower (ZBlower ) is estimated by Ref. [59]: The annualized total cost of the system is expressed as follows,
( )0.7 ( )
ηblower
ZBlower = ṁa (ΔPHum + ΔPDehum )0.1 (43) A
Can,P = ZPC,tot × CRF , i, n (53)
1 − ηblower P
Where, ṁa is the air mass flow rate at the blower inlet in (kg/s), and ΔP is Where (ZPC,tot ) is the total plant cost at present value (initial investment),
the pressure difference in (kPa). ( )
(CRF) is the capital recovery factor expressed in AP, i, n to convert
The investment cost of the HDH heater (heat exchanger) (ZHEX ) is present worth to uniform annual value, and it is calculated by,
defined by Ref. [60]:
16
Fig. 15. CPV/T hybrid desalination exergy destruction and exergy efficiency variations at; (a) ambient temperature, (b) Wind speed, and (c) Cooling HTF flow rate.
( )
A i(1 + i)n
CRF = , i, n = (54) OMCan,P = 0.2Can,P (56)
P (1 + i)n − 1
The annual salvage value (SVan ) can be defined by,
Where (i) is the real interest rate, and (n) is the plant lifetime in (years). ( )
The real interest rate can be estimated by, A
SVan = SVFu ∗ SFFFu , i, n (57)
F
if − f
i= (55)
1+f Where SVF is the future salvage value that is considered to be 20 %
( )
ZPC,tot , and SFFF is the sinking fund factor expressed in AF, i, n to convert
Where (if ) is the nominal interest rate and (f) is the inflation rate. future worth to uniform annual value and its estimated by,
The annual maintenance operational cost (OMCan,P ) can be expressed ( )
as: A i
SFFF , i, n = (58)
F (1 + i)n − 1
17
Fig. 16. CPV/T hybrid desalination exergy destruction and exergy efficiency at various (a) high-pressure pump efficiencies and (b) Feed water salinity changes.
ZPC,tot
PBP = (59)
CF
Where, CF is the cash flow of annual savings that can be expressed as

follows.
CF = LCOW ∗ Qfw,all + SVan − OMCan,P (60)
The summary of the economic model calculations is listed in Table 6.
4. System performance
The next section furnishes comprehensive techno-exergy-economic

performance parameters for assessing the CPV/T hybrid HDH-RO
desalination system. Performance evaluation indices for the CPV/T
hybrid HDH-RO desalination system can be computed by utilizing mass
balance, energy balance (The First Law of Thermodynamics), exergy
balance (The Second Law of Thermodynamics), and economic model
calculations. The created model is technically evaluated through such
parameters as freshwater productivity flow rate, freshwater salinity,
recovery ratio, and specific energy consumption. Furthermore, exergy is
assessed through the calculation of both exergy destruction and system
exergy efficiency. Finally, it is economically evaluated through the
estimation of the levelized cost of water and the payback period.
Freshwater productivity of HDH-RO hybrid desalination can be
defined as follows.
ṁfw,all = ṁfw,HDH + ṁfw,RO (61)
The following mass salt balance equation expresses the salinity of

freshwater.
ṁfw,all Sfw,all = ṁfw,HDH Sfw,HDH + ṁfw,RO Sfw,RO (62)
The recovery ratio (RRall ) for the hybrid desalination system is the
Fig. 17. (a) Portion of subsystems in the total cost, (b) Cost value and portion
ratio of produced freshwater to incoming saline water, defined as
in each main component at the base case conditions.
follows.
The Payback period (PBP ) of the plant is the time required to recover ṁfw,all
RRall = (63)
the initial investment of the plant, and it can be defined as follows [20, ṁsw
67]. The specific energy consumption, a critical parameter for evaluating
18
Table 7
Freshwater cost of the proposed hybrid HDH-RO system compared to previous
RO powered by renewable sources.
Reference System Capacity COW [U SEC Remarks
$/m3] [kW/m3]
HDH-RO CPV/T 580–860 0.88-1.16 3.3–3.7 RR ¼

Hybrid HDH-RO L/h 38 %
system þERD
(Present
Study)
Bruno J. C. et al. ORC-RO 15 m3/day 4.3–9.5 NA Theo.
[73]
Hossam-Eldin Hybrid 150–300 4.6–7.3 1.25–1.6 Theo.
A. et al. [74] Wind-PV m3/day
Helal A. M. PV-RO 20 m3/day 7.3 7.3 Theo.
et al. [75]
Amy M. B. et al. PV-RO 0.3 m3/ 4.7–6.6 2.5–4 Exp.
[76] day
Kershman S. A. Hybrid 300 m3/ 5.6 2.3 Theo.
et al. [77] Wind/ day
PV-RO
Kosmadakis G. SORC- NA 6.4 NA Theo.
et al. [78] RO
Gokçek M and Wind- 24 m3/day 2.96–6.46 4.4 Theo.
Gokçek OB RO Fig. 18. Levelized cost of water (LCOW) changes at solar irradiance variations.
[79]
Spyrou I.D. Hybrid 3840 m3/ 3 2.53 Theo.
et al. [80] Wind/ day
PV-RO
Marcos S. M. Wind- 8.5 m3/ 0.8–3 3.4 Exp.
et al. [81] RO day
Thomson M. PV-RO 3 m3/day 2 3.5 Theo.
and Infield D
[82].
Ammous et al. PVT-RO 227 m3/ 1.6 3.2 Theo.
[83] day
hybrid desalination system performance, is calculated as follows.

Qfw,all
SECall = (64)
Pe,PV
The overall exergy destruction is defined and mathematically

expressed by the following equations.
∑ ∑
ĖxD = ĖxQ − Ėxw + ṁin exin − ṁout exout (65)
ĖxD,t = ĖxD,CPV/T + ĖxD,HDH + ĖxD,RO (66)
Exergy efficiency for each component and overall system can be

estimated using the following equations for heat exchange and power- Fig. 19. Levelized cost of water (LCOW) with inlet seawater tempera
driven equipment. ture changes.
For heat exchange and the overall system,
ηII =
ΣĖxout ΣĖxin − ΣĖxD
= (67) CF = LCOW ∗ Qfw,all + SVan − OMCan,P (71)
ΣĖxin ΣĖxin
5. Solution procedure and sensitivity analysis
For power-driven components,
ΣĖxuse Ėxo − Ėxi The modeling and equations created in Section 3 should be solved to
ηII = = (68) technically, exergy, and economically evaluate the CPV/T hybrid HDH-
Pin Pin
RO desalination system. Therefore, EES software develops an iterative
The levelized cost of water (LCOW) is expressed by Ref. [64], progressive code to find all performance parameters mentioned in Sec
Can,tot tion 4.
LCOW = (69) Sensitivity analysis is commonly used to detect the key parameters
AWP
affecting system behavior [68]. The effect of climatic parameters such as
The Payback period (PBP ) of the plant is estimated by the following
solar irradiance, inlet seawater, ambient temperature, wind speed, and
equation [67].
operating parameters like CPV/T cooling fluid flow rate, feed water
ZPC,tot salinity, and high-pressure pump efficiency on techno-exergy-economic
PBP = (70)
CF behavior are investigated. The analysis was performed at parameter
variation (±15 % and ±30 % as a preliminary study) while all others
Where CF is the cash flow of annual savings that can be expressed as were fixed.
follows.
19
Fig. 20. Levelized cost of water variation with (a) Ambient temperature, (b) Wind speed, and (c) Cooling HTF flow rate changes.
6. Results and discussions (PBp) under parametric changes, is used to evaluate the current system
economically. Finally, the present system is technically and economi
This section discusses the effect and the sensitivity of climate change cally compared with the previous RO system powered by renewable
and some operating parameters to evaluate the technical, exergy, and resources.
economic performance of the CPV/T hybrid HDH-RO desalination sys
tem. The climatic parameters are considered as solar irradiance (G), 6.1. Validation
inlet sea water temperature (T1w), ambient temperature (Tamb), and
wind speed (Vwind), while the operating parameters are cooling fluid The CPV/T theoretical model was validated by comparing predicted
flow rate (Qc), feed water salinity (S1w), and high-pressure pump effi CPV/T outlet temperatures in [K] with experimental results from Cheng
ciency (ηHPP ). Technical analysis is conducted through the evaluation of H. et al. [25,69], utilizing hourly environmental data. The current
system productivity (Qfw), freshwater salinity (Sfw), and specific energy CPV/T theoretical model and the experimental test rig by Cheng H. et al.
consumption (SEC) at parametric changing ranges. In contrast, exergy [25] are identical in design and dimensions specification. During vali
analysis is conducted through exergy destruction (ExD) and exergy ef dation, the CPV/T current model is operated under the same selected
ficiency (ηII,all ) evaluation. A techno-economics study, through the climatic data of a typical day (June 2017 from 9 a.m. to 5 p.m.) in
determination of the levelized cost of water (LCOW) and payback period Changping, Beijing, China (40.09o North latitude, 116.31o East
20
Fig. 21. Levelized cost of water variations with (a) feed salinity and (b) high-pressure pump efficiency changes.
longitude as the literature experimental test rig operated before. The flow rate (Qc) of 70 L/h, feed water salinity (S1w) of 35 g/kg, and high-
model outcomes closely aligned with experimental data, exhibiting less pressure pump efficiency (ηHPP ) of 70 %. As observed in Fig. 5a, PV cell
than 1 % error, as shown in Fig. 3a. The calculated GOR from the HDH temperature (Tc) and CPV/T outlet temperature (Tf,o) increased with
theoretical model was validated against Narayan et al. [29]. Under increasing solar irradiance still, the cell temperature was below the
certain conditions of 0.8 humidifier and dehumidifier effectiveness, inlet maximum allowable value of 850C (silicone monocrystalline cells).
seawater temperature of 30 ◦ C, and maximum heating temperature of Freshwater productivity increased by 39 % from 608.7 to 846.4 L/h,
60 ◦ C, our model closely matched mathematical results, illustrated in respectively, with solar irradiance changes from 600 to 1000W/m2. In
Fig. 3b, with over 98 % of predictions within a 5 % error range. The RO comparison, salinity decreased by 30.2 % from 564.1 to 393.7 ppm at
theoretical model was validated against reverse osmosis system analysis the same solar irradiance range as illustrated in Fig. 5b. This is because
(ROSA) using WAVE software, employing the same method as before as solar irradiance increases, both thermal and electrical powers pro
[30,70]. Freshwater productivity in [m3/h] was validated using a Dow vided to the hybrid desalination system increases, allowing more feed
SW30HR-380 membrane under specific conditions. The model show water to be desalinated raising productivity and decreases salinity.
cased over 95 % of predictions within a 4 % error range for freshwater Fig. 5c shows that SEC is directly proportional with solar irradiance
productivity, as depicted in Fig. 3c. variation and increases by 9.1 % from 3.3 to 3.6 kW/m3, while RR is
inversely proportional and decreases by 10.3 % from 38.1 to 34.2 % at
6.2. System enhancement the same solar irradiance range. This is because as solar irradiance in
creases, the energy produced and the saline feedwater rate is higher than
System enhancements resulting from increased RO feed pressure to the productivity. The results conclude that the higher the solar irradi
50 bars, replacing the membrane element with the SW30-HR380 type, ance, the higher the freshwater productivity and lower freshwater
and integrating PX as ERD are illustrated in Fig. 4a and b. The improved salinity (higher productivity and higher water quality). However, SEC
system exhibits higher freshwater productivity than the previous one, rises (higher energy consumption) and RR drops, reducing system
increasing from 266.4 to 508.5 L/h, a 90.8 % improvement at solar performance.
irradiance of 700W/m2, as depicted in Fig. 4a. Additionally, the SEC for
the improved system decreases from 7.9 to 3.3 kW/m3, marking a 58.2 6.3.2. Inlet sea water temperature
% reduction, while the RR rises from 21.1 to 36.9 %, a 74.8 % increase at Fig. 6a,b, and c illustrate CPV/T temperature profile, freshwater
solar irradiance of 700W/m2, as shown in Fig. 4b. In conclusion, the new productivity, salinity, SEC, and RR changes with inlet seawater varia
modifications demonstrate a substantial enhancement in freshwater tions. Inlet feed water temperature (T1w) varying from 10 to 40 ◦ C at
productivity and overall system performance [71]. solar irradiance (G) of 700w/m2, Tamb = 250C, Vwind = 1 m/s, Qc = 70 L/
h, S1w = 35 g/kg, ηHPP = 70 %. PV cell and outlet temperature rise are
directly proportional to inlet seawater increments, as demonstrated in
6.3. Technical evaluation
Fig. 6a. It is obvious that as inlet seawater temperature increases from 10
to 260C, the freshwater productivity increases by 5.3 %, from 647.9 to
6.3.1. Solar irradiance
682.5 L/h, then descends again to reach 660.4 L/h when the tempera
The temperature profile of the CPV/T and the variations in key
ture rises to 400C as depicted in Fig. 6b. The reason behind this behavior
technical performance parameters like freshwater productivity, salinity,
is while the temperature increased it improves both the membrane
specific energy consumption, and recovery ratio in response to solar
temperature correction factor and raised temperature out from the
irradiance fluctuations are shown in Fig. 5a,b, and c. Solar irradiance (G)
dehumidifier, leading to higher HDH and RO productivity. However,
varying from 600 to 1000 W/m2 at an ambient temperature of 25oC,
after 260C, the tendency of salt polarization in the RO membrane
wind speed of 1 m/s, inlet feed water temperature (T1w) of 20oC, HTF
21
Fig. 22. Sensitivity analysis of (a) Freshwater Productivity, (b) SEC, (c) Exergy destruction, and (d) LCOW.
happened, and freshwater condensation was reduced at the dehumidi that a higher inlet seawater temperature has a limited effect on pro
fier (as coil surface temperature increased with inlet seawater in ductivity and increases freshwater salinity (limited productivity and low
crements), reducing productivity. Furthermore, as inlet seawater quality). Nevertheless, SEC drops (lower energy consumption) and RR
increased from 10 to 40oC, the freshwater salinity increased by 1.62 rises, improving system performance.
times from 357.9 to 937.4 ppm, respectively. That happened because
elevating RO inlet seawater temperature expands membrane element 6.3.3. Ambient temperature
porosity, limiting salt removal with freshwater permeate. Fig. 6c shows The effect of ambient temperature on CPV/T temperature profile,
that SEC is inversely proportional with inlet seawater and decreases by freshwater productivity, salinity, specific energy consumption, and re
11.1 % from 3.6 to 3.2 kW/m3, while RR is directly proportional and covery ratio is displayed in Fig. 7a,b, and c. The ambient temperature
increases by 13.6 % from 34.67 to 39.4 % at the same ranges. Based on ranges from 297 to 319K at G = 700w/m2, T1w = 200C, Vwind = 1 m/s,
the calculated results, the highest amount of freshwater, equal to 682.5 Qc = 70 L/h, S1w = 35 g/kg, ηHPP = 70 %. PV cell and outlet temperature
L//h, was produced at an inlet temperature of 260C. It can be concluded are directly proportional to ambient temperature, as demonstrated in
22
Table 8 m/s at G = 700w/m2, Tamb = 250C, T1w = 200C, Qc = 70 L/h, S1w = 35

The specific power consumption of the proposed hybrid HDH-RO system g/kg, ηHPP = 70 %. The results reveal an inverse relationship between PV
compared to previous studies. cell and outlet temperature with wind speed due to enhanced PV cooling
Reference System Feedwater Capacity SEC Remarks Fig. 8a. Concurrently, freshwater productivity increases marginally by
type/ (kWh/m3) 5.2 % from 677.4 to 702.9 L/h, while salinity decreases by 10 % from
Salinity 502.8 to 452.7 ppm with rising wind speed at the same range as shown
HDH-RO CPV/T 35,000 580–860 3.3–3.7 RR 38 %+ in Fig. 8b. This productivity boost is attributed to improved PV cell
Hybrid HDH- ppm L/h ERD cooling, reducing cell temperature, thereby increasing electrical power
System RO
for RO unit operation. Additionally, the SEC experiences a slight 2.9 %
Present
Study increase from 3.4 to 3.5 kW/m3. In comparison, the RR decreases by 2.7
Gabrielli P. PV/T 20,000 60 L/h 41 RR = 3 %, % from 36.9 to 35.9 % within the same wind speed range as plotted in
et al. [84] HDH ppm Fig. 8c. The result concludes that as wind speed rises, there is a modest
J. Shaikh HDH Seawater – 31.1 GOR = impact on productivity, SEC, and RR. In contrast, it has a notable effect
and S. 0.5–2.75,
Ismail [1] cost =
on the slight elevation of salinity.
2.6–6.5
$/m3 6.3.5. Cooling fluid flow rate
Herold D. el PV-RO 35,000 0.8–4.2 18–19 RR 14 % Freshwater productivity, salinity, SEC, and RR at various cooling
al [85]. ppm m3/d
HTF flow rates are depicted in Fig. 9a and b. The cooling fluid flow rate
Paulo C. M. PV-Ro 42,800 243–297 16.1–19.7 RR 22 %
Carvalho ppm L/h changes from 70 to 120 L/h at G = 700w/m2, Tamb = 250C, T1w = 200C,
et al. [86] Vwind = 1 m/s, S1w = 35 g/kg, ηHPP = 70 %. The results demonstrate that
Tzen E [87]. PV- 37,700 3.12 m3/ 16.5 RR 13 % HTF flow rate variations have a neglectable effect on freshwater pro
Wind ppm day ductivity, salinity, SEC, and RR not exceeding 0.6 % along the HTF flow
RO
rate range with a maximum productivity of 678.7 L/h, salinity of 502
Herold D. PV-RO Seawater 0.8–3 16–16.3
and m3/day ppm, SEC of 3.4 kW/m3, and RR of 36.9 % at Qc = 80 L/h. Freshwater
Neskakis productivity peaking occurs at 80L/h; beyond this value, the produc
A [88]. tivity declines. That happened because increasing the cooling fluid flow
Thomas K.E PV-RO 32,000 0.6 m3/ 13 RR10 %
rate from 70 to 80 L/h initially boosts productivity by enhancing electric
[89]. ppm day
Ali Altaee RO 35,000 1 m3/hr 6.5 RR 25 % power production and pumping power to the RO unit. However, this
[30] ppm increase also lowers the CPV/T outlet temperature, eliminating HDH
Scrivani A PV- Seawater 36 m3/ 4.86 Pelton brine thermal energy feed to the RO at the mixer, which reduces the RO
[90] Diesel day turbine feed temperature and freshwater productivity. The peak productivity
RO recovery
occurs at 80 L/h; beyond this value, productivity declines due to the
Manolakos PV-RO 35,000 0.8 m3/ 4.3–4.6 ERD RR8%,
and ppm day drop in feed temperature outweighing the cooling enhancement effect.
Mohamed Cooling fluid flow rate increments improve PV cooling, preventing cell
[91] overheating. The results conclude that the flow rate variations (imple
Ntavou E PV-RO 37,500 2.1 m3/h 5.2–5.8 at 61 -53
mentation of flow control method) neglect affect system performance
et al. [92] ppm bars
Qiblaweya PV- 42,000 300 m3/ 4.3 ERD PX, RR
and productivity.
H. et al. Wind- ppm day 35 %
[93] Diesel 6.3.6. High-pressure pump efficiency
RO The impact of high-pressure pump efficiency changes on freshwater
Subiela V.J. PV- Seawater 1 m3/day 3.74 ERD, RR
productivity, salinity, specific energy consumption, and recovery ratio
et al. [94] Wind 18 %
RO are displayed in Fig. 10a and b. The HPP efficiency varies from 60 % to
Thomson M. PV with 40,000 3 m3/day 3.5 ERD 82 % at G = 700w/m2, Tamb = 250C, T1w = 200C, Qc = 70L/h, Vwind = 1
and battery ppm m/s, and S1w = 35 g/kg. The freshwater productivity increases signifi
Infield D RO
cantly for higher HPP efficiency, with an improvement of about 26.4 %,
[82]
from 602.5 to 761.8L/h when going from 60 to 82 %, as demonstrated in
Fig. 10a Moreover, freshwater salinity descends by 28.3 % from 588.1 to
Fig. 7a, because of PV cooling reduction in the ambient. Also, freshwater 429.9 ppm at the same HPP efficiency variations range. As HPP
productivity slightly decreased by 3.8 %, from 678.4 to 652.6 L/h, while increased, more feed saline water was fed to the RO unit with high hy
salinity increased by 9.6 % from 501 to 549 ppm as the ambient tem draulic energy to be desalinated, increasing productivity and dimin
perature increased from 297 to 319K respectively as illustrated in ishing salinity. Furthermore, SEC drops by 21 % from 3.8 to 3, and RR
Fig. 7b. The slight decrements in productivity might be because of the declines by 8.3 % from 38.4 to 35.2 % as HPP rises at the same range as
reduction of PV cell cooling, increased cell temperature, then decreases illustrated in Fig. 10b. The findings conclude that as HPP efficiency rises,
the power produced to operate the RO unit reducing feedwater rate, freshwater productivity is significantly increased while salinity, SEC,
hence slightly reducing productivity and increasing salinity. Moreover, and RR decrease (higher productivity-higher quality-lower consumption
SEC slightly declined by 2.9 % from 3.4 to 3.3 kW/m3, while RR slightly -little drop in performance).
increased by 2.4 % from 36.8 to 37.7 %, at the same ambient temper
ature range variation as depicted in Fig. 7c. The results concluded as 6.3.7. Feed water salinity
ambient temperature rises its slightly affect on productivity, SEC, and The influence of feedwater salinity on freshwater productivity,
RR, while has a reasonable effect on salinity elevation. salinity, specific energy consumption, and recovery ratio is depicted in
Fig. 11 and b. The variation in feed water salinity ranges from 30 to 50
6.3.4. Wind speed g/kg under conditions of G = 700w/m2, Tamb = 250C, T1w = 200C, Qc =
The impacts of wind speed on CPV/T temperature profile, freshwater 70L/h, Vwind = 1 m/s, S1w = 35 g/kg, and ηHPP = 70 %. Freshwater
productivity, salinity, specific energy consumption, and recovery ratio productivity experiences a significant decline, decreasing by approxi
are displayed in Fig. 8a,b, and c. The wind speed changes from 1 to 6.5 mately 58.5 %, from 771.8 to 320.6L/h, as shown in Fig. 11a. However,
freshwater salinity increases by 1.5 times, escalating from 424.8 to 1060
23
ppm within the same range of feedwater salinity. That is because as feed with ambient temperature and wind speed, cooling HTF flow rate var
water salinity increases, the osmotic pressure rises while feed pressure iations are demonstrated in Fig. 15a, b, and c. Ambient temperature
remains constant, hence freshwater productivity drops. Furthermore, varies from 297 to 319K, wind speed varies from 1 to 6.5 m/s, and
SEC experiences a significant increase by 1.3 times, rising from 2.9 to cooling HTF varies from 70 to 120L/h; these parameters change at base
6.7 kW/m3, while RR undergoes a substantial decline of 64.6 %, case values. The results show that ambient temperature has a slight ef
decreasing from 45.5 to 16.1 %, with the increase in feedwater salinity fect nearly neglectable on exergy destruction while affecting inversely
within the same range, as illustrated in Fig. 11b. The findings lead to the by 7.2 % exergy efficiency as the ambient temperature rises from 297 to
conclusion that the rise in feedwater salinity has a negative impact on 319K at the same parameters of the base case as plotted in Fig. 15a. It is
the system, resulting in a significant decrease in freshwater productivity also noted that wind speed and cooling HTF flow rate have a neglectable
and recovery ratio, accompanied by an increase in freshwater salinity effect on exergy destruction and exergy efficiency as illustrated in
and SEC (lower productivity, lower quality, higher consumption, and a Fig. 15b and c. That is because those parameters slightly affect stream
drop in performance). temperature inside the system. From the result, it is concluded that
ambient temperature, wind speed, and cooling HTF flow rate neglect
6.4. Exergy evaluation affect exergy destruction, and only ambient temperature slightly affects
overall exergy efficiency.
Exergy analysis here is performed through exergy balance and Exergy destruction and the overall system exergy efficiency, varying
techno-exergy analysis under base case conditions and specific ranges of with high-pressure pump efficiency and feed water salinity, are depicted
climatic and operating parameters. in Fig. 16a and b. The results indicate a slight decrease of 2.8 % in exergy
destruction, from 10.5 to 10.2 kW, as the high-pressure pump efficiency
6.4.1. Exergy balance rises from 60 to 82 % at the base case parameters, as shown in Fig. 16a.
The pie charts in Fig. 12a, b, and c showcase the exergy destruction Additionally, exergy efficiency increases by 15 %, from 18 to 20.7 %,
portion among various subsystems and main components under base within the same efficiency range. This trend comes from the fact that as
case conditions of G = 700 W/m2, Tamb = 250C, Vwind = 1 m/s, T1w = high-pressure pump efficiency increases, the hydraulic losses reduce
20 ◦ C, Qc = 70 L/h, S1w = 35 g/kg, and ηHPP = 70 %. As illustrated in (not small value), minimizing exergy destruction in RO units and
Fig. 12a, the CPV/T has the highest exergy destruction portion among significantly enhancing system exergy efficiency. Fig. 16b illustrates
the other subsystems, with 85.4 %. On the other hand, the RO unit that feedwater salinity has a neglectable effect on exergy destruction
comes next with 11.5 %, and finally, the HDH unit has the lowest exergy that doesn’t exceed 1.5 %, with a slight impact of 3.7 % on exergy ef
destruction portion of 3.1 %. This is because CPV/T has more optical and ficiency with a maximum value of 19.4 % at 40 g/kg salinity. In
thermal loss than other subsystems. While RO and HDH operate under conclusion, changes in high-pressure pump efficiency slightly affect
lower temperature differences, the major losses are considered electrical exergy destruction while having a notable impact on system exergy ef
losses. Fig. 12b shows that the humidifier and the blower have the ficiency. At the same time, feed water salinity has a slight effect on
largest exergy destruction percentage of 37.7 % and 31 %, respectively, exergy destruction and exergy efficiency.
then comes the dehumidifier with 24.3 %, and the lowest is 7.1 % at the
heat exchanger. Furthermore, at the RO unit, the largest exergy 6.5. Economics
destruction percentage is 61.3 % at the high-pressure pump. After that
comes membranes with 25.5 %, and finally comes PC with 13.2 %, as In the following, system economic evaluation of the CPV/T hybrid
displayed in Fig. 12c. HDH-RO desalination system is performed through the determination of
cost balance, levelized cost of water (LCOW), payback period (PBp), and
6.4.2. Techno-exergy analysis comprehensive techno-economic analysis.
The effect of the climatic and some operating parameters on the
system’s exergetic performance are discussed below. 6.5.1. Cost balance
Exergy destruction and overall system exergy efficiency changes The pie charts in Fig. 17a and b showcase the cost portion at each
with solar irradiance variations are plotted in Fig. 13. The result shows subsystem and main system component to total cost under base case
that exergy destruction increases significantly by 66.2 % from 8.9 to conditions of G = 700 W/m2, Tamb = 250C, Vwind = 1 m/s, T1w = 200C,
14.8 kW as solar irradiance rises from 600 to 1000 W/m2 at the same Qc = 70 L/h, S1w = 35 g/kg, and ηHPP = 70 %. As illustrated in Fig. 17a,
parameters of the base case. Additionally, it is revealed that exergy ef the RO unit has the highest cost portion among the other subsystems, at
ficiency increases slightly by 3.1 % from 19.1 to 19.7 % at the same solar 68 %. On the other hand, the CPV/T unit comes next with 26 %, and
irradiance variations. That might be because as solar irradiance in finally, the HDH unit has the lowest cost of 3.3 %. Fig. 17b shows the
creases, optical losses, temperature differences, and electrical losses main equipment values and their portion of total investment cost as base
increase, leading to rising exergy destruction. Moreover, the increments case condition. The result reveals that membrane elements have the
of solar irradiance increase inlet exergy (sun exergy) to the system more highest value and portion of 8332$ and 34.2 %, respectively. After that
than exergy destruction, hence exergy efficiency growths. The result comes CPV/T, HPP, PX, blower, humidifier, dehumidifier, and heat
concludes that solar irradiance changes significantly affect exergy exchanger with 25.5, 21.2, 13, 2.5, 1.8, 1.4, and 0.4 % respectively.
destruction while slightly affecting system exergy efficiency.
The effect of inlet seawater temperature on overall exergy destruc 6.5.2. Levelized cost of water
tion and exergy efficiency is depicted in Fig. 14. It is observed that To calculate the point value of LCOW, cost formulas are used to
exergy destruction decreases by 6.7 % from 10.55 to 9.8 kW as inlet calculate the initial cost of each equipment based on literature as
seawater temperature increases from 10 to 400C at the same parameters mentioned in Section 3.3.1. Next, a series of economic equations are
of the base case. However, exergy efficiency significantly increases by calculated to solve the economic model computing LCOW, as discussed
32.6 % from 18.1 to 24 % at the same inlet seawater temperature ranges. in Section 3.3.2. The result reveals that the value of LCOW at the base
The drop in exergy destruction is because as inlet seawater temperature case condition is 0.916 U$/m3, and it varies from 0.88 to 1.16 U$/m3
increases, the temperature difference and feed water flow rate decrease; when solar irradiance increases from 600 to 1000W/m2, respectively.
hence exergy destruction drops. It could be concluded that inlet LCOW values are also compared with previous studies’ values, as listed
seawater temperature increments decrease exergy destruction while in Table 7. The comparison results show that the proposed system has
significantly increasing overall system exergy efficiency. the lowest cost of water among similar-scale systems and is competitive
Exergy destruction and overall system exergy efficiency changes to other large-scale values of (0.5–1.2) U$/m3 [72].
24
6.5.3. Payback period decreasing order: feed water salinity (S1w), high-pressure pump effi
The payback period is considered an essential economic evaluation ciency (ηHPP ), solar irradiance (G), ambient temperature (Tamb), inlet
parameter that calculates the minimum time needed for the system’s seawater temperature (T1w), wind speed (Vwind), and finally the HTF
annual cash inflows from product sales to recover the initial investment flow rate (Qc) is the least influential. The highest productivity value of
cash in. The payback period is determined to be 12 years for the base 993.8 L/h is achieved by decreasing the feed water salinity by 30 %,
case conditions. while the lowest productivity value of 476.3 L/h is reached by
increasing the feed water salinity by 30 %.
6.5.4. Techno-economic analysis Moreover, Fig. 22b reveals the SEC’s most substantial parameters in
In the subsequent analysis, a techno-economic evaluation of the declining order: feed water salinity, high-pressure pump efficiency, solar
CPV/T hybrid HDH-RO system is undertaken to determine its viability irradiance, inlet seawater temperature, ambient temperature, wind
under different climatic and operating parameters. Initial assessments speed, and finally, the HTF flow rate is the least dominant. The highest
involve the annual output of clean water and the yearly plant cost, SEC value of 5.5 kW/m3 is achieved by increasing the feed water salinity
leading to the calculation of the total cost of clean water, as mentioned by 30 %, while the lowest SEC value of 2.6 kW/m3 is reached by
in Section 3. The study further investigates the impact of solar irradi decreasing the feed water salinity by 30 %. Additionally, Fig. 22c il
ance, ambient conditions (ambient temperature, wind speed, inlet lustrates the most affecting parameters on exergy destruction in
seawater temperature), HTF flow rate, and High-Pressure Pump effi descending order: solar irradiance, high-pressure pump efficiency, inlet
ciency on the Levelized cost of clean water, providing comprehensive seawater temperature, feed water salinity, HTF flow rate, ambient
insights into the economic feasibility of the proposed system. temperature, and finally, wind speed is the smallest significant. The
Levelized cost of water (LCOW) values with solar irradiance varia highest ExD value of 14.7 kW is achieved by growing the solar irradiance
tions under the base case conditions are depicted in Fig. 18. It observed by 30 %, while the lowest ExD value of 7.9 kW is reached by decreasing
that LCOW drops by 21.6 % from 1.11 to 0.87 U$/m3, as solar irradiance the solar irradiance salinity by 30 %. Finally, the sensitivity of LCOW
increases from 600 to 1000W/m2, respectively. The reason is that as through all parameters investigated before and other economic param
solar irradiance increases, freshwater productivity significantly rises eters such as interest rate, total capital cost, and operation & mainte
more than plant cost increments. The results conclude that solar irra nance cost is demonstrated in Fig. 22d. The results illustrate the most
diance has inverse significant effects on LCOW. affecting parameters on LCOW in descendant order: feed water salinity,
Fig. 19 displays LCOW values with inlet seawater temperature at a total capital cost, high-pressure pump efficiency, solar irradiance, in
range from 10 to 400C under base case conditions. The result shows that terest rate, operation & maintenance cost, ambient temperature, inlet
LCOW declines slightly by 4 %, from 1.06 to 1.02U$/m3, as inlet seawater temperature, cooling HTF flow rate, and finally wind speed is
seawater temperature increases from 10 to 240C, respectively. Then, it the least significant. The highest LCOW value of 1.52U$/m3 is achieved
rises again by 6.8 % to the 1.09 U$/m3 value as inlet seawater tem by raising the feed water salinity by 30 %, while the lowest LCOW value
perature rises to 400C. From the result, it could be concluded that the of 0.67 U$/m3 is reached by reducing the total capital cost by 30 %.
lowest LCOW value is 1.02 U$/m3 at the inlet seawater temperature of The CPV/T hybrid HDH-RO desalination system exhibits a good
240C. performance with a lower specific energy consumption compared to
The effect of ambient temperature, wind speed, and cooling HTF previous green energy source studies at similar productivity scales, as
flow rate on LCOW is illustrated in Fig. 20a, b, and c. The results reveal outlined in Table 8. This positions the system competitively in terms of
that LCOW is directly proportional to ambient temperature, as the rises energy efficiency and sustainability, marking a notable advancement in
from 297 to 319K, LCOW increases slightly by 5 %, from 1.02 to 1.07 U green desalination technologies.
$/m3, respectively, as shown in Fig. 20a. That might be because fresh
water productivity decrease with ambient temperature increments and 7. Conclusion
also plant cost increase too. While LCOW is inversely proportional to
wind speed, LCOW drops by 4.9 %, from 1.02 to 0.97 U$/m3, respec From the techno-exergy-economic investigation of the CPV/T hybrid
tively, as shown in Fig. 20b. The result takes the drop trend because, as HDH-RO desalination system, which includes the integration of CPV/T
wind speed increases, freshwater productivity slightly increases and standalone power configuration, HDH and RO best performance, and the
plant cost declines. Moreover, cooling HTF flow rate has a neglectable effective utilization of mass and energy recovery through hybrid
effect on LCOW, as displayed in Fig. 20c.It could be concluded that connection and reverse osmosis ERD integration, it can be concluded
ambient temperature and wind speed increments have a slight propor that.
tional and inverse effect on LCOW, respectively while cooling HTF flow
rate has a neglectable impact. • Solar irradiance increments significantly improve productivity and
Levelized cost of water (LCOW) values with feed water salinity and quality as freshwater elevates by 39 % and salinity diminishes by
high-pressure pump efficiency variations under the base case conditions 30.2 % while reducing system performance as SEC rises by 9.1 % and
are described in Fig. 21a and b. The result noted that LCOW increases RR drops by 10.3 %. While inlet seawater temperature has a limited
significantly by 1.5 times from 0.87 to 2.11U$/m3, as feed water salinity effect on productivity, high-growth freshwater salinity improves
rises from 30 to 50 g/kg, respectively as displayed in Fig. 21a. However, system performance.
LCOW drops by 18.6 % from 1.13 to 0.92 U$/m3, as HPP efficiency rises • High-pressure pump efficiency increments improve freshwater pro
from 62 to 82 %, respectively as depicted in Fig. 21b. That is because, as ductivity by 26.4 %, quality (28.3 % salinity drops), and energy
HPP efficiency grows freshwater productivity rises while as feed salinity consumption (SEC is eliminated by 21 %), whereas RR diminishes by
increases productivity declines. The results conclude that HPP efficiency 8.3 %.
has an inverse effect on LCOW, while feed water salinity has a sub • Feed water salinity increments negatively impact the system pro
stantial direct effect. ductivity, quality, and performance, as a productivity and recovery
ratio significantly decrease by 58.5 % and 64.6 %, respectively, and
6.6. Sensitivity analysis SEC and freshwater salinity rise by 1.3 and 1.5 times, respectively.
• The CPV/T has the highest exergy destruction portion among the
Sensitivity analysis of freshwater productivity, specific energy con other subsystems with 84.6 %; in descending order, the RO unit
sumption, exergy destruction, and levelized cost of water for the CPV/T comes with 12.1 %; finally, the HDH has the lowest portion of 3.3 %.
hybrid HDH-RO desalination system is presented in Fig. 22a,b,c, and d. Moreover, the highest exergy destruction in HDH: Humidifier (37.7
Fig. 22a highlights the productivity most influential parameters in %) and Blower (31 %), followed by Dehumidifier (24.3 %) and Heat
25
Exchanger (7.1 %). In the RO unit, High-Pressure Pump leads (61.3 References
%), then Membranes (25.5 %), and PC (13.2 %).
• Solar irradiance increments have significantly raised exergy [1] J.S. Shaikh, S. Ismail, A review on recent technological advancements in
humidification dehumidification (HDH) desalination, J. Environ. Chem. Eng. 10
destruction by 65.9 % while slightly affecting system exergy effi (6) (2022), https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jece.2022.108890.
ciency. Inlet seawater temperature increments decrease exergy [2] S.M. Alawad, R. Ben Mansour, F.A. Al-Sulaiman, S. Rehman, Renewable energy
destruction by 7.9 % while substantially increasing overall system systems for water desalination applications: a comprehensive review, Energy
Convers. Manag. 286 (2023), https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enconman.2023.117035.
exergy efficiency by 35.8 %. Elsevier Ltd.
• High-pressure pump efficiency increments slightly decrease exergy [3] A.S. Isah, H.B. Takaijudin, B.S. Mahinder Singh, U.A. Abubakar, S.J. Mohammad,
destruction while raising exergy efficiency by 15.9 %. T. Oladoyin abimbola, Assessing the performance, sustainability, and economic
viability of a photovoltaic-based solar desalination system for water scarce regions,
• The RO unit has the largest cost portion among the other subsystems, J. Clean. Prod. 421 (June) (2023) 138528, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
with 68 %; in descending order, the CPV/T unit comes next with 26 jclepro.2023.138528.
%; finally, the HDH unit has the lowest cost, at 3.3 %. [4] W. He, G. Huang, C.N. Markides, Synergies and potential of hybrid solar
photovoltaic-thermal desalination technologies, Desalination 552 (October 2022)
• Solar irradiance has an inverse effect of 21.6 % on LCOW, while Inlet
(2023) 116424, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.desal.2023.116424.
seawater has a slight effect on LCOW of 6.8 %. Moreover, HPP effi [5] B. Anand, R. Shankar, S. Murugavelh, W. Rivera, K. Midhun Prasad, R. Nagarajan,
ciency has an inverse impact by 18.6 % on LCOW, while feed water A review on solar photovoltaic thermal integrated desalination technologies,
salinity has a huge direct impact over 1.5times Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 141 (February) (2021) 110787, https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.rser.2021.110787.
• The most influential productivity parameters are S1w ηHPP , G, Tamb, [6] V.K. Chauhan, S.K. Shukla, J.V. Tirkey, P.K. Singh Rathore, A comprehensive
T1w, Vwind, and Qc (descending order). The highest productivity is review of direct solar desalination techniques and its advancements, J. Clean. Prod.
993.8 L/h with 30 % increased salinity; the lowest is 476.3 L/h with 284 (2021) 124719, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.124719.
[7] S.T. Pourafshar, K. Jafarinaemi, H. Mortezapour, Development of a photovoltaic-
30 % decreased salinity. In contrast, SEC’s significant parameters are thermal solar humidifier for the humidification-dehumidification desalination
S1w, ηHPP G, T1w, Tamb, Vwind, and Qc (descending order). The highest system coupled with heat pump, Sol. Energy 205 (February) (2020) 51–61, https://
SEC is 5.5 kW/m3 with 30 % increased salinity; the lowest SEC is 2.6 doi.org/10.1016/j.solener.2020.05.045.
[8] B. Anand, S. Murugavelh, Techno-economic analysis of solar trigeneration system,
kW/m3 with 30 % decreased salinity. IOP Conf. Ser. Earth Environ. Sci. 312 (1) (2019), https://doi.org/10.1088/1755-
• Prominent exergy destruction factors, in descending order, are G, 1315/312/1/012030.
ηHPP , T1w, S1w, Qc, Tamb, and least, Vwind. Peak destruction (14.7 kW) [9] M. Ammous, M. Chaabene, Photovoltaic thermal collectors: reverse osmosis
desalination system as an application, Appl. Sol. Energy 53 (2) (2017) 152–160,
is associated with 30 % more solar irradiance, while the minimum https://doi.org/10.3103/S0003701X17020049.
(7.9 kW) ties to a 30 % reduction. Meanwhile, LCOW has substantial [10] Jessica adriana bane, Feasibility Study and Optimization Analysis of Using a PVT
parameters: are S1w, ZC,P, ηHPP , G, i, OMCP, Tamb, Qc, and Vwind Colector for a Reverse Osmosis Based Water Desalination Plant, The University of
Texas at EI Paso, 2017.
(descending order). The highest SEC is 5.5 kW/m3 with 30 %
[11] L. Kelley, A.M. Bilton, S. Dubowsky, Enhancing the performance of photovoltaic
increased salinity; the lowest SEC is 2.6 kW/m3 with 30 % decreased powered reverse osmosis desalination systems by active thermal management, in:
salinity. ASME 2011 Int. Mech. Eng. Congr. Expo. IMECE 2011, vol. 1, 2011, pp. 427–436,
• The proposed system produces 860L/h of fresh water at the lowest https://doi.org/10.1115/imece2011-62717.
[12] T. Otanicar, W. Qu, Thermodynamic analysis of hybrid humidification-
water cost and SEC of 0.916 U$/m3 and 3.3 kW/m3, respectively, dehumidification (HDH) - reverse osmosis (RO) desalination system powered by
with an RR of 38 % and a 12-year payback period compared to other concentrating photovoltaic/thermal solar collector, AIP Conf. Proc. 2033 (2018),
green-powered desalination systems. https://doi.org/10.1063/1.5067164.
[13] N.M. Eshoul, B. Agnew, M.A. Al-weshahi, M.S. Atab, Exergy analysis of a two-pass
reverse osmosis (RO) desalination unit with and without an energy recovery
CRediT authorship contribution statement turbine, ERT) and Pressure Exchanger (PX) (2015) 6910–6925, https://doi.org/
10.3390/en8076910.
[14] H. Ghaebi, S. Ahmadi, Energy and exergy evaluation of an innovative hybrid
Mark M. Fares: Writing – review & editing, Writing – original draft, system coupled with HRSG and HDH desalination units, J. Clean. Prod. 252 (2020)
Visualization, Validation, Software, Resources, Methodology, Investi 119821, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.119821.
gation, Formal analysis, Data curation, Conceptualization. Xing Ju: [15] B.A. Qureshi, S.M. Zubair, Exergetic analysis of a brackish water reverse osmosis
desalination unit with various energy recovery systems, Energy 93 (2015)
Writing – review & editing, Visualization, Validation, Supervision, Re 256–265, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2015.09.003.
sources, Investigation, Conceptualization. E. Elgendy: Writing – review [16] M.H.K. Manesh, R.S. Ghadikolaei, H.V. Modabber, V.C. Onishi, Integration of a
& editing, Visualization, Validation, Resources, Investigation, Formal combined cycle power plant with med-ro desalination based on conventional and
advanced exergy, exergoeconomic, and exergoenvironmental analyses, Processes 9
analysis, Conceptualization. M. Fatouh: Writing – review & editing,
(1) (2021) 1–29, https://doi.org/10.3390/pr9010059.
Visualization, Investigation, Conceptualization. Heng Zhang: Writing – [17] A.E. Kabeel, M.R. Diab, M.A. Elazab, E.M.S. El-Said, Hybrid solar powered
review & editing, Visualization, Investigation. Chao Xu: Writing – desalination system based on air humidification dehumidification integrated with
original draft, Visualization, Resources, Investigation. Mostafa M. Abd novel distiller: exergoeconomic analysis, J. Clean. Prod. 379 (P1) (2022) 134690,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2022.134690.
El-Samie: Writing – review & editing, Visualization, Validation, Re [18] M.A. Jamil, S.M. Elmutasim, S.M. Zubair, Exergo-economic analysis of a hybrid
sources, Investigation. humidification dehumidification reverse osmosis (HDH-RO) system operating
under different retrofits, Energy Convers. Manag. 158 (Feb. 2018) 286–297,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enconman.2017.11.025.
Declaration of competing interest [19] G. Li, L. Zhang, Investigation of a solar energy driven and hollow fiber membrane-
based humidification – dehumidification desalination system, Appl. Energy 177
The authors declare that they have no known competing financial (2016) 393–408, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2016.05.113.
[20] B. Anand, S. Murugavelh, A hybrid system for power, desalination, and cooling
interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence using concentrated photovoltaic/thermal collector, Energy Sources, Part A
the work reported in this paper. Recover. Util. Environ. Eff. 44 (1) (2022) 1416–1436, https://doi.org/10.1080/
15567036.2019.1644395.
[21] A.M. Elsafi, Integration of humidification-dehumidification desalination and
Acknowledgment concentrated photovoltaic-thermal collectors: energy and exergy-costing analysis,
Desalination 424 (September) (2017) 17–26, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
This work was supported by the Foundation of the National Natural desal.2017.09.022.
[22] M. Ammous, M. Chaabene, Multi criteria sizing approach for Photovoltaic Thermal
Science Foundation of China (51821004).
collectors supplying desalination plant, Energy Convers. Manag. 94 (2015)
365–376, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enconman.2015.02.004.
[23] A. Kroiß, M. Spinnler, T. Sattelmayer, Analysis of hybrid photovoltaic/thermal
(PV/T) solar system for small scale reverse osmosis desalination plants, in: 25th
Eur. Photovolt. Sol. Energy Conf. Exhib, 2010, pp. 5161–5167. January, https://
www.researchgate.net/profile/Alexander-Kroiss/publication/272821551_Analysi
s_of_Hybrid_PhotovoltaicThermal_PVT_Solar_Systems_for_Small_Scale_Reverse_
26
Osmosis_Desalination_Plants/links/55991afb08ae5d8f39341538/Analysis-o [48] P. Ding, et al., Exergoeconomic analysis and optimization of a hybrid Kalina and
f-Hybrid-Photovoltaic-Thermal. humidification-dehumidification system for waste heat recovery of low-
[24] M.M. Fares, Xing Ju, E. Elgendy, M. Fatouh, Mostafa M. Abd El-Samie, temperature Diesel engine, Desalination 496 (Dec) (2020), https://doi.org/
Heng Zhang, Chao Xu, Theoretical investigation of a humidification- 10.1016/j.desal.2020.114725.
dehumidification/reverse osmosis hybrid desalination unit driven by concentrated [49] M.H. Elbassoussi, R.H. Mohammed, S.M. Zubair, Thermoeconomic assessment of
photovoltaic/thermal solar collector: on both energy and mass recovery, Energy an adsorption cooling/desalination cycle coupled with a water-heated
Convers. Manag. 297 (May) (2023) 117671, https://doi.org/10.1016/j. humidification-dehumidification desalination unit, Energy Convers. Manag. 223
enconman.2023.117671. (August) (2020) 113270, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enconman.2020.113270.
[25] C. Haiping, L. Haowen, Z. Heng, L. Kai, G. Xinxin, Y. Boran, Numerical simulation [50] J. Peacock, G. Huang, J. Song, C.N. Markides, Techno-economic assessment of
and experimental analysis of an LCPV/T system under real operating conditions, integrated spectral-beam-splitting photovoltaic-thermal (PV-T) and organic
J. Clean. Prod. 209 (2019) 903–915, https://doi.org/10.1016/j. Rankine cycle (ORC) systems, Energy Convers. Manag. 269 (August) (2022)
jclepro.2018.10.256. 116071, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enconman.2022.116071.
[26] RO membrane products [homepage of the internet]. https://www.lenntech. [51] S.M. Esmaeili, P. Pourmoghadam, Energy exergy and economic evaluation of a
com/replacement/filmtec-sw30hr-380.htm. (last visit1/July/2023).”. CCHP configuration powered by CPVT collectors dynamically, Energy Rep. 9
[27] F-Chart official website, “www.fchart.com/ees/index.php. (last visit 1/July/ (2023) 6486–6499, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.egyr.2023.06.003.
2023).”. [52] P. Gang, F. Huide, Z. Huijuan, J. Jie, Performance study and parametric analysis of
[28] F- chart Software EES Manual, “EES Engineering Equation Solver for Microsoft a novel heat pipe PV/T system, Energy 37 (1) (2012) 384–395, https://doi.org/
Windows Operating Systems, www.fchart.com. (last visit 1/July/2023).”. 10.1016/j.energy.2011.11.017.
[29] G.P. Narayan, M.H. Sharqawy, J.H. Lienhard V, S.M. Zubair, Thermodynamic [53] S.A. Kalogirou, Y. Tripanagnostopoulos, Hybrid PV/T solar systems for domestic
analysis of humidification dehumidification desalination cycles, Desalin. Water hot water and electricity production, Energy Convers. Manag. 47 (18–19) (Nov.
Treat. 16 (1–3) (2010) 339–353, https://doi.org/10.5004/dwt.2010.1078. 2006) 3368–3382, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enconman.2006.01.012.
[30] A. Altaee, Computational model for estimating reverse osmosis system design and [54] S.M. Shalaby, M.K. Elfakharany, I.M. Mujtaba, B.M. Moharram, H.F. Abosheiasha,
performance: Part-one binary feed solution, Desalination 291 (2012) 101–105, Development of an efficient nano-fluid cooling/preheating system for PV-RO water
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.desal.2012.01.028. desalination pilot plant, Energy Convers. Manag. 268 (July) (2022) 115960,
[31] M.H. Sharqawy, M.A. Antar, S.M. Zubair, A.M. Elbashir, Optimum thermal design https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enconman.2022.115960.
of humidification dehumidification desalination systems, Desalination 349 (2014) [55] H.T. El-Dessouky, H.M. Ettouney, in: H.T. El-Dessouky, H.M. B.T.-F. of S.W.
10–21, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.desal.2014.06.016. D. Ettouney (Eds.), Chapter 10 - Economic Analysis of Desalination Processes,
[32] W.F. He, F. Wu, T. Wen, Y.P. Kong, D. Han, Cost analysis of a humidification Elsevier Science B.V., Amsterdam, 2002, pp. 503–524, https://doi.org/10.1016/
dehumidification desalination system with a packed bed dehumidifier, Energy B978-044450810-2/50012-9.
Convers. Manag. 171 (29) (2018) 452–460, https://doi.org/10.1016/j. [56] Y. Gu, X. Zhang, J. Are Myhren, M. Han, X. Chen, Y. Yuan, Techno-economic
enconman.2018.06.008. analysis of a solar photovoltaic/thermal (PV/T) concentrator for building
[33] H. Nikkhah, B. Beykal, Process design and technoeconomic analysis for zero liquid application in Sweden using Monte Carlo method, Energy Convers. Manag. 165
discharge desalination via LiBr absorption chiller integrated HDH-MEE-MVR (January) (2018) 8–24, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enconman.2018.03.043.
system, Desalination 558 (April) (2023) 116643, https://doi.org/10.1016/j. [57] B. Kurşun, K. Ökten, Comprehensive energy, exergy, and economic analysis of the
desal.2023.116643. scenario of supplementing pumped thermal energy storage (PTES) with a
[34] F.A. Al-Sulaiman, G. Prakash Narayan, J.H. Lienhard, Exergy analysis of a high- concentrated photovoltaic thermal system, Energy Convers. Manag. 260 (March)
temperature-steam-driven, varied-pressure, humidification-dehumidification (2022), https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enconman.2022.115592.
system coupled with reverse osmosis, Appl. Energy 103 (2013) 552–561, https:// [58] D.S. Ayou, V. Eveloy, Energy, exergy and exergoeconomic analysis of an ultra low-
doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2012.10.020. grade heat-driven ammonia-water combined absorption power-cooling cycle for
[35] M.I. Zubair, F.A. Al-Sulaiman, M.A. Antar, S.A. Al-Dini, N.I. Ibrahim, Performance district space cooling, sub-zero refrigeration, power and LNG regasification, Energy
and cost assessment of solar driven humidification dehumidification desalination Convers. Manag. 213 (April) (2020) 112790, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
system, Energy Convers. Manag. 132 (2017) 28–39, https://doi.org/10.1016/j. enconman.2020.112790.
enconman.2016.10.005. [59] Y.M. El-Sayed, Designing desalination systems for higher productivity,
[36] A.H. Shafaghat, M. Eslami, M. Baneshi, Techno-enviro-economic study of a reverse Desalination 134 (1–3) (2001) 129–158, https://doi.org/10.1016/S0011-9164(01)
osmosis desalination system equipped with photovoltaic-thermal collectors, Appl. 00122-9.
Therm. Eng. 218 (July 2022) (2023) 119289, https://doi.org/10.1016/j. [60] P. Pourmoghadam, A. Kasaeian, Economic and energy evaluation of a solar multi-
applthermaleng.2022.119289. generation system powered by the parabolic trough collectors, Energy 262 (PA)
[37] K.H. Mistry, R.K. McGovern, G.P. Thiel, E.K. Summers, S.M. Zubair, J.H. Lienhard, (2023) 125362, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2022.125362.
Entropy generation analysis of desalination technologies, Entropy 13 (10) (2011) [61] J. Kim, S. Hong, A novel single-pass reverse osmosis configuration for high-purity
1829–1864, https://doi.org/10.3390/e13101829. water production and low energy consumption in seawater desalination,
[38] S.M. Zubair, M.A. Antar, S.M. Elmutasim, D.U. Lawal, Performance evaluation of Desalination 429 (December 2017) (2018) 142–154, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
humidification-dehumidification (HDH) desalination systems with and without desal.2017.12.026.
heat recovery options: an experimental and theoretical investigation, Desalination [62] Y. Du, L. Xie, Y. Liu, S. Zhang, Y. Xu, Optimization of reverse osmosis networks
436 (October 2017) (2018) 161–175, https://doi.org/10.1016/j. with split partial second pass design, Desalination 365 (2015) 365–380, https://
desal.2018.02.018. doi.org/10.1016/j.desal.2015.03.019.
[39] R. Petela, Exergy of undiluted thermal radiation, Sol. Energy 74 (6) (2003) [63] R.S. El-Emam, I. Dincer, Thermodynamic and thermoeconomic analyses of
469–488, https://doi.org/10.1016/S0038-092X(03)00226-3. seawater reverse osmosis desalination plant with energy recovery, Energy 64
[40] V. Badescu, Upper bound efficiency for thermal radiation energy conversion by (2014) 154–163, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2013.11.037.
using spectrally selective electrical, chemical and mechanical work extractors, [64] P. Sharan, T. Neises, J.D. McTigue, C. Turchi, Cogeneration using multi-effect
Phys. Scr. 98 (6) (2023) 65021, https://doi.org/10.1088/1402-4896/acd3c5. distillation and a solar-powered supercritical carbon dioxide Brayton cycle,
[41] I.K. Karathanassis, E. Papanicolaou, V. Belessiotis, G.C. Bergeles, Dynamic Desalination 459 (2019) 20–33, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.desal.2019.02.007.
simulation and exergetic optimization of a Concentrating Photovoltaic/Thermal [65] M. Sarai Atab, A.J. Smallbone, A.P. Roskilly, An operational and economic study of
(CPVT) system, Renew. Energy 135 (2019) 1035–1047, https://doi.org/10.1016/j. a reverse osmosis desalination system for potable water and land irrigation,
renene.2018.12.085. Desalination 397 (2016) 174–184, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.desal.2016.06.020.
[42] M.A. Jamil, S.M. Elmutasim, S.M. Zubair, Exergo-economic analysis of a hybrid [66] D. Lawal, M. Antar, A. Khalifa, Integration of an MSF desalination system with an
humidification dehumidification reverse osmosis (HDH-RO) system operating HDH system for brine recovery, Sustain. Times 13 (6) (2021), https://doi.org/
under different retrofits, Energy Convers. Manag. 158 (February) (2018) 286–297, 10.3390/su13063506.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enconman.2017.11.025. [67] M. Sheykhi, M. Chahartaghi, M.M. Balakheli, B.A. Kharkeshi, S.M. Miri, Energy,
[43] D.U. Lawal, S.M. Zubair, M.A. Antar, Exergo-economic analysis of humidification- exergy, environmental, and economic modeling of combined cooling, heating and
dehumidification (HDH) desalination systems driven by heat pump (HP), power system with Stirling engine and absorption chiller, Energy Convers. Manag.
Desalination 443 (March) (2018) 11–25, https://doi.org/10.1016/j. 180 (August 2018) (2019) 183–195, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
desal.2018.05.011. enconman.2018.10.102.
[44] A. Bhowmick, B. Kundu, Exergoeconomic assessment and optimization of a double [68] B. Lee, et al., Economic feasibility studies of high pressure PEM water electrolysis
effect absorption chiller integrated with a humidification-dehumidification for distributed H2 refueling stations, Energy Convers. Manag. 162 (Apr. 2018)
desalination system, Energy Convers. Manag. 247 (2021), https://doi.org/ 139–144, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enconman.2018.02.041.
10.1016/j.enconman.2021.114766. [69] H. Chen, H. Zhang, M. Li, H. Liu, J. Huang, Experimental investigation of a novel
[45] M.H. Sharqawy, J.H. Lienhard V, S.M. Zubair, Thermophysical properties of LCPV/T system with micro-channel heat pipe array, Renew. Energy 115 (2018)
seawater: a review of existing correlations and data, Desalin. Water Treat. 16 (1–3) 773–782, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2017.08.087.
(2010) 354–380, https://doi.org/10.5004/dwt.2010.1079. [70] M. La Cerva, L. Gurreri, A. Cipollina, A. Tamburini, M. Ciofalo, G. Micale,
[46] A. Khouya, 4E assessment of a hybrid RO/MED-TVC desalination plant powered by Modelling and cost analysis of hybrid systems for seawater desalination:
CPV/T systems, Energy Convers. Manag. 277 (December 2022) (2023) 116666, electromembrane pre-treatments for Reverse Osmosis, Desalination 467 (March)
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enconman.2023.116666. (2019) 175–195, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.desal.2019.06.010.
[47] H. Rostamzadeh, A.S. Namin, H. Ghaebi, M. Amidpour, Performance assessment [71] M.M. Fares, et al., Hybrid desalination system driven by solar energy: optimization
and optimization of a humidification dehumidification (HDH) system driven by and case study, Appl. Therm. Eng. (2024) 122847, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
absorption-compression heat pump cycle, Desalination 447 (June) (2018) 84–101, applthermaleng.2024.122847.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.desal.2018.08.015.
27
[72] N. Ghaffour, T.M. Missimer, G.L. Amy, Technical review and evaluation of the Nonlinear Theory Appl. 5 (1) (2016) 11–27, https://doi.org/10.4236/
economics of water desalination: current and future challenges for better water ijmnta.2016.51002.
supply sustainability, Desalination 309 (Jan. 2013) 197–207, https://doi.org/ [84] P. Gabrielli, et al., Combined water desalination and electricity generation through
10.1016/j.desal.2012.10.015. a humidification-dehumidification process integrated with photovoltaic-thermal
[73] J.C. Bruno, J. López-Villada, E. Letelier, S. Romera, A. Coronas, Modelling and modules: design, performance analysis and techno-economic assessment, Energy
optimisation of solar organic rankine cycle engines for reverse osmosis Convers. Manag. X 1 (January) (2019) 100004, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
desalination, Appl. Therm. Eng. 28 (17–18) (2008) 2212–2226, https://doi.org/ ecmx.2019.100004.
10.1016/j.applthermaleng.2007.12.022. [85] D. Herold, V. Horstmann, A. Neskakis, J. Plettner-Marliani, G. Piernavieja,
[74] A. Hossam-Eldin, A.M. El-Nashar, A. Ismaiel, Investigation into economical R. Calero, Small scale photovoltaic desalination for rural water supply -
desalination using optimized hybrid renewable energy system, Int. J. Electr. Power demonstration plant in Gran Canaria, Renew. Energy 14 (1–4) (1998) 293–298,
Energy Syst. 43 (1) (2012) 1393–1400, https://doi.org/10.1016/j. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0960-1481(98)00080-9.
ijepes.2012.05.019. [86] P.C.M. De Carvalho, D.B. Riffel, C. Freire, F.F.D. Montenegro, The Brazilian
[75] A.M. Helal, S.A. Al-Malek, E.S. Al-Katheeri, Economic feasibility of alternative experience with a photovoltaic powered reverse osmosis plant, Prog. Photovoltaics
designs of a PV-RO desalination unit for remote areas in the United Arab Emirates, Res. Appl. 12 (5) (2004) 373–385, https://doi.org/10.1002/pip.543.
Desalination 221 (1–3) (2008) 1–16, https://doi.org/10.1016/j. [87] E. Tzen, D. Theofilloyianakos, Z. Kologios, Autonomous reverse osmosis units
desal.2007.01.064. driven by RE sources experiences and lessons learned, Desalination 221 (1–3)
[76] A.M. Bilton, L.C. Kelley, D. Steven, Photovoltaic reverse osmosis - feasibility and a (2008) 29–36, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.desal.2007.02.048.
pathway to develop technology, Desalin. Water Treat. 31 (1–3) (2011) 24–34, [88] D. Herold, A. Neskakis, A small PV-driven reverse osmosis desalination plant on the
https://doi.org/10.5004/dwt.2011.2398. island of Gran Canaria, Desalination 137 (1–3) (2001) 285–292, https://doi.org/
[77] S.A. Kershman, J. Rheinländer, H. Gabler, Seawater reverse osmosis powered from 10.1016/S0011-9164(01)00230-2.
renewable energy sources - hybrid wind/photovoltaic/grid power supply for small- [89] K.E. Thomas, Overview of ViIIage ScaIe, renewable energy powered desalination,
scale desalination in Libya, Desalination 153 (1–3) (2003) 17–23, https://doi.org/ Renew. Energy (April) (1997). NREL617pp.-440-22083 UC Category: 1210
10.1016/S0011-9164(02)01089-5. DE97000240, internal-pdf://22083-1171855115/22083.pdf.
[78] G. Kosmadakis, D. Manolakos, G. Papadakis, Parametric theoretical study of a two- [90] A. Scrivani, Energy management and DSM techniques for a PV-diesel powered sea
stage solar organic Rankine cycle for RO desalination, Renew. Energy 35 (5) water reverse osmosis desalination plant in Ginostra, Sicily, Desalination 183 (1–3)
(2010) 989–996, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2009.10.032. (2005) 63–72, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.desal.2005.02.043.
[79] M. Gökçek, Ö.B. Gökçek, Technical and economic evaluation of freshwater [91] D. Manolakos, E.S. Mohamed, I. Karagiannis, G. Papadakis, Technical and
production from a wind-powered small-scale seawater reverse osmosis system economic comparison between PV-RO system and RO-Solar Rankine system. Case
(WP-SWRO), Desalination 381 (2016) 47–57, https://doi.org/10.1016/j. study: Thirasia island, Desalination 221 (1–3) (2008) 37–46, https://doi.org/
desal.2015.12.004. 10.1016/j.desal.2007.01.066.
[80] I.D. Spyrou, J.S. Anagnostopoulos, Design study of a stand-alone desalination [92] E. Ntavou, G. Kosmadakis, D. Manolakos, G. Papadakis, D. Papantonis,
system powered by renewable energy sources and a pumped storage unit, Experimental evaluation of a multi-skid reverse osmosis unit operating at
Desalination 257 (1–3) (2010) 137–149, https://doi.org/10.1016/j. fluctuating power input, Desalination 398 (2016) 77–86, https://doi.org/10.1016/
desal.2010.02.033. j.desal.2016.07.014.
[81] M.S. Miranda, D. Infield, A wind-powered seawater reverse-osmosis system [93] H. Qiblawey, F. Banat, Q. Al-Nasser, Laboratory setup for water purification using
without batteries, Desalination 153 (1–3) (2003) 9–16, https://doi.org/10.1016/ household PV-driven reverse osmosis unit, Desalin. Water Treat. 7 (1–3) (2009)
S0011-9164(02)01088-3. 53–59, https://doi.org/10.5004/dwt.2009.695.
[82] M. Thomson, D. Infield, A photovoltaic-powered seawater reverse-osmosis system [94] V.J. Subiela, J.A. de la Fuente, G. Piernavieja, B. Peñate, Canary islands institute of
without batteries, Desalination 153 (1–3) (2003) 1–8, https://doi.org/10.1016/ technology (ITC) experiences in desalination with renewable energies (1996-
S0011-9164(03)80004-8. 2008), Desalin. Water Treat. 7 (1–3) (2009) 220–235, https://doi.org/10.5004/
[83] M. Ammous, S. Charfi, A. Harb, M. Chaabene, Improvement of PV/T based reverse dwt.2009.733.
osmosis desalination plant performances using fuzzy logic controller, Int. J. Mod.
28

1 s2.0 S0960148124005627 Main

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

1 s2.0 S0960148124005627 Main

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

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

1 s2.0 S0960148124005627 Main

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Renewable Energy 227 (2024) 120497

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Techno-exergy-economic assessment of humidification-dehumidification/

and photovoltaic (PV)- reverse osmosis (RO) desalination were con­

Abbreviations Tref Photovoltaic reference temperature (K)

1a Dehumidifier inlet air m Motor

Fig. 1. Schematic diagram of the proposed system.

Concentrated photovoltaic/thermal [25] -Energy balance at

Reverse osmosis [30] -Freshwater volume

Table 2 (continued ) • The effectiveness of the humidifier and dehumidifier is 85 %, while

3.1.1. Concentrated photovoltaic/thermal unit

exT = exph + exch (1) ηII =

a + cx + ex2 + gx3 + ix4

Exergy efficiency at the dehumidifier:

ΣĖxout,Heater ĖxC3 + Ėx3w

ZHEX = 235(Q̇H )0.75 (44)

Where, Q̇H is heat transfer at the heat exchanger in (kW).

Where, Qf is the volume flow rate fed to the RO unit in (m3/day).

Where Ni is the number of membrane elements, Ae is the membrane

3.3.2. Economic model

Where, CF is the cash flow of annual savings that can be expressed as

The summary of the economic model calculations is listed in Table 6.

The next section furnishes comprehensive techno-exergy-economic

The following mass salt balance equation expresses the salinity of

HDH-RO CPV/T 580–860 0.88-1.16 3.3–3.7 RR ¼

hybrid desalination system performance, is calculated as follows.

The overall exergy destruction is defined and mathematically

ĖxD,t = ĖxD,CPV/T + ĖxD,HDH + ĖxD,RO (66)

Exergy efficiency for each component and overall system can be

Table 8 m/s at G = 700w/m2, Tamb = 250C, T1w = 200C, Qc = 70 L/h, S1w = 35

You might also like

and photovoltaic (PV)- reverse osmosis (RO) desalination were con