Parabolic Trough Collector

A large PTC usually consists of a holding structure, curved mirror facets, the absorber tube, and the foundation with pylons.

From: Comprehensive Renewable Energy , 2012

Solar-based systems

Simona Di Fraia , ... Laura Vanoli , in Polygeneration Systems, 2022

6.2.2.1 Parabolic trough collector

PTC systems use the mirrored surface of a linear parabolic reflector to focus direct solar radiation onto an absorber pipe that runs along the focal line of the concentrator and contains a working fluid that is generally used to produce steam that drives a steam turbine.

PTCs require a land occupation of around 40,000   m2/MW and water demand of about 2.9–3.5   m3/MWh [24]. The operation and maintenance cost of large plants is approximately 8% of the total cost of the electricity produced [25].

PTCs can be easily integrated with thermal energy storage (TES) and a backup system. This allows for operation in periods of low-solar radiation such as cloudy days or during the night, increasing the hours of operation of the plant. Therefore full-load, steady-state electricity generation can be supplied, assuring predictable dispatchability to meet peak demands [26].

Read full chapter

URL:

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/B9780128206256000050

Hybrid solar power system

Jie Sun , in Advances in Clean Energy Technologies, 2021

11.1.1.1 Parabolic trough collector

The PTC is the most mature and commercialized CSP technology today. The first prototype was introduced in the 1880s [6], and PTC has been developed ever since [7, 8]. For PTC, the receiver and concentrator are integrated together. The solar radiation is concentrated by the parabolic trough concentrator and then absorbed by the receiver in the focal line, where the concentrated solar energy is converted into thermal energy and transferred into heat transfer fluid (HTF). The sun-tracking system of PTC is driven in single-axis mode. Normally, the axis is in a south-north direction. Synthetic oil (SO), e.g., VP-1, is widely used as HTF in PTC-CSP plants, e.g., SEGS series project (354   MWe in total) in California, United States, in the 1980s and Andasol series project (150   MWe in total) in Andalusia, Spain, in the 2000s [9]. However, due to the fact that SO generally decomposes above 400°C, the thermodynamic cycle efficiency for a PTC-CSP system is thus largely limited. Therefore, new HTF such as water/steam, also called direct steam generation (DSG), is introduced due to the following advantages [7, 10]: (1) maximum temperature of the thermodynamic cycle above 400°C for higher thermodynamic efficiency; (2) higher overall efficiency due to the absence of oil-water/steam heat exchangers; (3) higher efficiency due to simplified system configuration; and (4) no environmental risk of fire.

Read full chapter

URL:

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/B9780128212219000116

Concentrating solar power best practices

Hank Price , ... Frederick Morse , in Concentrating Solar Power Technology (Second Edition), 2021

20.5.1.4 Collector technology

Parabolic trough collector technology has matured, with much being learned over the last 15  years. However, there is still a lack of industry standards for collectors. The key need is for standards to design collectors to survive wind loads. Not all collectors are designed with the same methodology, and as a result, they have different design criteria and different wind survival capabilities. Additionally, several plants have been built in locations where it appears that the actual wind conditions may have been worse than the design criteria. There have been several notable collector failures due to windy conditions, and these have occurred to collectors designed by some of the more experienced collector providers. The industry needs better design standards and practices for defining the design wind conditions at a site. Although significant advances in collector optical qualification have occurred in recent years, most plants still do not appear to have a good understanding of the actual optical performance of their solar fields. This is an area where new projects could benefit from the new tools starting to be available.

Read full chapter

URL:

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/B9780128199701000207

Solar thermal powered Organic Rankine Cycles

M. Orosz , R. Dickes , in Organic Rankine Cycle (ORC) Power Systems, 2017

16.2.1.4 Parabolic trough collector

A parabolic trough collector (PTC) is a linear concentrating system made of long, parabolic-shaped mirrors and a receiver tube placed along the focal axis of the parabola. DNI is concentrated onto the receiver tube (as illustrated in Fig. 16.8), where solar energy is absorbed by the HTF. A glass envelope is often placed around the HCE to limit convection losses and further improve the collector efficiency; the annulus space between the glass envelope and the receiver tube can be under vacuum. Common PTCs achieve concentration ratios of 50, and the HTF temperature can reach up to 400°C (Lovegrove and Stein, 2012). Parabolic troughs are highly modular and can be arranged in solar fields of various sizes and architecture, however, to minimize losses, the collector axis must be oriented either in an east-west or in a north-south direction, both of which require single-axis tracking. In the case of a smaller solar field, dual-axis tracking can be used to reduce optical losses, however, this is relatively uncommon for linear concentrators.

Figure 16.8. Parabolic dish/trough collectors.

Read full chapter

URL:

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/B9780081005101000168

Emerging Technologies for Reduced Carbon Footprint

Bruce G. Miller , in Clean Coal Engineering Technology (Second Edition), 2017

Parabolic trough collector

The parabolic trough collector is considered the most mature technology of all the CSP options ( Ugolini et al., 2009; Sheu et al., 2012). It uses a single-axis tracking curved mirror system to concentrate solar radiation onto a single point. A receiver tube, containing a heat transfer fluid, is located at the focal point of the mirror and collects the concentrated solar heat energy. The heat transfer fluid, which is a mineral oil or synthetic oil, enters a steam generator to produce superheated steam. The cooled heat transfer fluid returns to the CSP modules to be heated again in a closed loop.

The operating temperatures of parabolic trough systems are 550-1020°F (Sheu et al., 2012; Kuravi et al., 2013). A parabolic trough system is a popular option for the use in a hybrid combined cycle due to its maturity and low price. The systems can also be used to reheat feedwater extracted from the heat recovery steam generator.

Read full chapter

URL:

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/B9780128113653000144

Parabolic-trough concentrating solar power systems

Eduardo Zarza Moya , in Concentrating Solar Power Technology (Second Edition), 2021

7.1 Introduction

A parabolic-trough collector (PTC) is a linear-focus solar collector, basically composed of a parabolic-trough-shaped concentrator that reflects direct solar radiation onto a receiver or absorber tube located in the focal line of the parabola (see Fig. 7.1). The larger collector aperture area concentrates reflected direct solar radiation onto the smaller outer surface of the receiver tube, heating the fluid that circulates through it. The solar radiation is thus transformed into thermal energy in the form of sensible or latent heat of the fluid. This thermal energy can then be used to feed either industrial processes demanding thermal energy (e.g. food industry, petrochemical industry, etc.) or Rankine cycles to produce electricity with a steam turbine in a 'solar thermal' power plant.

Fig. 7.1

Fig. 7.1. A typical parabolic-trough collector.

With today's technology, parabolic-troughs can deliver useful thermal energy up to 398°C. The main limitation on the maximum temperature is imposed by the thermal oil currently used as the working fluid because it quickly degrades above 398°C. However, a significant research effort continues to be devoted to new fluids to achieve temperatures close to 500°C in the midterm.

Read full chapter

URL:

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/B9780128199701000098

Solar Thermal Systems: Components and Applications

B. Hoffschmidt , ... O. Kaufhold , in Comprehensive Renewable Energy (Second Edition), 2022

3.06.3.4.1 Prefabrication

A large PTC usually consists of a holding structure, curved mirror facets, the absorber tube, and the foundation with pylons. The holding structure can generally be separated into a torque-resistant body and the cantilever arms, which carry the mirrors. These components are prefabricated at specialized facilities. The holding structure and the pylons are usually made of steel. The torque-resistant body can be a round tube or made of some kind of framework. The cantilever arms are made of a framework construction but can also be stamped similar to sheet form profiles of a car bodywork. These processes can be highly automated in order to produce at low cost and at a high level of quality. Because of the size of a larger PTC (span more than 5   m), these parts may be shipped separately to the construction site to minimize the transport volume.

Read full chapter

URL:

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/B9780128197271000583

Parabolic-trough concentrating solar power (CSP) systems

E. Zarza Moya , in Concentrating Solar Power Technology, 2012

7.2.3 Receivers

The typical PTC receiver tube is in fact composed of two concentric pipes, an inner steel pipe containing the working fluid and an outer glass tube surrounding the steel pipe. The glass tube is made of low-iron borosilicate glass to increase its transmittance for solar radiation. The outer surface of the steel pipe has an optically selective surface with a high solar absorptance and low emittance for thermally generated infra-red radiation. The principles of such surfaces are discussed in detail in Chapter 15. The glass tube is usually provided with an anti-reflective coating to achieve a higher solar transmittance and better annual performance.

Receivers for parabolic-trough collectors can be classified as either evacuated or non-evacuated. Evacuated receivers are commonly used for temperatures above 300   °C because they have a high vacuum (i.e., 10−   5  mbar) between the steel pipe and the glass cover, thus reducing thermal losses and increasing the overall efficiency of the PTC, especially at higher operating temperatures. Figure 7.9 shows a typical evacuated receiver. The glass cover of these receivers is connected to the steel pipe by means of stainless steel expansion bellows which not only compensate for the different thermal expansion of glass and steel when the receiver tube is working at nominal temperature, but also provide a tight annular gap between both tubes to make the vacuum. One end of these expansion bellows is directly welded to the outer surface of the steel pipe, while the other end is connected to the end of the glass cover by means of a glass-to-metal welding. Shown in Fig. 7.9 are chemical 'getters' placed in the gap between the steel receiver pipe and the glass cover to absorb gas molecules passing from the fluid to the annulus through the steel pipe wall. Since the evacuated receivers are expensive (about 850 €/unit in 2010) due to their technical complexity, they are used only for higher temperatures, when good thermal efficiency is required and the high cost is compensated by a higher thermal output.

Figure 7.9. A typical evacuated receiver for parabolic-trough collectors.

At the end of 2010, there were only three manufacturers of evacuated PTC receivers: Schott, Siemens and ASE. Most of the parabolic-trough solar thermal power plants implemented around the world until 2009 had receivers manufactured by either the Israeli company, Solel (purchased in 2009 by Siemens, www.energy.siemens.com), or the German company, Schott (www.schottsolar.com). In 2009, a third manufacturer, the Italian company, Archimede Solar Energy (ASE, www.archimedesolaenergy.com), announced that they were launching a new receiver tube called HEMS08, suitable for fluids up to 550   °C. The first plant using HEMS08 receivers was the Archimede Plant, located in Syracuse (Italy) and ready to operate in 2010 using molten salt (a mixture of sodium and potassium nitrate) as the receiver working fluid.

Figure 7.9 shows how these three manufacturers join the glass cover and the inner steel pipe by means of flexible bellows. The glass-to-metal welding used to connect the glass cover to the flexible bellows is a weak point in the receiver tube and has to be protected from the concentrated solar radiation to avoid high thermal and mechanical stress that could cause the welding to crack. An aluminum shield is therefore usually placed over the flexible bellows to protect the welding. Table 7.5 shows the technical parameters of the receivers manufactured by the Schott, Siemens and ASE companies.

Table 7.5. Technical parameters of the receivers commercialized by Schott, Siemens and ASE

Schott PTR-70 Siemens UVAC-2010 ASE HEMS08
Solar absorptance >   0.95 >   0.96 >   0.95
Solar transmittance > 0.96 > 0.96 n.a.
Thermal emittance <   0.1 at 400   °C <   0.09 at 400   °C <   0.1 at 400   °C <   0.14 at 580   °C
Steel pipe inner/outer diameters 70/65   mm stainless steel 70/65   mm stainless steel 70/65   mm stainless steel
Thermal losses 250   W/m at 400   °C n.a. 230   W/m at 400   °C
Glass cover Borosilicate Borosilicate Borosilicate
Active length ratio at 350  °C >   96% 96.4% n.a.
Maximum fluid temperature 400   °C 400   °C 550   °C

Non-evacuated receivers are suitable for applications with a working temperature below 300   °C, because thermal losses are not so critical at these temperatures. Although non-evacuated receivers are also composed of an inner steel pipe and a glass cover, they have neither vacuum between the steel pipe and its glass cover nor glass-to-metal welds. Selective coatings used for non-evacuated receivers are simpler than those used for evacuated receivers. Black-chrome or black nickel coatings are commonly used because they are cheap and easy to produce.

Due to manufacturing constraints, maximum receiver tube length is usually less than 5   m, so they are connected in series up to the total length of the PTC. Evacuated receivers are usually welded, while non-evacuated receivers are usually connected by special threaded joints.

Read full chapter

URL:

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/B9781845697693500078

Solar thermal system—an insight into parabolic trough solar collector and its modeling

Anubhav Goel , Gaurav Manik , in Renewable Energy Systems, 2021

14.3 Parabolic trough solar collector—history

The first known PTSC or parabolic trough collector (PTC) was constructed in 1870 by John Ericsson, had a collector area of 3.25  m2 to concentrate sun rays over a tube, and was built to drive a small 373-W engine. Several variants of the same, varying in geometry and construction materials, were built and presented by him till 1886, and air was used as the heat transfer medium in these prototypes (Pytilinski, 1978). In 1907 two Germans—Wilhelm Meier and Adolf Remshardt, got the first patent for steam generation using parabolic trough technology (Fernández-García, Zarza, Valenzuela, & Pérez, 2010). Various PTC-based solar engines were built and tested by an American engineer, Frank Shuman, between 1906 and 1911; the knowledge gained was utilized by him in collaboration with Charles Vernon Boys, to construct a pumping plant for irrigation in Meadi, Egypt, in 1912 (Günther, Joemann, & Csambor, 2011). The pumps were driven by steam motors, for which the steam was generated using an array of PTCs; whole system was successfully running in 1913 but was shut down in 1915 due to World War I.

Development of PTC gone through a dull phase and no major contribution to the field was attained until in the mid-1970s, when the United States Department of Energy as well as the German Federal Ministry of research and technology started to fund projects based on PTCs. Due to the rise in cost of fuels, governments got interested toward renewable energy, and development of several systems based on PTCs went underway. Outcomes of this acceleration were positive and can be summarized as (Fernández-García et al., 2010; Price et al., 2002; Shaner & Duff, 1979):

•

Two conceptually similar collectors, each by Sandia National Laboratories (SNL) and Honeywell International Inc., were developed to work at temperatures less than 250°C.

•

In 1975 three more collectors for IPH were tested at SNL, all varying in materials used for the construction of PTC components.

•

From 1977 to 1982, the company Acurex demonstrated several parabolic trough systems in the United States for process heat applications.

•

The Israeli-American company Luz International Ltd., founded in 1979, devised three generations of PTCs, called LS-1, LS-2, and LS-3.

•

Nine members of the International Energy Agency constituted a project with an objective of electricity generation using solar energy at Plataforma Solar de Almeria and it was operational in 1981. It was later taken over by the government of Spain.

•

In the 1980s the PTCs entered the commercial market and some American companies, namely, Acurex Solar Corp., Solar Kinetics Corp., Jacobs Del. Corp., Honeywell Inc., General Electric Co., and Suntec Systems Corp.–Excel Corp., began to manufacture and market it.

The breakthrough for PTC technology came in 1983 when Southern California Edison (SCE) signed an agreement with Luz International Limited to obtain power from PTC-based power plants to be constructed in California. These plants were termed as SEGS I and II and were operational by 1985–86. This led the base for credibility for Luz, which later signed several contracts with SCE to develop SEGS III to IX plants. These plants are still in operation and vary in capacity from 14 to 80   MW and constitute a total installed capacity of 354   MW (Philibert, 2004). The operational and constructional experience gained through these plants propelled the PTC technology and laid the base for further technological advancements and project planning.

Another lean phase for the PTCs went on till 2007, where negligible expansion in installed capacity of PTC-based plants and no vital innovation in its technology were seen. But in 2007 Nevada Solar One with a capacity of 64   MW was started in Nevada. Further expansions took place in Europe, Andasol I in Granada generating electricity since 2008 with a capacity of 50   MW, and another power plant Andasol II is working since 2009; these were the first plants with thermal storage systems (Geyer et al., 2007).

With the advancements in technology and diminishing nonrenewable energy resources, there is a shift in the government's mindset globally to support PTSC-based systems. Although most of the PTSC-based power plants are in the United States and Spain, but several projects in India, Australia, Egypt, China, Algeria, Morocco, and other countries are in construction or planning phase. According to data provided by the National Renewable Energy Laboratory, United States, the population of such plants is increasing rapidly, with currently around 100 plants at different phases (Parabolic Trough Projects). In addition to power generation, parabolic troughs have the potential to serve heat-intensive industrial processes. PTSCs were initially tested for IPH applications in the mid-1970s and 1980s but could not meet the industrial criteria at that time due to technology constraints and high cost (Price et al., 2002), but with the lowering cost of PTSC components and improved technology they can fit in certainly.

Read full chapter

URL:

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/B9780128200049000218

Indirect Solar Desalination (MSF, MED, MVC, TVC)

Vassilis Belessiotis , ... Emmy Delyannis , in Thermal Solar Desalination, 2016

6.8 Solar Desalination Combinations

One of the first solar systems was installed in Abu Dhabi (Fig. 6.22) which is a multiple effect stack (MES) distillation system with evacuated tube solar collector system with a designed production of 120   m3  day−1 and typically 85   m3  day−1 (El-Nashar, 1993, 2000a,b, 2001a) while some other combinations have been studied which concern designs of mainly pilot installations. García-Rodríguez et al. (2002) report that typical temperature for solar distillation MED is 65–75°C whereas for MSF distillation system it is 80–90°C. For these systems, flat-plate collectors are suitable, as well as evacuated tube collectors, PTC, compound parabolic collectors, and linear Fresnel mirrors with better combination being the parabolic troughs.

Figure 6.22. The MES installation and the evacuated tube solar collector field installed in Abu Dhabi (El-Nashar, eolss).

From the four main industrialized desalination methods, two belong to the thermal (MED and MSF) and two (MVC and RO) to the mechanical. The two thermal methods have high application reliability and are fully industrialized. The two mechanical methods have medium class reliability but they are also matured and fully industrialized. The MED distillation method is more effective from the MSF distillation with respect to the primary operation energy and the consumption of electrical power has a smaller cost and lower operating temperatures. It is therefore suitable for combination with solar concentrating systems as with parabolic troughs or linear Fresnel collectors. Lately, the MED distillation system is combined either with MVC or with RO for better performance of the hybrid system of both desalination methods.

The combination of PTC with an MED distillation constitutes a system of high reliability with simple operation. The mean concentration of the parabolic trough is C=15–40 and the supplied temperature is ~380°C. They rotate around a single axis and use as heat transfer fluid:

1.

Synthetic oils, which however restrict the higher supplied temperature

2.

Water, so as to produce steam directly in the absorbing tube of the collector, with temperatures reaching up to 400°C. García-Rodríguez and Gómez-Camacho (1999, 2001) and García-Rodríguez, 2003 proposed the use as a heat transfer fluid, water, seawater, or brine, and they performed by economic evaluation for each of the fluids.

The direct steam generation PTC has many advantages against those using thermal oil. The MED systems are more flexible than the MSF ones, can operate at part load, and have lower possibilities of scale deposits. Generally, they are considered more suitable than the MSF for relatively small capacity installations, whereas the desalination systems with TVC have lower performance from both MED and MSF systems (García-Rodríguez et al., 1999). Usually they are combined with the MED or MSF distillation systems.

The connection of the two systems is achieved with auxiliary devises whereas for the systems PTC/MED and PTC/MSF a storage tank and a conventional boiler are required. The storage tank uses oil as the operating fluid. In this case the input–output temperature difference to and from the solar collector field is ~80°C.

Darwish and Darwish (2014) report that although RO is the more efficient method and has a lower desalinated water production cost, there is still interest for the thermal methods MSF, MED, and TVC, either as single units or hybrid combinations, for connections with solar energy collection systems. The most efficient from those distillation methods is the LT-MED, which consumes approximately the same thermal energy as the MSF. The required solar energy is 250–300   MJ   m−3 and ~4   kWh   m−3 for powering the pumps. The MED requires 1.5–2.0   kWh   m−3 for the circulation of the various fluids. Additionally, the operational limits presented in Table 6.2 apply.

Table 6.2. Operational Limits for the Various Thermal Desalination Methods

Distillation Method Heating Steam Pressure (bar) Maximum Temperature (°C)
MSF 2–3 111–115
LT-MED 2–3 80
TVC 3–10 70

There is a large number of publications which refer to the conventional desalination powered from solar energy and/or renewable sources of energy. A few of these papers are referred here in a random selection. Ophir and Nadav (1982) give a review of the systems used for the production of electrical power and desalinated water from solar energy. El-Nashar (1985, 2000b) described the optimization of solar desalination installations, whereas Kalogirou (1997, 2001) presented a study on the influence of the cost on the price of the desalinated water which is produced with renewable energy sources. Trieb and Müller-Steinhagen (2008) refer to the use of concentrating solar energy for the production of desalinated water in Middle East and North Africa. Ali et al. (2011) presented a techno-economic review of the indirect solar desalination for MSF and MED installations as well as for the RO and MD. Sagie et al. (2005) analyzed the commercial solar energy systems and the commercial desalination systems which can be connected with solar energy and they estimated the economics of these systems. Among the latest research papers are those of Darwish (2014) and Darwish and Darwish (2014) which refer to the combination of the solar desalination, with the use of auxiliary energy from natural gas, for an installation of power/desalinated water in Qatar (UAE).

Fig. 6.23 shows the combinations of desalination/electric power systems, according to the type of turbine in the electricity power production section.

Figure 6.23. Possibility of the most suitable combinations of solar energy with desalination systems.

In Fig. 6.22 one of the first installations of indirect production of desalinated water with solar energy is shown. It concerns the installation in Abu Dhabi (El-Nashar, 1993, 2000a,b, 2001a,b). It consists of a field of solar evacuated tube collectors and a multistage stack distillation system (MES). The evacuated tube collector field has a total surface area of 1862   m2. The system is designed for 120   m3  day−1 but operated at a little lower production. The seawater feed had salt concentration equal to 55‰ and evaporator inlet temperature 135°C. El-Nashar (2001a, 2003) reported that on the evacuated tubes dust and sand deposited and these reduced the efficiency of the system and that part of the produced water was used for the cleaning of the collector surface, thus reducing the available production.

Various combined types of conventional desalination/solar energy have been constructed, as the AQUASOL system shown in Fig. 6.24 (Alarcón et al., 2005). Most of these installations are of pilot type for the study of the operating conditions, whereas lately studies have been performed for installation in arid areas but they have not yet erected so as to operate. In Table 6.3 some pilot installations of conventional desalination methods are indicatively given with some operation data, whereas in Table 6.4 also indicatively some of the latest installations of H/D and MD are given which are powered indirectly with solar energy.

Figure 6.24. The hybrid desalination system "AQUASOL" with solar system, at Plataforma solar de Almeria, Spain (Alarcón et al., 2005).

Table 6.3. Desalination Installations Indirectly Powered From Solar Energy (MSF, MED)

Location Type of Desalinator Desalinated Water (m3  day−1) Solar Collector Type
Al-Ain (UAE) a 20-Stage MSF
55-Eff. MED		 600
500		 Flat-plate collectors
Al-Azhar University, Gaza a MSF 10 Flat-plate collectors
Area of Hzag, Tunisia a Distillation 0.2 Flat-plate collectors +PV
Arabian Gulf MED 6000 Parabolic troughs
Gran Canaria, Spain a MSF 10 Low concentration
Kuwait b MSF 100 Parabolic troughs
La Paz, Baja California, Mexico c 10-Stage MSF 10 Parabolic troughs+flat-plate collectors
La Desiré Island, French Caribbean a 14-Eff. MED 40 Evacuated tube collectors
PSA, Almeria, Spain d MED heat pump 72 Compound parabolic collectors
Takahami Island, Japan e 16-Effect MES 16 Flat-plate collectors
Sulaibiya, Kuwait f RO+MSF 20/25 Point focus collectors
Safat, Kuwait a MSF 10 Flat-plate collectors
Um-Al-Nar, Abu Dhabi g 18-Eff. MES 120 Evacuated tube collectors
a
García-Rodríguez (2007a,b)
b
Kriesi (1984)
c
Scholle and Schubert (1980)
d
Alarcón et al. (2005)
e
Delyannis (1987)
f
Moustafa et al. (1984), Moustafa et al. (1985a), Moustafa et al. (1985b)
g
El-Nashar (1985, 2001a)

Table 6.4. Indirect Solar-Powered Desalination Installations (H/D, MD)

Location Type of Desalinator Desalinated Water (m3  day−1) Solar Collector Type
Arid area, Quom, Iran a 2-Stage H/D 580   L   day−1
Sfax, Tunisia b Multiple effect humidification (MEH) 180   L   day−1 Original flat-plate collectors
INRST (National institute of Scientific and Technological Research), Tunisia (see Fig. 5.12) c 4-Stage MEH 355   kg   day−1 Original flat-plate collectors
Al-Hail, Μuscat, Oman d MEH 180   L   day−1 Flat-plate collectors
Red Sea, Irbid e Autonomous Air gap membrane distillation (AGMD) 120   L   day−1 Flat-plate collectors+PV
a
Zamen et al. (2014)
b
Mueller-Holst and Mueller (2005)
c
Houcine et al. (2006)
d
Mueller-Holst and Mueller (2005)
e
Banat et al. (2007)

Read full chapter

URL:

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/B9780128096567000064