Progress in Energy and Combustion Science 56 (2016) 106–137

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Progress in Energy and Combustion Science

j o u r n a l h o m e p a g e : w w w. e l s e v i e r. c o m / l o c a t e / p e c s

Exergy analysis of solar thermal collectors and processes

Soteris A. Kalogirou a,*, Sotiriοs Karellas b, Konstantinos Braimakis b, Camelia Stanciu c,
Viorel Badescu d,e
a
Department of Mechanical Engineering and Materials Science and Engineering, Cyprus University of Technology, P. O. Box 50329, 3603, Limassol, Cyprus
b Laboratory of Steam boilers and Thermal Plants, National Technical University of Athens, 9 Heroon Polytechniou Str. 15780, Zografou, Athens, Greece
c Faculty of Mechanical Engineering, Polytechnic University of Bucharest, Spl. Independentei 313, Bucharest 060042, Romania
d
Candida Oancea Institute, Polytechnic University of Bucharest, Spl. Independentei 313, Bucharest 060042, Romania
e
Romanian Academy, Calea Victoriei 125, Bucharest, Romania

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Article history: This paper presents a review of exergy analysis of solar thermal collectors and processes. It includes not
Received 28 September 2015 only various types of solar collectors, but also various applications of solar thermal systems. Initially the
Accepted 24 May 2016 fundamentals of second law analysis are briefly presented as well as the exergy of solar radiation, which
Available online 18 July 2016
is the input to any solar system. Concentrating and non-concentrating collectors have been analyzed,
including parabolic dish and parabolic trough collectors from the first category, and flat-plate collec-
Keywords:
tors, air solar heaters, and evacuated tube collectors from the second category. Hybrid photovoltaic/ thermal
Exergy analysis
collectors have also been examined. Applications and processes include the use of phase change mate-
Sustainability
Solar radiation rials either in the collection or storage of thermal energy, drying, heating, multigeneration, trigeneration,
Solar collectors solar cooling, solar assisted heat pumps, domestic cogeneration, hydrogen production, hybridization with
Solar processes other renewables, solar ponds, power plants and desalination/distillation. Through literature review on
the above subjects it is shown that exergy analysis, which gives a representative performance evalua-
tion, is emphasized as a valuable method to evaluate and compare possible configurations of these systems.
© 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Contents

1. Introduction ........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................ 107

1.1. Thermodynamic fundamentals ....................................................................................................................................................................................................... 108
2. Exergy of solar radiation ................................................................................................................................................................................................................................ 109
3. Solar collectors optimization ........................................................................................................................................................................................................................ 110
3.1. Flat-plate collectors ............................................................................................................................................................................................................................ 110
3.1.1. Theoretical approach ......................................................................................................................................................................................................... 111
3.1.2. Optimization parameters for maximum exergetic efficiency .............................................................................................................................. 112
3.2. Air solar heaters .................................................................................................................................................................................................................................. 112
3.2.1. Optimal geometry for heat transfer enhancement ................................................................................................................................................. 113
3.3. Other FPC reviews ............................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 113
3.4. Evacuated tubes collectors ............................................................................................................................................................................................................... 114
3.5. Concentrating collectors ................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 115
3.5.1. Theoretical background; linear parabolic collectors .............................................................................................................................................. 115
3.5.2. Parabolic dish collectors .................................................................................................................................................................................................. 116
3.5.3. Parabolic trough collectors ............................................................................................................................................................................................. 117
3.6. Photovoltaic panels ............................................................................................................................................................................................................................. 117
3.7. Hybrid collectors ................................................................................................................................................................................................................................. 117
3.8. Concluding remarks ........................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 117

Note: The reprint of the various figures used in this manuscript is done with the agreement of the copyright owner.
* Corresponding author. Department of Mechanical Engineering and Materials Science and Engineering, Cyprus University of Technology, P. O. Box 50329, 3603, Limassol,
Cyprus. Tel: +357-2500-2621; Fax:+357-2500-2637.
E-mail address: Soteris.kalogirou@cut.ac.cy (S.A. Kalogirou).

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.pecs.2016.05.002
0360-1285/© 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
 S.A. Kalogirou et al. / Progress in Energy and Combustion Science 56 (2016) 106–137 107

4. Process analysis of solar applications ........................................................................................................................................................................................................ 118

4.1. Phase change materials (PCM) ........................................................................................................................................................................................................ 118
4.2. Drying ...................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 119
4.3. Heating, cooling and multigeneration ......................................................................................................................................................................................... 120
4.3.1. Air/water heaters ................................................................................................................................................................................................................ 120
4.3.2. Trigeneration ....................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 122
4.3.3. Solar cooling ........................................................................................................................................................................................................................ 124
4.3.4. Heat pumps for heating ................................................................................................................................................................................................... 125
4.3.5. Domestic cogeneration (PV/T) ....................................................................................................................................................................................... 126
4.4. Hydrogen production ......................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 126
4.5. Hybridization with other renewables .......................................................................................................................................................................................... 127
4.6. Solar ponds ............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................ 128
4.7. Power plants (ORC, Kalina, photovoltaic) ................................................................................................................................................................................... 128
4.8. Desalination and distillation ........................................................................................................................................................................................................... 131
4.9. Other domestic applications (solar roofs/buildings/chimney/cooker) ............................................................................................................................. 132
5. Conclusions ......................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 133
Acknowledgments ............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................ 133
References ............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................ 135

1. Introduction out heat transfer processes. When however a more in-depth analysis
is required, especially to identify areas of irreversibility to improve
The sun is the source of life on the earth, but at the same time either the collector or the process driven by the solar collector, the
it is a “free” source of energy for many systems using this re- second law analysis, and more specifically exergy analysis, is in-
source to power a process. The greatest advantage of solar energy valuable. This is because, within the context of exergy analysis, the
as compared with other forms of energy is that it is clean and can temperature of the heat transfer taking place in the collector and
be supplied without any environmental pollution [1]. Further- other processes is taken into consideration. In this way, exergy anal-
more, solar energy has a remarkably higher potential compared to ysis is a useful tool that helps assess the performance of systems
other renewables, such as wind, ocean, hydro, biomass and not only in terms of energy balance, but by also providing an insight
geothermal. into their potential for production of mechanical work. As far as solar
“Solar collectors” is a term used to describe a multitude of dif- energy utilization applications are concerned, due to their exten-
ferent devices designed for harnessing the energy from the sun, sive variation regarding their technological principles (i.e., collector
which is in the form of solar radiation, by converting it into useful types, technologies involved, etc.) and desired end-products (i.e.,
heat. Thus solar energy collectors are special kind of heat exchang- process heat, cooling, electricity, desalination, etc.), it is usually nec-
ers that transform solar radiation energy to internal energy of the essary to resort to the exergy analysis to draw meaningful
transport medium. It is evident that solar collectors constitute a comparisons and reach substantial conclusions on their advan-
major component of any solar energy utilization system. Their op- tages and drawbacks. This is because the exergy efficiency is an index
eration is based on absorbing the incoming solar radiation, converting that does not neglect the special properties and boundary condi-
it into heat, and transferring this heat to a fluid (usually air, water, tions of each process.
or a special heat transfer fluid) flowing through the collector. The Solar energy can be used for various purposes. We quote here
solar energy collected in this way is carried from the circulating fluid as examples three applications: refrigeration, power generation and
either directly to a heat-demanding process or to a thermal energy chemical reactions or metallurgical processes. In the first case solar
storage tank from which it can be drawn for use at night and/or energy provides the work necessary to transfer heat from a cold res-
cloudy days [1]. Depending on the energy conversion pathway that ervoir to a hot reservoir. In the second case, work production is also
is employed, there is a great variety of end-products that can be involved. Finally, high temperature chemical reactions and metal-
derived from solar energy utilization systems. Consequently, apart lurgical processes may yield lower-grade thermal energy as a by-
from the generation of heat, which can be directly used for indus- product, which can be further used in thermodynamic cycles for
trial and domestic processes, solar systems can be used for the power generation. All these applications involve a chain of succes-
production of electricity, by providing the generated heat to a sive processes, which has as main input solar energy and work as
power cycle, or cooling, via the integration of thermal cooling an intermediary or end-use product. Also, each of these particular
technologies. processes may be described independently, in terms of its own inputs
There are many types of systems that employ solar energy col- and output. The main theoretical tool created for quantifying the
lectors as a source of input energy to drive a process. A review of change in the potential work content during thermodynamic trans-
the various types of collectors available and the possible applica- formations is exergy. In order to properly design energy conversion
tions that these can be employed is presented in [1]. These systems processes of varying quality levels, an exergy analysis is needed.
are usually analysed in a simple way using the principles of energy Therefore, exergy models should be developed for each specific solar
analysis, as is expressed in the first law of thermodynamics. Ac- energy application, to properly evaluate the quality of the pro-
cording to the energy analysis, the various energy inputs and outputs duced heat and the efficiency of its conversion pathway (in solar
of a system are identified, and the performance of the system is as- thermal applications) or the efficiency of work production or uti-
sessed as the ratio of the useful energy outputs divided by the sum lization processes (in solar power applications). The purpose of this
of the energy inputs. This index of performance is known as the first- review is to provide an inventory of such exergy models.
law efficiency and is widely used in engineering applications. Such Therefore, this paper aims to give the basic principles of
an analysis is usually adequate for most of the collectors em- exergy analysis and present a review on how this is used in the
ployed and the processes involved. The weakness of first law analysis thermal analysis of the solar energy collectors alone and of the pro-
is the fact that it does not take into account the degradation of the cesses involving solar energy collectors as the power source.
energy quality that occurs when energy is converted from one form With respect to the solar energy collectors, such an analysis aims
into another, or exchanged between materials and streams through- to improve the collector design so as to capture and convert
108 S.A. Kalogirou et al. / Progress in Energy and Combustion Science 56 (2016) 106–137

incoming solar irradiation more effectively, whereas for the pro- Q dS

cesses exergy analysis can identify ways to improve the overall ∑ ms
 − ∑ ms
 +∑
T
≤
dt
(6)
in out
effectiveness of the process.
The structure of the paper is as follows: Section one provides Finally, for open loop systems, the rate of entropy generation is
a theoretical introduction, which attempts to briefly introduce the given by:
basic laws of thermodynamics and exergy analysis, including
different approaches and definitions and by presenting key math- dS Q
ematical formulations. Section 2 focuses on the exergy of the solar S gen = − ∑ + ∑ ms
 − ∑ ms
 ≥0 (7)
dt T out in
radiation, which is the input power to any solar system. Section 3
is dedicated to the optimization methodology of solar thermal Exergy efficiency, also called second-law efficiency, estimates the
collectors, where it is shown how exergy analysis is used in the efficiency of a process by taking into account the second law of ther-
design of the various types of collectors; both low-temperature modynamics. It is a measure of the deviation of a real process from
stationary collectors and high-temperature concentrating (track- an ideal, reversible. For a work producing thermal machine, the
ing) collectors. This section also includes photovoltaic and hybrid exergy efficiency is given by:
photovoltaic/thermal collectors. Section 4 presents an extensive lit-
erature review on the process analysis of solar applications, including W  
W
ηII =  = 1 −  lost (8)
a large variety of applications utilizing different technologies, at Wmax Wmax
various scales and aiming at the production of different products.
where W  is the real work produced by the system, while W max rep-
Finally, section 5 gives the conclusions of this paper.
resents the maximum work that would have been produced by
the system in case of no irreversibilities. Their difference repre-
sents W lost .
1.1. Thermodynamic fundamentals
Using Eq. (7):
From the first law of thermodynamics for any steady-state process
 lost = T0 S gen
W (9)
between two states 1 and 2 of a closed system one may write:
2 2 in which T0 is the ambient temperature.
∫ δ Q − ∫ δ W = E2 − E1 (1) Equation (9) is known as Gouy–Stodola theorem. Equation (8)
1 1
should not be confused with the first law efficiency, ηI, which for
Or performing the integrations: a heat engine operating between two heat reservoirs of high and
low temperatures TH and TL, respectively, is given by the ratio
Q 1,2 − W1,2 = E2 − E1 (2) between work produced W  and heat rate received from the high

Q
temperature source H :
The second law of thermodynamics applied for the same closed
system gives: W ⎛ T ⎞
ηI =  = ηII ⎜ 1 − L ⎟ = ηII ηCarnot (10)
QH ⎝ TH⎠
2
δQ
∫ T ≤ S2 − S1 (3)
A clearer presentation of the connection between the second law
1
efficiency and the first law efficiency, and thus another way of pre-
Therefore, the entropy transfer between the closed system senting Eqs. (8) to (10) is shown in Appendix A.
and the environment depends on the heat transfer across the The purpose of this paper is to present a review of the applica-
boundary (δQ) and the boundary temperature (T). The entropy trans- tions of exergy analysis on solar thermal collectors and systems. It
fer differentiates the heat and work transfer as two parallel starts with the analysis of exergy of solar radiation and continues
forms of energy transfer and, as shown in Eq. (3) only heat trans- with exergy analysis of various types of solar collectors, applica-
fer (δQ) can cause an entropy transfer or an entropy change of the tions and processes for both low and high temperature systems. The
system. exergy analysis is not a substitute, but merely a necessary comple-
Another parameter used in this type of analysis is the entropy mentary tool for the energy analysis, when the sustainability of the
generated given by: systems is considered.
Consider a solar collector with an aperture area (or total heliostat
2
δQ area) equal to Aa, which receives solar radiation with an energy flux
S gen = S2 − S1 − ∫ ≥0 (4)  . This energy flux Q* is proportional to the collector area
1
T equal to Q*
Aa and the proportionality factor q*  (W/m2), which is the energy
In the case of an open system (control volume) that does not density flux or irradiance and varies with the geographical posi-
undergo a volume variation during processes, the thermodynamic tion on the earth, the orientation of the collector, the meteorological
analysis needs to take into account the additional energy and entropy conditions and the time of day. The energy flux Q*  can be thus ex-
changes that take place because of the mass transfer across the pressed by the equation:
boundary. The exchanged mass has a certain enthalpy [mh], kinetic
energy [½(mV2)] and potential energy [mgz], where m, h, V and z Q * = q *A a (11)
are the mass, the specific enthalpy, the speed of the system and the
For concentrating collector systems, q*  is the solar energy
height of the system with respect to a reference state, while g rep-
resents gravitational acceleration. Therefore, in this case the first density flux on the reflector. In order to obtain the energy ab-
law of thermodynamics is given by: sorbed by the collector receiver, the tracking mechanism accuracy,
the optical imperfections of the mirror, including its reflectance, as

∑ m ⎛⎜⎝ h + 2 V ⎞  ⎛ h + V 2 + gz ⎞⎟ + Q − W
1 1  sh = dE well as the optical properties of the receiver glazing must be
2
+ gZ ⎟ − ∑ m
⎠ out ⎜⎝
(5)
in 2 ⎠ dt considered.
The incident solar radiation may be partly delivered to a power
The second law of thermodynamics is given by: cycle (or user) at a heat transfer rate equal to Q and at a receiver
 S.A. Kalogirou et al. / Progress in Energy and Combustion Science 56 (2016) 106–137 109

Exergy input coming from solar

⎛ T ⎞
radiation: Ein = Q * ⎜1 − o ⎟
⎝ T *⎠
T*

Exergy destruction due to irreversible heat

⎛1 1 ⎞
transfer = Q * To ⎜ − ⎟
⎝ Tr T * ⎠

Tr
Exergy available at the outlet of the
⎛ T ⎞
collector system: Eout = Q ⎜1 − o ⎟
⎝ Tr ⎠

To
Exergy destruction due to heat loss
⎛ ⎞
(collector-ambient)= ( Q * −Q ) ⎜1 − TT o
⎟
⎝ r ⎠
Fig. 1. Exergy flow diagram.

temperature equal to Tr. Thus the quantity Q o represents the The difference Ėxin − Ėxout represents the destroyed exergy rate
collector-ambient heat loss rate: inside the collector system. From Fig. 1, the entropy generation rate
can be written as:
Q o = Q * − Q (12)
Q Q Q*

For imaging concentrating collectors, Q o is proportional to the S gen = o + − (16)
To Tr T*
receiver-ambient temperature difference Tr – To and to the receiv-
er area Ar as described in Ref. [1]: This equation can be written with the help of Eq. (12) as:

Q o = UL A r ( Tr − To ) (13)
1⎡ ⎛ To ⎞  ⎛ To ⎞ ⎤
S gen = ⎢Q* ⎜ 1 − ⎟ − Q ⎜⎝ 1 − ⎟⎠ ⎥ (17)
where UL is an overall heat transfer coefficient between the receiv- To ⎢⎣ ⎝ T* ⎠ Tr ⎥⎦
er and the environment. The process of solar energy collection is
accompanied by the generation of entropy upstream of the collec- By using Eq. (14) and Eq. (15), Eq. (17) can be written as:
tor, downstream of the collector and inside the collector as shown
1 
in Fig. 1. S gen =
To
(Ein − E out ) (18)
The exergy inflow coming from the solar radiation falling on the
collector surface is sometimes approximated by:
or E out = E in − ToS gen (19)
 ⎛ 1 − To ⎞
E in = Q* (14)
⎜⎝ ⎟
T* ⎠ Therefore, if we consider Ėxin constant, the maximization of the
exergy output rate (Ėxout) is the same as the minimization of the
where T* is the apparent sun temperature as an exergy source. total entropy generation rate Ṡgen.
Usually the value suggested by Petela [2] is adopted, i.e., T* is ap-
proximately equal to ¾ Ts, where Ts is the apparent black body
2. Exergy of solar radiation
temperature of the sun, which is about 5770 K. The exergy avail-
able at the outlet of the collector system, considering the receiver
The input energy on any solar system is solar energy. One of the
as a heat reservoir of constant temperature Tr, is given by the
first who examined the exergy of solar radiation was Petela during
expression:
his doctoral studies [3]. For an exergetic analysis, one might need
to compute the exergy associated to the solar energy input. In this
⎛ T ⎞
E out = Q ⎜ 1 − o ⎟ (15) regard, there are different reported results in the technical litera-
⎝ Tr ⎠ ture, corresponding to different hypotheses and approximations. Two
110 S.A. Kalogirou et al. / Progress in Energy and Combustion Science 56 (2016) 106–137
sorts of approaches have been adopted. In the first case, the exergy
of solar radiation has been derived from basic thermodynamic prin-
ciples. The second approach is based on empirical studies. Both
approaches are briefly reviewed below.
Jeter [4] gives an expression of solar exergy absorbed by con-
sidering the solar energy flux Q Ab as a simple heat transfer process
between the sun and the collector assimilated with a reversible
(Carnot) heat engine:
 S , Ab = Q Ab ⎛ 1 − Ta ⎞
Ex
⎝⎜ TS ⎠⎟
where T a is ambient temperature and T S =5770K is the Sun
temperature and Q Ab is the solar radiation absorbed by the collec-
tor Q Ab = (τα ) Q S where (τα) is the absorptance-transmittance
product of the cover-absorber assembly. It should be noted that in
this and the following expressions this term can be replaced by the
solar energy flux Φ as a simple heat transfer process between the
sun and the collector assimilated with a reversible (Carnot) heat
engine. Another approach was proposed by Spanner [5] with the
following result:
 S , Ab = Q Ab ⎛ 1 − 4 Ta ⎞
Ex
⎝⎜ ⎟
3 TS ⎠
Petela [2] introduced a supplementary term corresponding to
emission by radiation and computed the solar radiation exergy ab-
sorbed as:
 S , Ab = Q Ab ⎛ 1 − 4 Ta + 1 Ta ⎞
4
Ex ⎜⎝
3 TS 3 TS4 ⎟⎠
The last formula has been extensively proposed in the litera-
ture as cited by Refs. [6–9]. Moreover, Landsberg [10] and Press [11]
reported independently the same result as Petela.
Non-hemispherical isotropic blackbody radiation reservoirs are
characterized by a certain thermal level TS and a geometric (or view)
factor f, which shows how much of the hemisphere is covered by
the radiation reservoir when seen from the receiver. Badescu [12,13]
proposed for the exergy flux of this type of radiation reservoirs
(such as the Sun, when viewed from the Earth) the following general
expression:
 S , Ab = Q Ab ⎛ 1 − 4 Ta + 1 1 Ta ⎞
4
Ex
⎝⎜ 3 TS 3 f TS4 ⎠⎟
Ta3
under the condition that the geometric factor f ≥ . Radiation res-
TS3
Ta3
ervoirs with temperature TS and geometric factor f < 3 cannot be
TS
used to generate work in an environment of temperature Ta. It has
been proven that the Petela–Landsberg–Press formula Eq. (22) is
a particular case of Eq. (23), corresponding to the case of hemi-
spherical radiation reservoirs (i.e., f = 1). Badescu [12] also plotted
the variation of the Ex S Q Ab as a function of Ta TS for different values
of f and compared it to the Carnot efficiency. As expected, the value
of Ex S Q Ab is always lower than the Carnot efficiency value, rep-
resenting the actual attainable upper-bound efficiency. Also, for
radiation reservoirs of higher f values, Ex  S Q Ab slightly dimin-
ishes as the ratio of Ta TS increases, ranging between a maximum
value of 1 (when the two temperature levels are equal, whatever
the f value) to a minimum value of 1 − f 1 3 (when Ta TS = f 1 3 ).
General expressions valid for other, more complex cases, of ra-
diation reservoirs are given in Ref. [12].
Badescu [14] observed that the environmental radiation (the dead
state), which plays a fundamental role in exergy calculations, cannot
be arbitrarily chosen. Indeed, it consists of radiation emitted by the
receiver of the converter used to transform the radiation energy into
work. This fact is crucial and has been overlooked by previous
authors. Popular relations, such as Eqs (21) and (22), correspond
in fact to environmental radiation emitted by blackbody receivers.
However, blackbody receivers are never used in practice. Instead,
selective receivers are used for photothermal conversion and band-
gap materials for photovoltaic applications. In these realistic cases
the dead state does not consists of blackbody radiation. A general
exergy factor has been derived in Ref. [14], for enclosed thermal ra-
diation and for free thermal radiation. For the particular case that
(20) the dead state consists of radiation emitted by a hemispherical black-
body, the particular expression of Petela efficiency was found.
Additionally, Badescu [15] compared four statistical approaches,
estimating the exergetic efficiency in each case. Particular cases of
derived equations emphasized Jeter (Carnot) efficiencies when ap-
plying classical – classical approach (i.e., classical Wien approach
for the energy state occupation number – classical Boltzmann sta-
tistics for radiation entropy description), Petela–Landsberg–Press
relation when using quantum–quantum approach (i.e., quantum
Planck approach for the energy state occupation number – quantum
Bose statistics for radiation entropy description), and other two ex-
pressions when applying quantum-classical approach (Planck–
Boltzmann) and classical – quantum approach (Wien–Bose). When
(21)
representing all the four efficiency-like factors as a function of T0/
T, they are found to be positive and decreasing by increasing the
ratio T0/T for the usual case that T > T0. When radiation at tempera-
tures T lower than the environment temperature T0 is considered,
the quantum-classical and classical-classical approximations) predict
negative values of the available work factors, while the other two
predict positive values, which may exceed unity. This makes the
(22)
usage of all the four formulas questionable in the case that T < T0.
The author concluded that any exergy expression derived under the
framework of thermodynamics is compatible with a precisely defined
set of microscopic assumptions.
3. Solar collectors optimization
This section examines the optimum collector geometry, optimum
collector temperature, and non-isothermal collectors.
From the most common applications, such as low temperature
fluid heating (for air heating or domestic hot water production) to
the most complex ones, involving thermal to mechanical and elec-
(23) trical energy conversion, optimization represents the key for
improving system efficiency, reducing equipment size and cost and
selecting the most appropriate construction materials.
Exergy analysis has been proven to be a useful tool in engineer-
ing applications as well as for design and optimization procedures.
Sciubba and Wall [16] published a well-documented bibliograph-
ic research in this regard, citing more than 2600 papers on the subject
of exergy from its beginnings till 2004 and stating that solar tech-
nology is “the most suitable candidate for an exergy analysis” [16].
A presentation of exergy analysis applied to solar collector systems
will be introduced, emphasizing the progress as it is associated with
the improvement in the obtained results.
3.1. Flat-plate collectors
An ordinary/classical flat plate collector (FPC), shown in Fig. 2
[17], is composed of a black absorber plate in which fluid tubes are
mounted, an insulation material to reduce conduction losses and
a glass cover on top to reduce convection and radiation losses to
the atmosphere. The selection of the materials, the dimensions, the
number of tubes and the number of glass covers may differ from
one application to another and may be optimized based on differ-
ent chosen criteria.
 S.A. Kalogirou et al. / Progress in Energy and Combustion Science 56 (2016) 106–137 111

Glazing Radiation heat transfer from the absorber plate to the cover
is considered to occur between two infinite parallel plates [19],
while convection heat transfer rate is computed by using corre-
sponding Nusselt correlations. When computing radiation heat
transfer between the cover and ambient, the sky temperature
was estimated by the formula proposed by Swinbank [20]:
Inflow
Tsky = 0.0552Ta1.5.
Convection heat transfer between the cover and ambient air is
Outflow
attributed to wind convection. Duffie and Beckmann [21] pre-
sented a detailed discussion on different correlations used for
Absorber plate estimating the convection heat transfer coefficient hw. The most
Insulation widely used one is the following: hw = 5.7 + 3.8w [22], which is a
Flow tubes Header function of the wind speed w.
For the bottom heat loss coefficient, conduction through the in-
Fig. 2. A typical FPC, as reported by Ref. [17]. sulation is considered, as is also for the edges. Their sum is UL and
was calculated by a numerical method. They found that an in-
crease in the ambient temperature increases Tpm, but the increase
rate of Tpm is lower than that of Ta. It was also found that an in-
crease in the ambient temperature decreases heat losses.
3.1.1. Theoretical approach
The thermal efficiency of the collector is defined as in Ref. [18]:
The basic thermodynamic modeling of a FPC consists in apply-
ing energy and exergy balance equations to the studied system. Q u
Farahat et al. [9] applied this analysis for the optimization of a water η= (28)
Ap IT
FPC in steady state, detailing the energy and exergy balance
equations. The exergy analysis is based on applying the following exergy
The energy balance equation gives the useful energy gain Q u as balance equation [9,23]:
the absorbed solar radiation Q Ab from which losses Q L have been
extracted:  in + Ex
Ex  out + Ex
 st + Ex
 leak + Ex
 des = 0 (29)

Q u = Q Ab − Q L (24) and the exergy efficiency is defined as the ratio between the in-
crease of the fluid exergy rate and the exergy of solar radiation [9]:
Losses appear due to conduction, convection and radiation
between the FPC and the atmosphere. These are commonly ex-  out , f − Ex
Ex  in, f
pressed as a function of the overall heat transfer coefficient UL as: ηex =  in,S (30)
Ex
Q L = U L Ap (Tpm − Ta ) (25) Details may be found in Ref. [9] regarding the computation of
each exergy rate term.
In the above equation, Tpm represents the mean plate tempera-  in is composed of the fluid flow compo-
The inlet exergy rate Ex
ture and Ta represents the atmospheric temperature. Generally, it nent and the absorbed solar energy component. The first component
is very difficult to predict both UL and Tpm as they are dependent is computed based on the fluid exergy definition, which is a func-
on each other. An iterative process is therefore necessary. More than tion of the fluid inlet temperature Tin, its heat capacity and its
that, the plate temperature is not uniform along the collector. Thus, pressure drop:
a more frequently used method is to introduce the heat removal
 Δpin
 p ⎛⎜ Tin − Ta − Ta ln in ⎞⎟ +
factor FR and the collector efficiency factor F’ so that the useful energy  in, f = mc T m
Ex (31)
gain is expressed by the Hottel–Whillier equation [9,18]: ⎝ Ta ⎠ ρ

Q u = Ap FR [(τα ) IT − U L (T fi − Ta )] (26)  out includes only the fluid component

where
F ′ApU L
 p
mc ⎡ −
 p
⎤  leak is caused by heat leakage
FR = ⎢1 − e
mc
⎥ (27)
ApU L ⎢⎣ ⎥⎦
The overall loss coefficient UL is computed from convection and
radiation losses between the absorber plate and the atmosphere.
Ways to estimate these factors are given in various textbooks like
Ref. [18].
Ge et al. [19] performed a detailed calculation of the average heat
loss coefficient UL and the average absorber plate temperature Tpm
by an iterative process, considering non-uniformity in tempera-
ture distribution along the absorber plate. The average heat loss
coefficient is composed of three terms: the heat loss coefficient for
the upper part of the FPC, the bottom and the edges. In order to
find the upper heat loss coefficient, Ge et al. [19] considered losses
occurring by heat transfer, namely: radiation and convection,
between the cover and the environment and radiation and con-
vection between the absorber plate and the cover.
The outlet exergy rate Ex
and is computed in a similar manner as the inlet fluid exergy rate.
The stored exergy rate Ex  st is considered null in steady state
conditions.
The leakage (loss) exergy rate Ex
between the absorber at temperature Tp and the environment at tem-
perature Ta [9]:
 leak = −U L Ap (Tp − Ta ) ⎛ 1 − Ta ⎞
Ex (32)
⎜⎝ T ⎟⎠
p
The last term in Eq. (29) represents the destroyed exergy rate
 des and is due to three factors: temperature difference between
Ex
the Sun and the absorber, the pressure drop in the ducts and the
temperature difference between the absorber and the fluid. Ge et al.
[19] showed that the largest exergy loss is the one caused by the
temperature difference between the absorber plate and the sun, ac-
counting for 72.86% of the total exergy input rate for the studied
case. The exergy loss rate caused by the temperature difference
between the absorber plate and fluid is 1% of the total exergy input
rate. Ge et al. [19] neglected the fluid pressure drop. Also they
112 S.A. Kalogirou et al. / Progress in Energy and Combustion Science 56 (2016) 106–137

reported a 3.33% exergy loss rate caused by heat leakage from the
absorber plate to the environment.
The generic concepts of exergy analysis of solar thermal collec-
tors and in particular exergy efficiency and how this is related to
the energy efficiency are presented in Appendix B. This Appendix
also indicates that the comparison of the results published by dif-
ferent authors should be done with care, as according to the functions
selected for the solar radiation exergy and the operating temper-
ature level, different exergetic efficiency may be obtained even if
the same conditions regarding the working fluid temperatures are
considered.

3.1.2. Optimization parameters for maximum exergetic efficiency

Following the approach presented above, Farahat et al. [9] op-
timized a double glass FPC for maximum exergetic efficiency and
found that under optimized parameters (9.14 m 2 absorber,
0.0087 kg/s water mass flow rate heated from 300 K to 358 K), the
system has an exergetic efficiency of 3.898%. The results are shown
in Fig. 3. As can be seen, the exergetic efficiency presents a peak with Fig. 4. Exergy efficiency the mass flow rate of fluid and absorber plate, as reported
by Ref. [9].
respect to inlet fluid temperature at about 315 K, it slightly in-
creases with pipe diameter and drastically decreases when increasing
ambient temperature. Also, higher wind speeds and lower inci-
and applied. The following main results are worth being empha-
dent solar energy involve lower exergetic efficiencies. The way that
sized: the effective transmittance–absorptance product was found
exergy efficiency depends on the mass flow rate and the absorber
to be rather constant during the day, with some decrease near sunrise
plate area is shown in Fig. 4.
and sunset; the overall heat loss coefficient UL depends strongly
The same behavior is presented by Ge et al. [19]; they added the
on the time of the day, being larger near the noon. The results of
effect of fluid mass flow rate and found that increasing it caused a
optimal control showed that the optimum mass-flow rate in-
decrease in the useful exergy rate.
creases significantly when increasing the fluid inlet temperature,
Jafarkazemi and Ahmadifard [24] applied the same procedure
it is higher at sunrise and sunset during cold season, while it is quasi-
described by Farahat et al. [9] using the formula proposed by Bejan
constant during the warm season. When using a constant value of
for solar radiation exergy and compared the behavior of the FPC for
0.0001 kg/s/m2 of FPC surface the results obtained were very close
three working fluids: water, ethylene glycol and propylene glycol
to the optimum.
– water mixture. The results are shown in Fig. 5. They concluded
that water is the best fluid and in case of freezing outside condi-
3.2. Air solar heaters
tions, the propylene glycol – water mixture is a good choice.
Badescu [25] applied a direct optimal control method for a flat
A similar parametric study to the one done by Farahat et al. [9]
plate collector operating in transient regime. Exergy gain maximi-
for maximizing the exergetic efficiency was performed by Motahar
zation was aimed (objective function), while the control parameter
and Alemrajabi [26] for an unglazed transpired collector used for
was the water mass-flow rate in the collector (optimum function).
preheating ventilation air in building applications. They used Petela’s
With respect to other previous published literature, the mathe-
formula Eq. (22) and assumed a value of 6000 K for the sun’s ap-
matical model was built with time-dependent coefficients (collector’s
parent temperature and evaluated each heat transfer rate occurring
effective transmittance–absorptance product and overall heat loss
by conduction, convection and radiation. Convection and radia-
coefficient). Meteorological data measured in Bucharest were used
tion losses to the surroundings, convection heat transfer between
the collector surface and the plenum and between the wall and the
plenum, radiation between the wall and the cover and conduction
through the wall, for which Nusselt correlations were applied.

Fig. 5. Energy and exergy efficiencies for three different working fluids, as re-
Fig. 3. Exergy efficiency versus the fluid inlet temperature, as reported by Ref. [9]. ported by Ref. [24].
 S.A. Kalogirou et al. / Progress in Energy and Combustion Science 56 (2016) 106–137
For a given set of constant meteorological parameters (air tem-
perature, solar radiation) and room conditions, they have obtained
exergetic efficiency dependencies on collector’s properties (plate per-
foration parameters) and noticed the optimum values of these
parameters for maximum exergetic efficiency. The maximum
exergetic efficiency was found to be 2.28% for this type of collector.
A detailed energetic and exergetic analysis is applied by Gupta
and Kaushik to an air FPC [27], similar to the water FPC presented
above. They checked the optimal performance parameters for maxi-
mizing the exergy delivery rate and compared the dependence of
the exergy output rates on the energy output rates for different col-
lector parameters and mass flow rates. They applied an empirical
correlation determining directly the UL coefficient function on Tpm
and other FPC characteristics, citing Malhotra et al. [28] Gupta and
Kaushik [27] have also found the optimum inlet temperatures and
mass flow rates of the fluid for different geometric parameters
(optimum aspect ratio, i.e., length to width ratio of the absorber plate,
and optimum duct depth, i.e., the distance between the absorber
and the bottom plates). Other correlations UL(Tpm) were presented
by Bhatt and Channiwala [29] in a review paper concerning the cal-
culation of heat loss coefficient in FPC.
Luminosu et al. [30] computed the optimum mass flow rate based
on experiments done for a 4.2 m2 air FPC operating in Romania and
reported the value of 0.04 kg/s as optimum for the considered case.
Another experimental study was performed by Mohseni-Languri
et al. [31] on a 1.8 m2 air FPC in Iran designed for warming up a 12 m3
test room during winter. When maximum daily energetic efficien-
cy is aimed, the optimum mass flow rate is 0.016 kg/s, while for
maximum daily exergetic efficiency a value of 0.011 kg/s is pre-
ferred, for the same collector.
Kaze and Rene [32] compared an unglazed to a single cover air
heater operating in Cameroon. They considered temperature-
dependent heat transfer rates between components (cover-fluid-
absorber-insulation). Energy balance equations are applied to each
component of the FPC: cover, absorbing plate and fluid. Iterative com-
putations are required to solve the dependence of the heat transfer
coefficients on temperature. The results showed that both the daily
energy output rate and the exergy efficiency are higher in the case
of the unglazed air heater.
Kargarsharifabad et al. [33] carried out an energy and exergy anal-
ysis of a flat plate solar collector with a heat pipe, also called heat
pipe flat plate solar collector (HPFPC), and compared it to a con-
ventional FPC. The inflow exergy rate of the HPFPC only includes
the exergy rate of the solar radiation, computed by the formula pro-
posed by Bejan (the one most commonly used for FPC applications).
The outlet exergy rate of the HPFPC includes the rate of exergy loss
and the rate of exergy transferred through a heat pipe. The rate of
exergy destruction is due to the temperature difference between the
absorber and the Sun, the absorber and the evaporator of a heat pipe
(solar collector) and the evaporator and the condenser of the heat
pipe (water reservoir). The output exergy rate for computing the
exergetic efficiency represents the rate of exergy transferred through
the heat pipe. The results were compared to experimental data and
indicate that the use of heat pipes for heat transfer between the
absorber plate and the water tank increases the exergy efficiency
in comparison to conventional collectors with use of intermediate
fluid [33].
Johari et al. [34] presented a short classification of solar collec-
tors and concluded that extremely high exergy losses appear in direct
solar systems (in which the working fluid is directly heated from
the Sun) and the optimization should be oriented to reduce the mag-
nitude of exergy losses in the conversion device.
3.2.1. Optimal geometry for heat transfer enhancement
According to Nagpure et al. [35], in order to increase the thermal
efficiency of FPC, one should increase the heat transfer coefficient
113
between the absorber plate and the fluid inside. They focused on
optimizing the absorber design by considering an artificial rough-
ened absorber plate for which they developed correlations and
performed an exergy analysis. After comparing the results to those
corresponding to a smooth plate absorber plate, they concluded that
the thermal efficiency of the roughened duct is increased with
respect to the smooth duct at the same Reynolds number.
Another study regarding artificial roughness effect on exergetic
performances was performed by Singh and Sahu [36]. For the en-
hancement of heat transfer, they used a W shaped artificially
roughened plate and compared three cases; smooth plate, 1W rough-
ened and 2W roughened plates. A constant heat flux of 816 W/m2
and different mass flow rates (Reynolds numbers) were consid-
ered. The results showed that the exergy loss decreases when
increasing the Reynolds number and that increasing the plate rough-
ness resulted in a decrease in exergy loss. The 2W roughened plate
presented the highest thermal efficiency and the lowest exergy loss.
Following the same concept, Kurtbas and Turgut [37] studied an
air FPC with rectangular free and fixed fins mounted on the ab-
sorber plate surface and compared them to a classical FPC from an
energetic and an exergetic point of view. The total fins area was
0.384 m2 from a total absorber area of 1.64 m2. The fins were cut
in rectangular shapes and were laid out in two arrangements: 8 fins
and 32 fins, respectively (summing-up the same total area). Fins
located on the absorber increase heat transfer, but also they in-
crease the pressure drop, too. The authors reported that the fixed
fin collector is more effective than the free fin collector.
Esen [38] proposed a novel flat plate solar air heater in which
air is flowing simultaneously and separately over and under dif-
ferent obstacles of the absorbing plates instead of flowing either
over or under the obstacles. As shown in Fig. 6, he studied three types
of obstacle geometries and examined the effect of the plate being
mounted at three different levels between the insulation and the
cover. He compared the experimental results to those of a similar
FPC, but without any obstacles and concluded that the double-
flow collector with obstacles performed significantly better than the
one without obstacles, having improved thermal and exergetic ef-
ficiencies. The maximum exergetic efficiency was achieved for the
middle position of the plate and the 3rd type of obstacles (produc-
ing the greatest turbulence), namely 60.97% for a 0.025 kg/s mass
flow rate of air.
Akpinar and Koçyigit [39] used the same experimental setup, but
for two lower values of the mass flow rate and compared the same
absorbing plates with different obstacles: triangular obstacles of a
5 × 5 cm dimension, leaf shaped obstacles of a 5 × 5 cm dimen-
sion, rectangular obstacles of a 10 × 10 cm dimension and a smooth
plate. They noticed that the highest efficiency was achieved by the
collector with the leaf shaped obstacles absorbent plate, as in the
previous study of Esen [38].
Other geometries of the roughness elements were studied, too.
Sharma [40] compared five types of roughness elements: small di-
ameter protrusion wire, angled circular rib, wedge shaped rib, rib-
grooved and arc shaped wire. They found that solar air heaters having
rib-grooved and arc shaped wire as artificial roughness have better
exergy efficiency for low Reynolds numbers, while for high Reyn-
olds numbers the smooth duct is more suitable.
Bennamoun [41] applied energetic and exergetic analysis to an
air FPC used in a drying process. He found that in the case of thick
layers equations of porous media should be used.
3.3. Other FPC reviews
Tyagi et al. [42] published a review on air solar heaters and pre-
sented a short classification for active, passive and hybrid air heaters,
with or without thermal storage, covered or uncovered, with or
without tracking mechanism, and for different plate configurations.
114 S.A. Kalogirou et al. / Progress in Energy and Combustion Science 56 (2016) 106–137

Fig. 6. Types of absorber plates with obstacles, as proposed by Ref. [38].

They presented the state of the art on air heaters with thermal absorber and cover reduces or even eliminates the convective losses.
storage using phase change materials and presented a collection of Thus the useful gain absorbed by the collector Q Ab is entirely ab-
such materials with their properties and accordingly their range of sorbed by the fluid as Q u , so that it can be written:
application.
A recent review on solar collectors, thermal energy storage and Q Ab = Q u = Q fluid = mc
 p (Tout − Tin ) (33)
organic Rankine cycle (ORC) systems has been reported by Kim and
Han [43]. They presented the achievements in the field between 2009 The exergetic efficiency is defined by Eq. (30), where the exergy
and 2013. One might notice from this review that solar ORC systems received by the fluid is computed in the same manner as previously:
represent a promising technology and they may be powered either
 out , f − Ex
Ex  in, f = m
 [(hout − hin ) − Ta ( sout − sin )] (34)
by using flat plate collectors and thermal energy storage systems
or by using concentrating collectors (compound parabolic concen-
trators or parabolic trough solar collectors). FPC have usually a fixed
orientation contrary to concentrating collectors, which are usually
equipped with sun tracking mechanisms which are necessary for
high-temperature applications.
Another review on energy and exergy analysis applied to re-
newable energy systems has been presented by Park et al. [44] They
focused on solar air and water heaters, solar cookers and photo-
voltaic systems. Regarding solar heaters, they have presented a very
short theoretical approach and an extensive description of publi-
cations emphasizing different trials to improve collectors’ efficiency.
They concluded that energy and exergy efficiencies are higher for
systems equipped with thermal storage. They also found that the
energy efficiency is higher than the exergetic the latter being lower
than 5%.
It should be noted that sometimes it is very difficult to sepa-
rate the collector from a process, as for example air or water heating
done within the collector. Therefore, more applications of exergy
analysis emphasizing the process are presented in Section 4.3.

3.4. Evacuated tubes collectors

Another FPC configuration is the so called evacuated tube col-

lector (ETC) when the flat absorber is mounted inside evacuated
tubes and the fluid ducts pass through the absorber, as shown sche-
matically in Fig. 7.
While in the case of flat plate collectors the achieved temper-
ature is in the range of 30–80 °C, ETC could attain temperatures
between 50 and 200 °C [1]. Evacuating the space between the Fig. 7. Evacuated tube collector, as sketched by Ref. [1].
 S.A. Kalogirou et al. / Progress in Energy and Combustion Science 56 (2016) 106–137
Fig. 8. Parabolic dish and parabolic trough collectors, as presented by Ref. [1].
Mansour [45] performed an experimental study to compare flat
plate collectors (FPC) to evacuated tube collectors (ETC). He found
that ETC have better energetic and exergetic efficiencies than FPC.
Pandey [46] compared a typical ETC without energy storage to
two ETC having two different thermal energy storage (TES) systems:
one composed of paraffin wax, one including a phase change ma-
terial (PCM), and the other one using HP Hytherm 500 oil. From
reported results, one might deduce that the outlet fluid tempera-
ture has the same behavior in the three cases, presenting a maximum
along the day, but for the system without TES, it decreases quicker
in the afternoon. The PCM storage solution offers a little bit higher
values of the fluid outlet temperature. The use of TES systems offers
the advantage of an extended (by heat release) system operation
of four hours (in the evening) in comparison to the system without
TES [46]. Both energetic and exergetic efficiencies were higher in
the case of TES systems in comparison to systems without TES. They
are also found to be slightly higher for the solar air heater collec-
tor using PCM than the hytherm oil collector.
In a solar water heater based on ETC, water is stored in a storage
tank situated at the top of the collector. From the experiments carried
out by Ref. [46], it was shown that the average energetic and exergetic
efficiencies are equal to 66.57% and 13.38% respectively for a 15 l/
hr flow rate. As the volume flow rate increases, both efficiencies
decrease.
Another experimental study was performed by Al-Tahaineh and
Damseh [47] on a single-ended direct flow evacuated glass tube solar
collector. The results revealed that the exergetic efficiency is in-
creasing along with the fluid temperature difference, while the
energetic efficiency is decreasing. Furthermore, the exergetic effi-
ciency reaches a steady value for a temperature difference of about
50 K, while the energetic efficiency continuously decreases. The ETC
show good exergetic efficiencies at higher temperature difference.
3.5. Concentrating collectors
3.5.1. Theoretical background; linear parabolic collectors
Kalogirou [1] presented a comprehensive list of solar collector
types, dividing them in two main groups: non-concentrating col-
lectors (or stationary) and concentrating collectors. Concentrating
collectors are characterized by concentrating ratios C higher than
1. The concentrating ratio is defined as aperture area Aap of the solar
collector to the receiver area Ar. The solar radiation is intercepted
by the collector through the aperture area and concentrated in a
receiver through the receiver area, with the former being larger than
the latter. Regarding the sun tracking mechanism accompanying the
concentrating solar collectors, there are single-axis tracking col-
lectors (SAT) and two-axes tracking collectors (TAT). The main aim
of these sun tracking mechanisms is to adjust the orientation of the
115
aperture area in order to intercept as much as possible solar radi-
ation perpendicular to it. Among the SAT collectors [1], are the linear
Fresnel reflectors (having 10–40 concentrating ratio and achiev-
ing fluid temperatures of 60–250 °C), the parabolic trough collectors,
shown in Fig. 8, right (C = 15–45, T = 60–300 °C), and cylindrical
trough collectors (C = 10–50, T = 60–300 °C). The orientation of SAT
collectors is fixed with respect to one axis and can be oriented around
the other axis in order to track the sun position. TAT collectors can
be continuously adjusted to rotate on two axes, East–West and
North–South. In this category, the parabolic dish reflectors, shown
in Fig. 8, left (C = 100–1000, T = 100–500 °C) and the heliostat field
collectors (C = 100–1500, T = 150–2000 °C) have also been studied
[1].
Kalogirou [1] applied a detailed thermal analysis and second law
analysis for isothermal and non-isothermal collectors, determin-
ing the optimum collector temperature for minimizing the entropy
generation rate. He found that the optimal collector temperature
is the geometric average of the maximum collector (stagnation) tem-
perature and the ambient temperature. The results are shown in
Fig. 9.
Non-isothermal collectors are more realistic, especially in the case
of PTC collectors. In this case, when performing the thermal anal-
ysis, the term ∂T ∂x should appear in the first law equation.
Ngo [48] has also performed a detailed energetic and exergetic
analysis for the optimization of a concentrating type (parabolic dish)
solar collector. The exergy efficiency was selected as the objective
function for the optimization problem. The study is similar to the
Fig. 9. Optimum fluid temperature function on concentration ratios, as reported by
Ref. [1].
116 S.A. Kalogirou et al. / Progress in Energy and Combustion Science 56 (2016) 106–137
one presented for FPC. Eqs. (25 and 26) are valid for these collec-
tors too, with the observation that the (τα) property is replaced by
optical efficiency (ηo) and the mean plate temperature (Tpm) is re-
placed by the receiver temperature (Tr).
The exergy balance is expressed by Eq. (29). The inlet exergy rate
includes the inlet exergy rate due to the fluid flow and the ab-
sorbed solar radiation exergy rate, just like for FPC. The outlet exergy
rate includes only the exergy rate of the outlet fluid flow. The exergy
efficiency is the ratio of the exergy gain to the solar radiation exergy,
Eq. (30). The exergy loss rate is due to optical errors and heat trans-
fer to ambient in the solar receiver [48]:
 in,S + U L Ar (Tr − Ta )
2
 leak = (1 − ηo ) Ex
Ex
Tr
Exergy destruction is caused by friction of the viscous fluid (as
is represented by the pressure drop between the inlet and outlet
of the receiver) and heat transfer processes occurring due to the
temperature difference between the receiver surface and the sun
and to conduction from the outer receiver surface to the fluid
flow) [48]:
 Δp ln
 des = Ta m
Ex
(
Tout
Tin ) with a Stirling engine and found similar results; the exergy de-
ρ Tout − Tin
⎡ ⎛ 1 1⎞  ⎛ Tout Tout − Tin ⎞ ⎤
+ ⎢Q uTa ⎜ − ⎟ + mc p Ta ⎜ ln − ⎟⎠ ⎥
⎣ ⎝ Tr TS ⎠ ⎝ Tin Tr ⎦ clusion is valid, but in the morning and afternoon, the exergy
Ngo [48] also maximized the steady state exergetic efficiency for
a constant value of solar radiation intercepted by a parabolic dish
collector. He found an optimum receiver temperature and an
optimum mass flow rate. Performing different sensitivity studies,
he reported that the exergy destruction due to pressure drop is very
small in comparison to other losses and can be neglected. He also
found that the exergy efficiency rises with increasing concentra-
tion ratio C and that there is an optimum parabolic dish diameter
for maximum exergy efficiency.
A similar analysis was performed by Kahrobaian and
Malekmohammadi [49] for a linear parabolic collector. They applied
the Lagrange multipliers method having as objective function the
exergetic efficiency and they found the optimum values of collec-
tor inlet temperature, oil mass flow rate, concentration ratio and
glass envelope diameter. They additionally presented a very de-
tailed sensitivity analysis of exergetic efficiency and optimum values
of the collector parameters (corresponding to maximum exergetic
efficiency) with respect to solar irradiance.
Nixon and Davies [50] further used the results obtained by
Kalogirou [1] to optimize a linear Fresnel mirror from a cost-
exergy point of view. They maximized the available power output
(exergy) and minimized the total system cost, presenting the results
in terms of yearly produced exergy per total mirror area (W/m2) and
cost per exergy (US $/W). The two objective functions were calcu-
lated for a range of different mirror element spacing arrangements
and operating temperatures for the hourly height of the sun in the
sky, computing each time the corresponding shadow efficiencies,
heat loss from the receiver and the optical efficiency. The optimi-
zation procedure is presented in detail in Ref. [50]. Twenty-eight
80 mm wide mirrors, and a 100 mm wide receiver fixed at a height
of 2 meters operating with a north-south axis tracking orientation
were considered at five types of spacing arrangements (consid-
ered at various transversal angles: 15°, 30°, 45°, 60°, 75°). They
recommended a spacing arrangement corresponding to an onset of
shadowing at a transversal angle of 45° for which the exergy outputs
per total mirror area and number of operational hours per year are
maximized, and the cost per exergy is kept at a minimum. This leads
to the avoidance of excessive mirror reflector spacing and thus the
avoidance of the extra-cost from additional array structures and land
usage.
3.5.2. Parabolic dish collectors
Mukhopadhyay and Ghosh [51] proposed a dual receiver for a com-
bined Brayton–Rankine cycle based on a dish solar collector and
presented the thermal and exergetic analysis of this system. The re-
ceiver heats the air used to provide heat to the topping Brayton cycle
and also produces the steam for the bottom cycle. As the authors re-
ported, it is a modified directly irradiated annular Pressurized receiver
(DIAPR) reaching up to 1000 °C and supplying hot air at a pressure
of 10–30 bar and 1300 °C. The input exergy consists of the exergy
(35) of the air coming out of compressor of the topping cycle, the satu-
rated steam from the bottoming cycle and the solar radiation reaching
the receiver. The output exergy is the sum of the exergy of the hot
air entering the turbine in the topping cycle and the exergy of the
superheated steam fuelling the bottom cycle. From the results re-
ported, they concluded that the exergy destruction is the largest in
the solar receiver among all components of the combined cycle and
it is reducing at higher pressure ratios. It should be mentioned that
a constant receiver efficiency of 82% was considered.
Stanciu et al. [52] applied an exergetic analysis to a parabolic dish
struction rate is the highest in the solar receiver compared to the
dish collector and the Stirling engine, but not for the whole period
(36) of the day. There is a period from 10am to 2pm for which this con-
destruction in the solar engine is higher. When applying the exergy
balance equation, Stanciu et al. [52] considered that the exergy de-
struction rate in the solar collector is the result of heat exergy rates
entering and leaving the parabolic dish at the apparent tempera-
ture of the sun (4333 K). Regarding the exergy loss rate from the
receiver, this is due to convection of the air currents within the re-
ceiver cavity and conduction through the wall, and radiation heat
transfer between the receiver cavity and the ambient. The daily vari-
ation of exergy destruction rates (simulated in June in Romania)
exhibited a maximum at noon when solar radiation reaches a
maximum, the deepest variation corresponding to the dish con-
centrator and the damped one to the solar engine. The concentrator
dissipates the least exergy rate [52].
Madadi et al. [53] studied heat losses from a cylindrical cavity
receiver employed in a solar parabolic dish collector. The effects of
the wind speed and its direction on convection loss has been in-
vestigated along with other geometric and operation parameters.
An empirical correlation for estimating the dimensionless convec-
tive heat transfer coefficient was proposed, applicable for a wind
speed range of 0.1 to 10 m/s. The loss heat rate Q L is expressed as
a function of the convection and radiation losses between receiv-
er wall (considered isothermal) and ambient air. The results reported
indicate that increasing the heat transfer fluid mass flow rate de-
creases the radiation heat loss. A larger receiver diameter would
increase the incident solar radiation and also the thermal efficien-
cy. The importance of the receiver temperature was also found to
be significant. Additionally, they concluded that the radiation heat
loss cannot be neglected at low temperatures. The receiver emis-
sivity has an insignificant effect on radiation loss. As expected, an
important wind velocity increases the convective heat transfer co-
efficient and consequently the heat loss by convection. A generalized
correlation for predicting the convection heat loss in windy con-
ditions has been developed [53]:
1.9869
⎛T ⎞
Nu = 1.2Re0.48189 ⎜ r ⎟ (37)
⎝ Ta ⎠
for 1000 < Re < 3.7 × 104 and 400 K < Tr < 950 K, for wind direction
parallel to concentrator plane.
 S.A. Kalogirou et al. / Progress in Energy and Combustion Science 56 (2016) 106–137
3.5.3. Parabolic trough collectors
Ozturk et al. [54] investigated the geometry of a parabolic trough
collector at given design parameters in order to simulate the op-
eration and total energy collected in the receiver. They simulated
the operation of such a collector in Turkey, over a four-month period.
The maximum of energetic and exergetic efficiencies were reached
in July, being about 0.76 and 0.266 at noon, respectively.
Hu [55] reported the experimental results obtained for a 52 m2
parabolic trough collector for driving a double effect absorption
chiller. The fluid circulating inside the receiver was a propylene–
glycol–water mixture. The parabolic trough solar collector is a single
axis E–W tracking solar collector, having a 13.34 m2 aperture area
and a 0.68 m2 receiver area, corresponding to a 19.6 concentration
ratio. Experimental results collected during its operation esti-
mated the optical efficiency at 0.634 and the linear coefficient of
thermal losses at 1.4 WK−1 m−2. A detailed exergy destruction anal-
ysis was presented, which emphasized that the higher the receiver
temperature, the higher the thermal energy loss, and thus the lower
the energy efficiency, but the higher the exergy efficiency. The con-
duction exergy destruction was very small and could be neglected.
Changing the mass flow rate involves changes in the thermal and
exergetic efficiencies; the receiver temperature is lower at higher
values of the mass flow rate and thus the exergy efficiency is lower,
while the thermal efficiency increases. He also found there is a limit
to the mass flow rate at which almost all of the useful exergy col-
lected in the collector is offset by the friction exergy loss in the
system.
3.6. Photovoltaic panels
Park et al. [44] presented a review on solar photovoltaic systems
(PV) and a detailed energetic and exergetic analysis applied to these
systems. The actual output of a PV system is computed as:
Q out = VOC I SC FF
where VOC stands for open circuit voltage, ISC is the short-circuit
current and FF is the fill factor.
The fill factor is defined as the ratio between the product of
voltage and current at maximum power point (VmIm) to the product
VOCISC. The energy efficiency is than defined as:
Q out
η=
APV IT
Regarding the exergy analysis, the input exergy rate is only as-
 in,S . The output exergy
sociated to the exergy of solar radiation Ex
 out represents the:
Ex
 elec = Vm Im
electric output exergy rate: Ex
from which the thermal one due to heat loss from the photovol-
taic surface to the ambient is subtracted:
 therm = ⎛ 1 − Ta ⎞ hPV −a APV (Tcell − Ta )
Ex
⎜⎝ ⎟
Tcell ⎠
The heat transfer coefficient hPV-a is due to wind convection. As
reported by Ref. [44] citing other authors, the cell temperature may
be estimated as:
TNOCT − 20
Tcell = Ta + IT
800 W /m2
where TNOCT represents the normal operating cell temperature.
Note that the heat generated by PV cells operation may be used
when hybrid collectors are envisaged.
117
3.7. Hybrid collectors
Sciubba and Toro [56] proposed an original hybrid (photovoltaic/
thermal) solar panel, producing simultaneously electricity and heat.
In order to increase the efficiency and life period of a photovoltaic
panel (PV), it is necessary to reduce its operating temperature. The
solution proposed consists in circulating a fluid with coolant effect
on the bottom side of the PV cells and further using it to heat do-
mestic water or for space heating. The system described is composed
of a glass cover, a PV panel made of polycrystalline silicon cells and
a heat collecting plate (absorber) mounted on the bottom side of
the PV panel, on whose lower surface fluid tubes are fixed. Between
the cover and the PV panel, an air gap exists. A steady-state sim-
ulation was performed and detailed energy and exergy analysis was
presented. The authors used the Camel-Pro simulator for the anal-
ysis of energy conversion processes. Energy balance equations were
applied on the cover and absorber. Radiation and convection losses
were considered between the cover at temperature Tc and the en-
vironment at Ta, and also between the PV panel (at Tcell) and the cover.
For the absorber energy balance equation, it was considered that
the absorbed solar radiation flux, (τα ) IT , is transformed into elec-
tric power produced by the PV panel, useful heat to the fluid and
radiation and convection losses between PV panel and cover. They
defined a thermal efficiency of the PV/T system as Eq (28), and an
electrical efficiency as:
PPV
ηelec ,PV T = (43)
APV IT
The authors compared the operation of the combined PV/T system
to the operation of a solar collector and a PV panel separately. The
reported results emphasized that the thermal efficiency of the PV/T
system is lower than the thermal efficiency of the solar collector
and the electrical efficiency of the combined PV/T system is lower
than the one of the stand-alone PV system, but presenting a roughly
(38) constant value (around 11.2%) throughout the day. Instead, the cell
temperature is much lower and roughly constant during the whole
year in the case of a PV/T system (about 24 °C) compared to a PV
panel only (about 47 °C in July). The same behavior was reported
for the exergetic efficiency. It was 2% for the solar collector and 12%
for the PV/T system.
Sandnes and Rekstad [57] performed an experimental study on
a similar PV/T system obtaining a similar behavior from an exergy
(39) point of view and validating analytical results with experimental
measurements. They concluded that PV/T systems are advanta-
geous for low temperature applications since cooling of the PV cells
gives increased power output.
Hepbasli [58] published a review on solar thermal systems com-
menting also the case of PV/T systems. It seems that the behavior
(40) reported by Sciubba and Toro [56] is found in other authors’ results too.
Badescu [59] analyzed the heating system of an ecological build-
ing placed in the campus of the University Politehnica of Bucharest.
The first law and the second law were used to analyze the heat pump
operation. Analytical expressions for the temperature dependent
(41) properties of the refrigerant R114 were used. The results revealed
that most of the exergy losses occur during the compression (41.25%)
and condensation (40.21%) processes. A comparison to the old R12
refrigerant is also provided. The building’s electric load is mainly
provided by a PV array, the results show that it could provide all
the energy required by the heat-pump compressor, if an appropri-
ate electrical energy storage system is provided.
(42)
3.8. Concluding remarks
Saidur et al. [60] presented an outline of the exergy analysis of
solar energy applications. By conducting an extensive review, he
118 S.A. Kalogirou et al. / Progress in Energy and Combustion Science 56 (2016) 106–137
identified some major categories regarding the various solar tech-
nologies in which the exergy analysis is relevant; solar photovoltaic
and photovoltaic/thermal panels, solar ponds, solar heating devices,
solar water desalination, solar air conditioning and refrigeration, solar
drying processes and solar power generation.
By comparing different solar collector types, they reported typical
collector exergy efficiency values, which vary greatly depending on
the type of the collector (i.e., glazed, unglazed, coverless), the cooling
fluid (air or water), the application (i.e., PV/T, air heater) and chosen
assumptions and equation models. According to the reported results,
the glazed PV/T water collector has the highest exergy efficiency,
which is equal to 13.30% [61], followed by the coverless PV/T water
collector, with an efficiency between 11% and 12.87% [62]. PV arrays
have efficiency values in the range of 3% to 9% [63], while double
glazed flat-plate water collectors have an efficiency of 3.90% [9].
Finally, double glazed air heaters were reported to have the lowest
exergy efficiency values, equal to 2%.
Among the solar heating devices, a typical solar water heating
system was reported to have an exergy efficiency value of 16.17%
[64], while solar assisted heat pumps were reported to have effi-
ciency values of 23.81% [65].
Nevertheless, authors would like to point out that the various
percentages are given as estimated by various authors with no
attempt to change them. These could give a general idea to the reader
regarding reported data, but they are not directly comparable since
models, assumptions and parameters may differ. As explained in
Appendix B, a direct comparison of the values given in the various
systems presented in this paper should be done with care.
The authors noted that there is a lack of articles focusing
on the exergy analysis of collectors other than those of the flat plate
type. Moreover, they reported that in most cases, the most com-
monly studied system parameters regarding their impact on the
exergy efficiency are the mass flow rate and the inlet temperature
of the fluid of the collectors and solar irradiance intensity. They
also pointed out the importance of comparing the thermal and the
exergetic efficiency of such systems. Finally, the authors reported
that the solar collectors were the component with the highest
exergy destruction in solar heating devices and air conditioning
systems.
In the following sections, a literature review on different
solar applications follows, providing the outline of each system,
its basic operating principles as well as reported performance in-
dicators by the authors, with a special emphasis on the exergy
efficiency.
4. Process analysis of solar applications
There are a multitude of applications and processes under which
the energy content of the solar radiation can be utilized. In many
instances, the solar radiation is converted to thermal energy, which
is subsequently used for various purposes. These include the direct
generation of space heating, hot water or process heat (to be used,
for example, for drying of various materials or desalination). In some
cases, the solar collectors are coupled with phase change materi-
als (PCMs) that store the solar thermal energy in the form of latent
heat.
The solar heat, which is usually delivered to a heat transfer fluid,
can also be provided to absorption cooling systems or heat pumps,
for the indirect production of cooling, especially for buildings.
Finally, several applications aim the production of electricity
through the implementation of power generation cycles, among
which the most notable is organic Rankine cycle (ORC) and the Kalina
cycle. The production of electricity is sometimes achieved direct-
ly, through photovoltaic (PV) systems. The generated electricity can
be sold to the power grid or it can be used either for the operation
of heat pumps of for other purposes, such as the electrolysis of water,
to produce hydrogen.
Based on the above considerations, it is obvious that there are
several conversion and utilization pathways regarding solar energy,
including a multitude of different technologies, devices, configu-
rations and end-products. In the literature, a great number of articles
deal with the exergy performance of various different solar energy
utilization modules.
4.1. Phase change materials (PCM)
Bouadila et al. [66] carried out an investigation testing the per-
formance of a novel solar air heater with phase change materials.
The solar radiation was converted to thermal energy and ab-
sorbed by spherical capsule PCMs. By conducting measurements in
a region within Tunisia, the authors estimated the daily average
energy and exergy efficiency of the system at 40 and 22%,
respectively.
Yang et al. [67] simulated a solar heat storage packaged bed with
PCMs. PCMs consisting of three different materials with melting tem-
peratures at 60, 50 and 42 °C stored in capsules where used to
transfer heat from flat plate solar collectors, using water as an in-
termediate heat transfer medium. The performance of the system
was compared to the one composed of a single PCM with a unique
melting temperature (at 60 °C). The multiple-type packed bed was
found to have a higher energy transfer efficiency but lower exergy
transfer efficiency during the melting process.
Utlu et al. [68] investigated and experimentally tested a hybrid
wall heating (40–45 °C) system composed of flat plate solar col-
lectors, a latent heat storage module made of paraffin, an
accumulation tank used for sensible heat storage and a heat pump.
A schematic diagram of the system is shown in Fig. 10. Among the
advantages of the system, he mentioned the significant decrease
of the power consumption of the compressor as well the flexibil-
ity and stability of operation for different environmental
temperatures.
A latent heat thermal storage system with PCMs powered by con-
centrating solar collectors for electricity production was investigated
by Shabgard et al. [69] The effect of two practical constraints on the
system operation was taken into account. Firstly, the fact that for
the long-term operation of the system, the thermal energy that is
stored should be equal to the thermal energy that is recovered for
the production of electricity. The second constraint regards the daily,
24 hours, operation of the system, which involves the selection of
variables such as the charging temperature of the PCM, the heat
transfer fluid inlet temperature when the system operates in
discharge-mode, and the charging time. The authors concluded that
for a typical salt phase change material, the optimal phase change
temperatures for heat transfer fluid temperatures of 560 °C and
800 °C are 475 °C and 715 °C, respectively. Moreover, the authors
found that by increasing the surface area of the PCM side by ten
times, the exergy extracted from the heat storage system can be in-
creased six times.
From the works mentioned above, it has been shown that, by
applying an exergetic analysis on PCM systems, it is possible to have
a better understanding of their efficiency, as Kousksou et al. [70]
have reported. This is because in certain applications, the heat storage
temperature, which is equivalent to the melting temperature of the
PCMs, is a crucial parameter that is overlooked by exclusively con-
sidering the energy balance of the system. The exergy efficiency of
the PCMs is also a very useful index in applications that are ori-
ented toward power generation. Furthermore, through exergy
analysis studies, it has been noticed that the melting temperature
is a very influential parameter on the irreversibility of the latent
thermal energy system.
 S.A. Kalogirou et al. / Progress in Energy and Combustion Science 56 (2016) 106–137
Fig. 10. The system considered by Utlu et al. [68].
4.2. Drying
Fudholi et al. [71] performed an energetic and an exergetic anal-
ysis of a solar drying system powered by a finned double-pass solar
collector for red chili, shown schematically in Fig. 11. The specific
energy consumption of the system was 5.26 kg/kWh for reducing
the moisture content of chili from 80 to 10% (wet basis). The average
value of the exergy efficiency of the systems was 57%, while the solar
collector, drying system and pick-up efficiencies were 28, 13 and
45%, respectively, for a solar radiation value of 420 W/m2.
In another study [72], the same group performed an experi-
mental analysis of a solar drying system for red seaweed from 90
to 10% of moisture (wet basis). By fitting different models to their
Fig. 11. The solar drying system for red chili investigated by Fudholi et al. [71].
119
experimental data, they recognized the Page model as the most ac-
curate. The efficiency of the solar collector ranged between 23 and
80%, with an average drying temperature of 48.6 °C.
According to the study of Celma and Cuadros [73], the exergy
losses of an olive mill wastewater drying system based on a solar
natural convection solar dryer were higher during the second day
of operation, because of the lower degree of energy utilization.
Thus, the exergy losses ranged between 34.40 to 100% during the
second day, while in the first day they ranged between 53.24 and
100%.
Midilli and Kucuk [74] experimentally investigated the exergetic
performance of a solar drying process of shelled and unshelled pis-
tachios. They witnessed that the results regarding the energetic and
exergetic efficiency of the process varied in each case and thus con-
cluded that the order, structure, as well as the moisture content of
the products should be taken into account for optimizing the design
of drying systems.
Akbulut and Durmus [75] conducted experiments on the thin
layer drying process of mulberry, using a forced solar dryer for mass
flow rates of the drying material, varying from 0.014 kg/s to 0.036 kg/
s. They found that although the energetic efficiency of the system
decreased from 55.2% to 20.5%, the exergy losses also decreased from
10.82 W to 2.65 W.
The implementation of exergy analysis in solar drying applica-
tions is a useful tool that can be used for component design and
for optimizing the operation procedure, which leads to the least
energy degradation. This is because it is possible to better match
the temperature profiles of the available heat of the drying streams
with the required drying temperatures. The information provided
by exergy analysis can be also effective for determining the capital
and operation cost components of drying systems, especially when
they are coupled with different collector types which are ideal for
different temperatures.
120 S.A. Kalogirou et al. / Progress in Energy and Combustion Science 56 (2016) 106–137
4.3. Heating, cooling and multigeneration
4.3.1. Air/water heaters
Kurtbas and Durmus [76] designed and assessed five different solar
air heaters with dimensions of 0.9 × 0.4 m. From their experiments
they concluded that the efficiency of the collector increases as the
mass flow rate of the heat transfer fluid increases. Other factors af-
fecting the heat transfer efficiency include the geometry of the
collector and the extension of the air flow line. In fact, as the rough-
ness increases, the heat transfer rate increases, but there is also an
increase in the pressure drop. The authors outlined the parameters
mostly affecting the exergy loss, which are the collector efficiency,
temperature difference of the air, as well as the pressure drop.
Alta et al. [77] carried out experiments to test the energy and
exergy performance of three solar flat plate air heaters, among which
two had fins; one of the air heaters equipped with fins had a single
glass cover, while the other two had double glass covers. The impact
of the air mass flow rate, tilt angle and temperature conditions was
studied. It was found that the air heater including fins and double
glass covers was superior in terms of energy and exergy efficiency,
showing a greater temperature difference of the input and output air
streams. The finned heaters showed an exergetic efficiency consis-
tently higher than the non-finned heater. The results also showed that
the circulation time inside the air heater has a greater impact on its
efficiency than the number of glass covers and that low air flow rates
are preferable in cases when higher temperatures are desired. In-
creasing the air flow rate was correlated with a monotonous increase
of the second law efficiency for the non-finned heater; however, there
was an optimal flow rate that maximized the exergy efficiency for
the finned heaters. The authors attribute this observation to possi-
ble air leakages occurring for high mass flow rates. On the other hand,
higher air flow rates favor the energetic efficiency in all cases.
Benli [78] investigated the effect of different absorber geom-
etries on the heat transfer coefficient and the efficiency of solar air
heaters. Five geometries were examined: corrugated, trapeze, reverse
corrugated, reverse trapeze and a base flat plate surface, as shown
in Fig. 12. The authors noticed that as the surface roughness in-
creases, the heat transfer is enhanced, but so do the pressure losses.
They also observed a reverse relationship between the dimension-
less exergy loss and both the heat transfer and the pressure losses
in the collectors. The exergy efficiency was shown to increase when
increasing the air flow rate as well as the air flow line of the collector.
Ceylan [79] performed an energy and exergy analysis of a
temperature controlled solar water heater. The system was exper-
imentally analyzed for operating temperatures ranging from 40 °C
to 55 °C and was compared to a thermosiphon system of an equal
solar collector surface of 0.5 m2. From the experimental results, he
found that the temperature controlled solar water heater has the
capability of producing hot water in the storage tank at much higher
temperatures than the conventional thermosiphon (at 50 °C and
55 °C). For a water temperature of 45 °C, the solar water heater had
a maximum energy efficiency of about 90%, while the efficiency of
the thermosiphon system was 80%. At 55 °C, the maximum energy
efficiency values of the two systems were 90% for the thermosiphon
system and 70% for the solar water heater. Moreover, the solar water
heater exhibited a better exergetic performance, due to the higher
temperature of the water produced. The author also stressed out
the fact that, due to its capability of being placed inside the house,
the solar water heater can potentially have lower thermal losses.
Xiaowu and Ben [80] performed an exergy analysis of domestic-
scale water heaters. A generic solar water heater was considered. A
storage cylinder is used for buffer storage for the water before its de-
livery to the end-users. A three-step exergy balance was implemented
by the authors by considering the sun, the solar collectors and the
storage cylinder as system nodes. The authors investigated the impact
of the collector design parameters on the exergy efficiency of the
collector. The authors concluded that the exergy efficiency of the water
heater is small because of the low quality exergy of the produced
water. They also stressed out that large exergy losses occur in the
storage cylinder. They proposed that in order to improve the exergy
efficiency of the system a proper selection of the width of the solar
collector plate (between 5 and 10 cm) and the number of cover layers
is required. The trade-off between maximizing the exergy efficien-
cy and the cost of the system should be also considered.
Rezaie et al. [81] investigated the potential of integrating thermal
energy storage (TES) to enhance the effectiveness of already exist-
ing solar collectors that are part of a district energy system in
Friedrichshafen, Germany. The TES operates in order to store solar
heat when it is not required and therefore minimize the fuel con-
sumption of the boilers of the district energy network. During the
charging state between March and August, the TES does not provide
any heating to the district energy network. At this mode of oper-
ation, the monthly energy efficiency ranges between 13% (August)
to 71% (April), with a total energy efficiency of 54%. The exergy ef-
ficiency varies between 18% (July) and 46% (August), with an overall
value of 25%. When the discharging mode is considered, the energy
efficiency is significantly higher (86%), while the exergy efficiency
is 50%. The overall annual energy and exergy efficiencies of the TES
were estimated to be 60% and 19%, respectively.
Lalji et al. [82] experimentally evaluated the performance of dif-
ferent packed bed solar air heaters. Based on their results, the authors
concluded that heaters with lower porosity materials have better
heat transfer characteristics, due to the occurrence of higher tur-
bulence. Meanwhile, the low porosity systems exhibited lower exergy
destruction rates.
Tiwari et al. [83] carried out an exergy analysis of an inte-
grated photovoltaic/thermal solar water heater under constant flow
rate operation and hot water collection temperature, shown in Fig. 13.
The surface of the PV panels is 0.516 m2. The capacity of the water
storage tank was considered equal to 45 lt. The PV produces direct
current electricity, which is used to power the water pump of the
system. The water is heated by cooling the PV/T collector and is
stored in the tank. From the simulation results, the authors showed
that the solar cell efficiency and temperature are inversely corre-
lated, as shown in many other studies. Moreover, while the mass
flow rate of the water increases, the overall exergy efficiency of the
system initially increases and then starts decreasing, indicating
the existence of an optimal mass flow rate equal to 0.006 kg/s. On
the other hand, the energy efficiency of the system keeps increas-
ing although beyond 0.006 kg/s its increase rate is insignificant. From
an overall thermal efficiency standpoint, the optimum collector
length was estimated to be equal to 2 m. Concerning the exergy ef-
ficiency, it keeps increasing when the collector length increases
because of the coincidental increase of the water temperature. Fur-
thermore, both the thermal and exergy efficiency of the system
decrease linearly when the constant collector temperature in-
creases, because of the decrease of the hot water mass flow rate.
When the solar radiation is insufficient to cover the energetic
needs, a hybrid system may be used. In these systems solar energy
is consumed in combination with another type of energy source for
system operation.
Torio and Schmidt [84] compared four solar – fossil fuel systems
in different configurations for the heating and cooling by impos-
ing temperature control in a hotel in Germany. Solar collector fields
consisting of 100 or 50 m2 flat plate solar collectors and a water tank
for energy storage were considered. A fossil fuel burner was com-
bined with the solar thermal system fueling a thermally driven
absorption cooling machine. Different load conditions were
compared. They reported that typical solar fractions for cooling and
heating are usually within the range of 60–80% and 10–20% for
German climatic conditions, respectively. The four configurations
were compared from energetic and exergetic efficiencies point of
 S.A. Kalogirou et al. / Progress in Energy and Combustion Science 56 (2016) 106–137 121

Fig. 12. Different air heater surfaces evaluated by Benli et al. [78].

view. It was found that increasing the part of energy or exergy
demand covered by solar energy, increases the exergy perfor-
mance of the system.
From the above studies, it can be seen that the exergy analysis
of solar heaters can be a tool used to provide insight into the optimal
selection of surface types (finned/non-finned) geometries (i.e.,
trapeze) and collector dimensions. By increasing the flow rate inside
the heater, there is usually a trade-off between the heat transfer/
exergy efficiency and the pressure losses. Furthermore, in certain
studies, the importance of the time-dependence of the exergy ef-
ficiency of the collectors has been noted. For this reason, it is
sometimes important to evaluate the performance of the collec-
tors throughout a wide range of operating conditions (solar
irradiance, ambient temperature etc.).
122 S.A. Kalogirou et al. / Progress in Energy and Combustion Science 56 (2016) 106–137

Fig. 13. The solar heater investigated by Tiwari et al. [83].

4.3.2. Trigeneration
Trigeneration (also known as combined cooling, heating and power
or CCΗP) systems, aim to convert an energy source (fossil, solar, waste
heat) into the aforementioned products. Trigeneration systems have
become attractive due to the fact that traditional electricity produc-
tion systems have a limited energetic efficiency (around 30–40%
[85,86]), so a great deal of the primary heat input is rejected to the
environment. By utilizing this heat and combining it with the addi-
tional production of cooling, trigeneration systems lead to higher
global efficiencies allowing the reduction of primary energy
consumption and emissions. At the same time, they help ensure the
reliability of energy supply networks [87]. As reported by Hernandez-
Santoyo and Sánchez-Cifuentes [88], the installation of a CCHP plant
can lead to an efficiency increase of up to 50% compared to a cogen-
eration (combined heating and power or CHP) plant of the same size.
Xu et al. [89] carried out an investigation on a combined cooling
heating and power (CCHP) system integrating middle and low
temperature solar thermal energy utilization and methanol de-
composition, shown schematically in Fig. 14. The system includes
a parabolic trough collector, operating at temperatures between

Fig. 14. The trigeneration system investigated by Xu et al. [89].

 S.A. Kalogirou et al. / Progress in Energy and Combustion Science 56 (2016) 106–137
Fig. 15. Solar trigeneration system proposed by Al-Sulaiman et al. [90].
250 °C and 300 °C. The solar heat is used to drive a methanol de-
composition reaction, which produces syngas. The syngas is
subsequently combusted in the chamber of a micro gas turbine in
order to power the absorption LiBr cooling, heating and power
systems. The total exergy input of the system was 2086.9 kW. The
total exergy output corresponding to electric power, cooling and heat
was 600 kW, 35.4 kW and 29.4 kW, respectively. The system was es-
timated to have an exergy efficiency of 48.81%, with a net electric-
to-solar thermal efficiency of up to 22.56%. The overall energetic
efficiency of the system was 76.40%.
Al-Sulaiman et al. [90] performed an exergy modeling study of
a solar driven trigeneration system based on the integration of par-
abolic trough solar collectors, an ORC and an absorption chiller,
shown schematically in Fig. 15. The performance of the system was
evaluated for four different cases: electricity (single generation), co-
generation with heating or cooling and trigeneration. Three modes
of operation were considered with regard to the solar energy uti-
lization including also solar energy storage and simultaneous solar
energy utilization and storage. The effect of the ORC evaporator pinch
point temperature, pump inlet temperature and turbine inlet
123
temperature of the ORC on the exergy efficiency of the system was
evaluated in all cases. The solar utilization mode had the highest
exergy efficiency. For the electricity-only generation scenario, the
solar utilization exergy efficiency was 7%, while the exergy effi-
ciency of the other two modes was 3.5% (utilization and storage)
and 3% (storage). Under the trigeneration mode, the efficiency values
increase to 20%, 8% and 7%, respectively. The system components
exhibiting the highest exergy destruction were, according to the
authors, the collectors and the evaporator of the ORC. The authors
also concluded that there is a very little impact of the turbine inlet
pressure on the exergy efficiency of the system.
Zhai et al. [91] considered a novel domestic scale hybrid solar
trigeneration system for remote areas. The system was based on the
use of a parabolic trough collector with a cavity receiver, a screw
expander and a silica gel-water adsorption cooling module. The
modeled system was able to produce 23.5 kW of electricity and
79.8 kW of cooling for a solar radiation of 600 W/m2 and an area
of 600 m2. For the meteorological conditions of Dunhuang, China,
the energy and exergy efficiency of the system was estimated at 58%
and 15.2%, respectively.
124 S.A. Kalogirou et al. / Progress in Energy and Combustion Science 56 (2016) 106–137
4.3.3. Solar cooling
Solar cooling technologies aim at the utilization of solar energy
for the production of air-conditioning. The implementation of solar
cooling as an alternative to conventional air-conditioning devices based
on vapor compression can reduce the stress on the electrical net-
works during the midday, when peak loads occur [92]. Many solar
air-conditioning technologies encompass sorption refrigeration, ab-
sorption cooling systems and desiccant cooling systems. Another
category includes thermo-mechanical refrigeration systems based on
Rankine cycles, Stirling engines and PV panels, while other options
are oriented toward hybrid configurations [93], shown in Fig. 16.
Lopez-Villada et al. [94] evaluated and compared various solar
absorption power-cooling configurations including evacuated tube
(ETC), parabolic trough (PTC) and linear Fresnel (LFC) collectors
coupled with a single-stage combined absorption (SSCA) and the
Goswami cycle. The authors concluded that for temperatures below
100 °C the ETC is the most suitable technology for SSCA. They also
pointed out that although the Goswami–ETC configuration has the
best efficiency at 138 °C, due to the difficulty of the ETC operating
at this temperature range, the PTC could be the best option for this
Fig. 16. Simplified representation of solar absorption and thermo-mechanical refrigeration cooling systems [93].
absorption-power cycle. Lastly, the authors concluded that depend-
ing on the priority of the system output (power or cooling), the
Goswami–ETC/PTC and the SSCA configurations are preferable,
respectively.
Pridasawas and Lundqvist [95] performed an exergy analysis of
a solar-driven ejector refrigeration system. They compared flat-
plate, single and double-glazed collectors with an evacuated tube
solar collector coupled with an absorption cooling system with
butane. They found that the exergy destruction is proportional to
the evaporation temperature of the system and it can be mini-
mized by optimizing the generating temperature. They also pointed
out that, although the evacuated tube solar collector has higher
exergy efficiency, the optimum generating temperature is in the
range between 80–100 °C. Therefore, flat plate collectors can also
be used efficiently for these temperatures.
Millan et al. [96] presented a methodology for estimating the
available solar exergy in absorption cooling processes, by taking into
account all the intermediate steps of the solar energy conversion
to the final product. These steps include the conversion of the sun’s
power into radiation absorbed by the converter, the transformation
 S.A. Kalogirou et al. / Progress in Energy and Combustion Science 56 (2016) 106–137
Fig. 17. The solar assisted absorption cooling system proposed by Onan et al. [97].
of the radiation into heat and, finally, the transference of the heat
exergy to the thermal fluid. By implementing their methodology for
the climatic data of Madrid, they estimated that the maximum
hourly exergy efficiency of the available heat varies between 11 and
14.6%. The maximum daily available exergy value ranges between
810 kJ/m2 and 940 kJ/m2.
Onan et al. [97] considered a domestic solar absorption cooling
system and carried out an exergy analysis by monitoring its oper-
ation on an hourly basis. The system, shown schematically in Fig. 17,
had a cooling capacity of 106 kW. The authors estimated that the
maximum exergy destruction of the system occurs in the solar col-
lectors of the solar auxiliary system and in the generator of the
absorption cooling device. They also mentioned that in order to get
more realistic results regarding the calculated exergy efficiency values
it is advisable that the time-varying environmental temperature is
used as the dead state temperature. Finally, while the energy effi-
ciency of the solar collectors was between 26.2% and 61.9%,
depending on the intensity of the solar radiation, the exergy effi-
ciency did not exceed 11.98% and had an average value of 6%. The
authors also proposed that the sizing and selection of the system
components is done by taking into account the hourly changes in
exergy destruction during the cooling season, in order to reduce the
irreversibility of the system.
Aman et al. [98] investigated a solar air conditioning system based
on a 10 kW ammonia-water absorption cooling system. The results
of the energy and exergy analysis show that the COP of the system
increased at a small rate when the heat source and the evaporator
temperature increased but decreased when the absorber and con-
denser temperatures increase, while the exergy efficiency decreased
if any of the generator, evaporator, condenser and absorber tem-
perature increased. Furthermore, the system was found to be more
efficient from a thermodynamic standpoint when low tempera-
ture heat sources are utilized. The exergy efficiency is around 35%
for absorber temperatures below 20 °C. Most of the exergy losses
occurred mostly in the absorbing process and secondarily in the gen-
erator. Moreover, the exergy destruction rate is proportional to the
absorber temperature and abruptly increases for temperatures above
45 °C.
125
Gomri [99] investigated a hybrid LiBr absorption cooling system
utilizing heat from both an array of solar collectors and a natural
gas burner. The temperature of the generator and the condenser were
varied between 45 to 83 °C and 28 to 36 °C, respectively, while the
evaporation temperature was fixed at 5 °C. Under optimal opera-
tion, the coefficient of performance (COP) was 0.82 while the exergy
efficiency was 30%, while the required collector surface was
minimized. The natural gas consumption was significantly low, thus
leading to very few CO2 emissions (always less than 3 kg/h).
Song et al. [100] studied a low grade (<100 °C) heat-driven ad-
sorption cycle for food storage purposes. The first stage of the
adsorption chiller (freezer) was based on CaCl2-BaCl2/NH3 and the
second stage (cooling) on silica-gel/lithium. The COP of the system
ranged from 0.13 to 0.28 depending on the temperature of the heat
source for a freezing temperature of about −15 °C and a cooling tem-
perature of about 5 °C. The exergy efficiency of the system varied
between 11% and 13%.)
4.3.4. Heat pumps for heating
Heat pumps are machines that are used for transferring heat from
a lower temperature source to a higher temperature destination,
called heat sink, opposite to the direction of spontaneous heat trans-
fer. Heat pumps are based on the implementation of a vapor
compression cycle, which basically incorporates an evaporator, a
compressor, a condenser and a throttle valve. Heat pumps can
operate to produce cooling or heating, depending on the location
of the evaporator, in which heat is absorbed, and the condenser, in
which heat is rejected. With respect to heat pumps for heating, solar
energy can be used to either power the compressor of heat pumps
(by coupling the vapor compression cycle with a thermo-mechanical
conversion cycle) or for providing additional heat to the working
fluid during its evaporation.
Ozgener and Hepbasli [101] identified four main categories of
solar-assisted heat pump systems (SAHPS). The first one includes
SAHPSs for water heating, the second SAHPSs with storage for space
heating, while the third and fourth categories include SAHPSs with
direct expansion for space heating and solar-assisted ground source
heat pump greenhouse heating systems respectively (SAGSHPGHS).
126 S.A. Kalogirou et al. / Progress in Energy and Combustion Science 56 (2016) 106–137
Fig. 18. System investigated by Ozturk [105].
They concluded that the key parameters affecting the perfor-
mance of ground source heat pumps are the heat pump machine
used, the circulating pump and the ground coupling well. They
stressed out the importance of carrying out exergy analyses of
SAGSHP systems in order to better assess their efficiency.
Suleman et al. [102] proposed an integrated solar heat pump
system aimed for industrial heating. The heat produced from the
solar collector was provided via a heat transfer oil circuit (using
Therminol VP1) to various parallel heat demanding processes in the
plant. The remaining heat was delivered to an air stream in a closed
loop in order to provide heat in the evaporator of the heat pump,
in which the working fluid R407C was used. The heat transfer oil
maximum temperature at its exit from the collectors was 150 °C.
The condensation and evaporation temperatures of the heat pump
were equal to 40.85 °C and −1.95 °C, respectively. The overall energy
and exergy efficiency of the process were estimated equal to 58%
and 75%, respectively. The COP of the heat pump was found to be
equal to 2.97 and its exergetic efficiency 35.7%. Most of the exergy
destruction occurred in the heating processes of the plant, fol-
lowed by the evaporator and, by a large difference, the compressor
and the solar pump. The fan, condenser, steam generator and ex-
pansion valve had a minimal contribution to the irreversibility of
the system.
Badescu [103] extended the study of the solar assisted heat-
pump system of the same ecological building placed in the campus
of the University Politehnica of Bucharest, outlined in Ref. [59], by
comparing two different operating modes: the heat pump oper-
ates in combination with a solar thermal collectors’ array (providing
thermal energy to drive the vapor compression heat-pump), and
respectively, the second mode in which the building is heated by
the heat pump alone. The results showed that the heat pump COP
is higher and the electric power required by the heat pump’s com-
pressor is smaller with up to 8% in the first operating mode.
4.3.5. Domestic cogeneration (PV/T)
Sobhnamayan et al. [104] published an article on the optimiza-
tion of a solar photovoltaic thermal water collector based on exergy
analysis. The authors noticed that by increasing the solar radia-
tion intensity from 0 to 1000 W/m2, the exergy efficiency increased
from about 0% to about 11.5%. The authors also point out that there
is a considerable error at estimating the exergy efficiency at low solar
radiation intensity values in other studies. The optimal value of the
pipes diameter was estimated equal to 4.8 mm, resulting in an exergy
efficiency higher than 12.5%. For higher pipe diameters, the exergy
efficiency drops and converges toward a value of 11.3%. The optimum
value of the inlet water velocity was found equal to 0.09 m/s. As
the water velocity increases, the exergy efficiency decreases due to
the fact that, the pressure drop in the tubes increases and there-
fore a higher electrical consumption by the circulating pump is
necessary.
Ozturk [105] presented an exergetic analysis of a heating
system combining a ground source heat pump with a photovol-
taic thermal hybrid solar collector (PV/T), shown schematically in
Fig. 18. The PV/T provides supplementary heat to the evaporator of
the heat pump while at the same time it produces electricity to
power the compressor and the pumps of the system, thus reduc-
ing the external electricity consumption. The exergy efficiency
of the unit was estimated to 74.12%. The components with the
highest exergy destruction rates are the evaporator and the radia-
tor heating system. In principle, the exergy destruction rate of the
system is straightly proportional with the ambient temperature;
therefore the system could be more beneficial for lower values of
this temperature.
Exergy analyses studies of solar cooling, heating and solar multi/
tri-generation systems are very common in the literature. The
evaluation of the exergetic performance of such systems is espe-
cially relevant because of the great number of different system
configurations proposed for CCHP systems, which combine several
prime mover engines (reciprocating, micro turbines, ORCs etc.) with
various cooling devices (i.e., sorption chillers, vapor compression
refrigerators) and utilizing different solar collector types. The exergy
analysis thus becomes an indispensable methodology to realisti-
cally evaluate and compare systems that can be significantly different
by taking into account their specific attributes, characteristics and
operation parameters.
4.4. Hydrogen production
Because of their limited nature and non-homogenous distribu-
tion, fossil fuels are not expected to keep up with the increasing
global energy demand, while at the same time their reserves are
getting less and less easily accessible. Based on the above consid-
erations, the synthesis of hydrogen is becoming significantly
attractive as a means to produce a CO2 neutral fuel with certain
 S.A. Kalogirou et al. / Progress in Energy and Combustion Science 56 (2016) 106–137
advantages such as high energy conversion efficiency, production
from water without any emissions, abundance, flexibility of storage,
effective long distance transportation, high heating value and ease
of conversion to other forms of energy [106]. There are a multi-
tude of hydrogen production technologies, such as electrolysis of
water, reforming of biofuels or fossil fuels and biological methods.
Some of these can be coupled with solar energy utilization tech-
nologies. A review of some literature works applying an exergetic
analysis on such systems follows.
Koumi Ngoh et al. [107] carried out a techno-economic analy-
sis of a hybrid hydrogen production system utilizing solar
photovoltaic and thermal energy. The system combined parabolic
trough collectors (PTC) used to generate hot pressurized steam at
320 °C, which was subsequently electrolyzed to H2 and O2 by elec-
tricity produced by photovoltaic panels. The production cost of the
system was estimated at 5235.45 $/ton of hydrogen.
Ahmadi et al. [108] proposed a novel proton exchange mem-
brane (PEM) system for hydrogen production powered by an ORC
utilizing solar and ocean thermal energy. The net power output of
the system was 102 kW with a hydrogen production rate of 1.2 kg/h.
The exergetic efficiency of the system was estimated at around 22%.
The components causing the highest exergy destruction were the
condenser and the turbine of the ORC. Moreover, he showed that
the increase of the solar radiation intensity leads to the increase
of the overall exergy efficiency. Meanwhile, the increase of the
ambient temperature increases the efficiency when it is lower than
292 K and it decreases it when it has higher values.
Ratlamwala and Dincer [109] assessed two solar driven systems
for the production of hydrogen by carrying out energy and exergy
analyses. The first system included a solar heliostat field with a Cu-
Cl and a Kalina cycle. The second system was similar to the first,
with the exception of the inclusion of a photocatalytic reactor for
producing hydrogen. The Cu–Cl cycle was considered by the authors
due to its capability of low temperature operation (around 530 °C)
and the reduced material and maintenance costs. The total heliostat
field had an area of 2000 m2 and an efficiency of 75% and the low
and high operating pressures of the Kalina cycle were equal to 2.5
and 4 bar, respectively. The authors concluded that when the solar
radiation intensity increases, the hydrogen production increases from
126.9 L/s to 289.4 L/s and 154.1 L/s to 343.9 L/s. The exergetic effi-
ciency of the systems increased from 45.6% to 47.79% for the first
one and from 54.94% to 56.41% for the second. Moreover, al-
though the ambient temperature has no impact on the energy
efficiencies of the systems, its increase leads to an increase of their
exergy efficiency from 47.98% to 50.82% and 56.87% to 59.64%.
Ozcan and Dincer [110] extended the scope of the previous study
by considering a solar driven Mg–Cl hybrid system for producing
electricity and hydrogen. A concentrating solar thermal power cycle
with energy storage, a steam power plant with reheating and re-
generation and a Mg-Cl hydrogen synthesis cycle constitute the
overall system proposed by the authors. Considering solar energy
as the heat source of the system, the overall system energy and
exergy efficiencies were estimated equal to 18.8% and 19.9%, which
are significantly lower compared to a heat input system consist-
ing of molten salts. The highest exergy destruction of the system
takes place in the solar field, accounting for 79% of the total system
irreversibility.
Hacatoglu et al. [111] performed an exergetic assessment of a
hybrid solar hydrogen system with activated carbon storage. The
system includes hybrid PV/T cells for making use of the solar ra-
diation. The hydrogen is produced by electrolysis and is stored in
a cluster of tanks containing carbon. A simple “base case” system
was considered and it was subsequently compared to an en-
hanced system with multiple outputs. The authors recognized that
solar photovoltaic-based systems have the lowest exergetic perfor-
mance, with efficiency values in the range between 14% and 18%.
127
They therefore consider these systems as having the highest po-
tential for further improvement. From the comparison of the base
case and the modified systems, the authors concluded that the exergy
efficiency values significantly differ, being equal to 4% and 11%, re-
spectively. They also point out the environmental benefits of the
hybrid system, which, as they state, may counter balance the eco-
nomic obstacles for its adoption.
Another method discussed for the production of hydrogen by uti-
lizing solar energy is the solar photolysis of water [112–114].
Photolysis is the reaction of the disassociation of water molecules
into hydrogen and oxygen that takes place when they are irradi-
ated with solar photons. Contrary to the applications involving
electrolysis powered by solar-derived electricity from intermedi-
ate PV panels, the aim of solar photolysis systems is the direct
chemical conversion of water into O 2 and Η 2 by employing
photoelectrode cells, in which light harvesting and the generation
of electric charge carriers and migration toward the external circuit
for water cleavage take place [115]. It is estimated that for the pro-
duction of 1 kg of hydrogen an energy input of 39.4 kWh is required
[116]. Conibeer and Richards [117] compared a PV/electrolyzer with
various proposed photoelectrolytic technologies for solar hydro-
gen production. Although they pointed out the simplicity, reliability
and applicability of photoelectrolytic systems, they concluded that
for the time being, the PV/electrolysis pathway is more appropri-
ate having a higher efficiency, due to its maturity and due to the
major challenges faced by photoelectrolytic systems. Owing to its
promising perspectives, photoelectrolysis as a means to produce hy-
drogen is currently under extensive basic research and critique [112],
with many different strategies involving various photoelectrode types
and arrays being proposed [115]. Most current investigations are
focused on the search of new semiconductor materials that are
capable of absorbing visible light radiation that are necessary for
the application of the technology, with TiO2 being the most widely
used [114,118]. Other photoelectrodes reported include SiO2, Al2O3,
In2O3 and RuO2 [119]. Varghese and Grimes [115] stress out the im-
portance of standardizing the evaluation procedures for determining
the efficiency of different cells. Furthermore, they concluded that
realistic solar photoconversion efficiencies can be predicted by using
the incident photon to electron conversion efficiency (IPCE) values
in the energetic analysis of such systems. For the time being, most
studies are proof-of-concept oriented and focus on the experimen-
tal testing of different cells and integrated energy systems have
not been considered. Photoelectrolytic cell efficiency values re-
ported (solar to H2 efficiency) range between 1.5, 4.6, 7 and 15%
[117,120–124]. Nevertheless, so far there is scarcity of reported en-
ergetic and especially exergetic efficiencies of such systems, although
they may seem promising for a sustainable “hydrogen economy”.
From the above indicative literature review, it can be seen that
there is a high variety of hydrogen production technologies inte-
grating solar energy utilization. These technologies can be greatly
different in their basic concepts and be oriented toward different
end-products. For this reason, the specific requirements and oper-
ation parameters corresponding to each system can give very
different results when applying an exergetic analysis. However, in
all cases, the exergy analysis can help to show which process com-
ponents contribute more to the energy degradation and optimize
the systems.
4.5. Hybridization with other renewables
The combination of solar energy with other renewable energy
sources, such as biomass fuels and wind power can result to sig-
nificant environmental and also economic benefits, since it can lead
to a decrease in primary fossil fuel consumption and net emis-
sions of pollutants [125]. In the literature, there have been several
works investigating the prospects of designing hybrid systems
128 S.A. Kalogirou et al. / Progress in Energy and Combustion Science 56 (2016) 106–137
Fig. 19. The hybrid solar-wind domestic system proposed by Li et al. [126].
making use of solar and other renewable energy sources. The purpose
of these systems, which are particularly appealing for decentral-
ized, off-grid applications, can be either electricity generation, or
excess energy storage.
Li et al. [126] performed an exergetic analysis of a domestic-
scale system combining a 5 kW wind turbine and an array of 11.4 m2
copper flat-plate solar collectors as well as two heat pumps, capable
of producing space heating, hot water, cooling and electricity, shown
in Fig. 19. They pointed out that a more efficient solar collector design
is required to improve the performance of the system, while the wind
turbine provides only 7.6% of the annual electricity required by the
heat pumps. Compared to conventional energy systems, the pro-
posed application exhibits a 31.3% reduction in CO2 emissions.
Calderon et al. [127] evaluated a photovoltaic-wind system with
hydrogen storage by using an exergetic analysis. PV panels com-
bined with a wind turbine were used for converting the radiation
of the sun and wind into electricity. The electricity was used to power
an electrolyzer for the production of hydrogen. The produced hy-
drogen was then used in a fuel cell for the generation of electricity.
A battery set and a metal-hydride system were considered for elec-
tricity and hydrogen storage. The system could cover an electric load
of 240 W. The exergy efficiency of the electrolyzer had a value of
68.75%, much higher than the efficiency of the PV module, which
was 8.39% and the fuel cell, which was 35.9%. The exergy perfor-
mance of the PV modules is highly dependent on the intensity of
the solar irradiance and the electricity produced. Meanwhile, the
exergy efficiency of the electrolyzer as well as the efficiency of the
fuel cell is more dependent on the hydrogen mass flow rate and
the electricity supply and demand.
Ravaghi-Ardebili et al. [128] carried out a numerical modeling
study on the low-temperature steam biomass gasification process
in which the heat input was provided by an integrated concen-
trated solar power plant. The solar collectors produced steam at
410 °C, which was used as the oxidizing agent for the gasification
process. They investigated the impact of various parameters on the
quality of the produced syngas, such as the biomass composition,
the particle size, the moisture content, the fuel-air equivalence ratio
and the residence time in the reactor.
4.6. Solar ponds
A salt gradient solar pond is a body of saline water in which the
salt concentration increases with depth, from a very low value at
the surface to near saturation at the depth of usually 1–2 m. The
density gradient inhibits free convection and the result is that solar
radiation is trapped in the lower region. Solar ponds are wide sur-
faced collectors in which the basic concept is to heat a large pond
or lake of water in such a way as to suppress the heat losses that
would occur if less dense heated water is allowed to rise to the
surface of the pond and lose energy to the environment by con-
vection and radiation [18].
Karakilcik et al. [129] analysed exergetically and energetically
a solar pond integrating conventional flat plate solar collectors in
order to provide heat to the heat storage zone. The solar pond energy
efficiency varied from 21.33% to 26.52% for 1 to 4 collectors in-
stalled. The respective values for the exergy efficiency ranged from
20.02 to 23.84%.
In another work, Bozkurt and Karakilcik [130] carried out an ex-
perimental study on the exergy performance of a solar pond with
solar collectors. Flat plate collectors were used for utilizing the solar
radiation, while an insulation of glass wool was considered. They
found that the maximum exergetic efficiency of the heat transfer,
non-convective and upper convective zones of the solar bond were
28.69%, 11.74% and 3.15%, respectively. The maximum overall energy
efficiency of the solar pond and the integrated solar pond system
were observed in August, equal to 28.41% and 33.5%, respectively,
while the minimum values were measured in January, being equal
to 8.28% and 9.48%, respectively.
4.7. Power plants (ORC, Kalina, photovoltaic)
Solar thermal power plants are installed to convert the solar ra-
diation into electricity. Most commonly, they are based on the
implementation of a power generation cycle, such as the Rankine
cycle and the Kalina cycle. The plants consist of a field of solar col-
lectors, which is coupled to the main power plant. The solar radiation
is firstly converted into heat, which is delivered in the fluid of the
 S.A. Kalogirou et al. / Progress in Energy and Combustion Science 56 (2016) 106–137
Fig. 20. Simplified diagram of a concentrating solar collector (CSP) plant based on the implementation of a Rankine cycle including a heat transfer loop [131].
collectors of the plant. There are two main categories of solar thermal
plants. In direct steam gasification (DSG) plants the working fluid
of the power cycle is directly evaporated as it flows inside the col-
lectors and then enters the steam turbine. In other cases, an
intermediate heat transfer loop, usually consisting of a thermal oil,
is used to deliver the heat from the collectors to the working fluid
of the power cycle.
Cau and Cocco [131] evaluated the annual performance of a
1 MWe solar ORC plant comparing parabolic trough with linear
Fresnel solar collectors for the solar-thermal conversion. A simpli-
fied diagram of their system in shown in Fig. 20. They found out
that despite the higher energy production per unit area of solar col-
lector (180–190 kWh/m 2 vs 130–140 kWh/m 2 ) and a better
conversion efficiency (10.5–11% vs. 7.6–8.1%) exhibited by the par-
abolic trough collectors, the linear Fresnel collectors have an overall
increased energy production per m2 of occupied land (55–60 kWh/y
vs. 45–50 kWh/y) due to their lower land requirements.
Concentrating solar collectors, such as the parabolic trough col-
lector (PTC) systems currently constitute the most mature technology
for solar thermal electricity conversion. This is mainly because of
their capability to operate under higher temperatures (up to 400 °C),
thus having a potential for attaining higher thermal efficiencies
[1,132].
Baghernejad and Yaghoubi [133] performed an exergy analysis
of an integrated solar combined cycle system. The simulated system
included a natural gas turbine and a heat recovery steam genera-
tor in which the flue gases were cooled to provide heat into a dual-
pressure Rankine cycle. A solar field was integrated in the system
in order to provide heat in the high pressure heat exchange module
of the heat recovery steam generator. The high and low pressure
steam temperatures were equal to 509 °C and 236.3 °C at pres-
sures of 89.6 bar and 9.6 bar, respectively. The total aperture area
of the collectors was assumed equal to 545 m2. The overall energy
and exergy efficiency values of the system are equal to 46.17% and
45.6%, respectively, which are higher than the values correspond-
ing to a simple combined cycle plants without the integration of
solar collectors and to PTC Rankine cycle plants. The exergy de-
struction in the combustor, collector, heat exchangers and pumps
and turbines accounts for 29.62%, 8.69%, 9.11% and 8%, respective-
ly. The component exhibiting the lowest exergy efficiency (27%) is
the solar collectors, due to their relatively low operation temperature.
129
The authors also proposed the implementation of combustion air
preheating and reducing the air-fuel ratio in order to decrease the
exergy loss in the combustors.
Al-Sulaiman [134] investigated steam and organic Rankine cycles
integrating parabolic trough collectors. Different working fluids were
considered for the ORCs. The systems were designed to produce elec-
tricity of 50 MWe. According to the results of the study, as the solar
irradiation intensity increases, the exergetic efficiency of the systems
increases. Most of the exergy destruction of the system occurs in
the parabolic trough collectors, and is equal to more than 50% of
the solar inlet exergy and 70% of the total exergy destruction
of the system. The second most important source of exergy de-
struction of the system was the evaporator, in which 13% of the solar
exergy input is destroyed (19% of the total exergy destruction).
However, according to the author, there is a high potential for im-
proving the exergetic performance of the system, corresponding to
an exergetic efficiency increase of 75%. Among the working fluids
examined, R134a exhibits the highest exergy efficiency, followed
by R152a.
Wang et al. [135] studied the off-design operation of a solar
powered ORC. The solar collectors were of the compound parabol-
ic type, while an intermediate circuit with a thermal storage tank
at about 150 °C was used for regulating the operation of the system.
According to the dynamic model he developed, the system exergy
efficiency increases for lower environment temperatures. There-
fore, the average exergetic efficiency is maximized in December and
minimized in August. However, the maximum net power output of
the system is obtained in June and September.
Rovira et al. [136] evaluated different configurations for inte-
grated solar combined cycle (ISCC) plants in which the solar heat
was utilized in different heating stages of the working fluid of the
heat recovery steam generator (HRSG). The heat from the collec-
tors was provided to the plant either through an intermediate heat
transfer fluid (HTF) at 390 °C or directly to the working fluid, at tem-
peratures of up to 545 °C. The authors stressed out the importance
of minimizing the irreversibility of the solar field and especially of
the HRSG, by using the solar heat for evaporating the high pres-
sure level steam but not for preheating it. Furthermore, they
concluded that, based on their assumptions, the direct steam gen-
eration (DSG) configurations lead to improved performance when
compared to HTF configurations.
130 S.A. Kalogirou et al. / Progress in Energy and Combustion Science 56 (2016) 106–137
Fig. 21. Process flow of the system investigated by Ruzzenenti et al. [137].
Ruzzenenti et al. [137] conducted a life cycle (LCA) and an exergy
life cycle analysis (ELCA) for micro scale geothermal-solar ORC plants
for cogeneration of power and heat, shown schematically in Fig. 21.
They concluded that the materials and energy used for the
construction of the wells counter balances the environmental ben-
efits that originate from the use of non-fossil energy sources.
Consequently, they proposed that the concept of such plants is more
appealing in the case that already created and abandoned wells are
used.
Rao et al. [138] proposed a novel combined cycle, which incor-
porates the use of liquefied natural gas (LNG) as the low temperature
(<75 °C) heat sink of the solar ORC. The LNG is evaporated in the
condenser of the ORC and is subsequently expanded to produce ad-
ditional work. At the same time, due to the significantly low
temperature of the LNG, the condensation of the working fluid of
the ORC can occur at −60 °C, thus increasing the cycle efficiency.
Through the comparison of the combined cycle against the sepa-
rate solar ORC and LNG power generation cycles, the authors
concluded that for the same power output, the required area of the
solar collectors and the heat exchange surface are decreased by 82.2%
and 31.7%, respectively. However, the proposed system is associ-
ated with a larger volume flow rate at the turbine outlet.
Sun et al. [139] simulated and optimized a low temperature
(~50 °C) solar-boosted Kalina cycle plant. After identifying the mass
flow rate of the working fluid, the working fluid of the solar sub-
cycle and the ammonia mass fraction as the most important
operational parameters, he applied his optimization method on a
case study based on radiation data in Kumejima Island of Japan. He
estimated that the power output of the plant could be as high as
491 kW, with an exergy and energy efficiency of 35.6% and 6.48%,
respectively.
Yang et al. [140] investigated the integration of a solar heating
in a Rankine cycle power plant, examining different configurations
for low and medium temperature ranges. They estimated the
thermal-to-electric power conversion efficiency equal to 36.5% and
11% for temperatures of 260 °C and below 100 °C, respectively.
Delgado-Torres and Garcia-Rodriguez [141] carried out thermo-
dynamic investigations of a low-temperature solar ORC by comparing
various working fluids. They concluded that dry fluids tend to exhibit
lower values of required collector aperture area compared to wet
fluids. According to their results, the system has the highest overall
energetic efficiency for the working fluids R245ca and R245fa.
Pei et al. [142] investigated a regenerative ORC for low-
temperature solar thermal electricity generation. PCMs were
considered for thermal energy storage, consisting of erythritol
((2R,3S)-butane-1,2,3,4-tetraol), with a melting point of 120 °C. Ac-
cording to the authors, the maximum regenerative ORC efficiency
surpasses the efficiency of the non-regenerative cycle by 9.2%. The
maximum overall system efficiency of the regenerative system is
higher than the efficiency of the non-regenerative system by 4.6–
5.4%. The authors also found out that the overall system efficiency
is optimized for regenerative temperatures, which are different from
the ones that optimize the efficiency of the ORC module. This is
because the collector efficiency decreases as the regenerative tem-
perature increases, while the ORC efficiency increases. The overall
electric efficiency of the proposed system for irradiance of 750 W/m2
is equal to 8.6%.
In another study, Gang et al. [143] proposed and thermodynam-
ically investigated a low-temperature solar thermal power generation
system incorporating an ORC, two-stage collectors and heat storage,
shown in Fig. 22. Flat plate collectors are used for preheating the
working fluid of the ORC, while compound parabolic concentrator
collectors are used for heating the working fluid to its maximum
temperature. The heat storage is achieved through two PCMs of dif-
ferent melting temperatures. According to the authors, the main
advantage of using two different collector types for the heat input
 S.A. Kalogirou et al. / Progress in Energy and Combustion Science 56 (2016) 106–137
Fig. 22. The system investigated by Gang et al. [143].
to the working fluid is the fact that the flat plate collector has a higher
efficiency for lower temperature ranges, whereas the CPC collec-
tor is more efficient for high temperatures. Consequently, the
efficiency of two-stage collector systems was estimated to be higher
than the efficiency of single-stage collectors by 6.5 to 14.1%, for solar
radiation values from 500 W/m2 to 1000 W/m2. For a radiation in-
tensity of 750 W/m2, the electric efficiency of the system was
estimated equal to 7.8% and 7.7% for the operation under simulta-
neous and separate heat collection and power conversion,
respectively.
Ganesh and Srinivas [144] investigated the potential of a low tem-
perature solar thermal Kalina plant based on the use of parabolic
trough collectors. They estimated a maximum specific power of
105 kW per kg/s of the working fluid under the assumption of 80%
strong solution concentration and with a separator temperature of
140 °C. The Kalina cycle efficiency is equal to 13%; however, the
overall plant efficiency was lower at 5.25%. By increasing the
separator temperature of the cycle, the efficiency values can be
further increased.
Xu et al. [145] investigated the energetic and exergetic perfor-
mance of solar power tower plant based on the application of a
Rankine power cycle. A solar field with an aperture area of 10,000 m2
and a beam direct normal irradiance of 800 W/m2 were consid-
ered. A heat transfer fluid consisting of molten salts was used to
deliver the heat from the receiver to the Rankine cycle system. The
working fluid of the power cycle was water, with a turbine inlet
steam temperature of 552 °C and a condensation temperature of
46 °C. The exergy efficiency of the power cycle subsystem was es-
timated equal to 74.5%, with a total exergy loss value of 12.6%.
Meanwhile, the exergy destruction of the heliostat field subsys-
tem accounted for 33.1% of the total exergy loss. On the other hand,
the central receiver has a significantly higher exergy loss equal to
44.2%, despite its very high energetic performance, which is about
90%. According to the authors, by increasing the temperature of the
working fluid, this exergy destruction rate can be minimized. The
authors also noted that the direct normal irradiance (DNI) greatly
affects the energy efficiency of the receiver, which changes from 45%
to 85% when the former increases from 100 W/m2 to 400 W/m2.
Beyond this value, however, an increase in the DNI value does not
131
lead to substantial improvement in the efficiency of the receiver.
With the application of advanced power cycles including reheat-
ing the working fluid and the implementation of a supercritical
Rankine cycle, the exergy efficiency of the system can be in-
creased from 24.5 to 25.6% and further up to 27.4% respectively.
Peng et al. [146] evaluated a hybrid solar- and coal-fired thermal
plant with a capacity of 330 MW located in Sinkiang, China. The uti-
lization of solar energy is aimed at preheating the feed water, thus
substituting the need for steam extraction from intermediate turbine
stages. The hybrid plant was compared to a solar-only power plant,
using the same heat transfer fluid and collectors of the same solar
capacity (700 W/m2). The hybrid plant was found to have a lower
exergy destruction rate and thus a higher exergy efficiency (28.7%
compared to 27.4% of the solar-only plant). This is because of the
closer temperature-matching that occurs in the solar-hybrid plant
in the solar feed water heater. The exergy destruction was also lower
in the turbine. The hybrid plant had also a higher solar energy ef-
ficiency (27.3%) compared to the first plant (25.9%). The authors also
remarked that the solar hybrid plant is also able to achieve better
off-design performance, its operation being less dependent on the
DNI variation.
Modi et al. [147] investigated the feasibility of a concentrated
solar power plant using an ammonia–water mixture as working fluid
by comparing it to a single Rankine cycle plant with direct vapor
generation. For the purpose of the analysis, the heat input to the
plant was considered constant and other parameters, such as the
ammonia mass fraction and the pressure at the turbine inlet were
varied. The single Rankine cycle showed an improved efficiency than
the optimized ammonia–water cycle when all heat input to the cycle
originates from the solar receiver. Nevertheless, the lower volume
flow rate and the fact that the vapor fraction at the turbine outlet
does not limit the operation of the ammonia-water plant enable the
operation at higher pressures. The authors also indicated that the
ammonia-water cycle can be superior when using a simple two-
tank molten-salt storage system with HITEC molten-salt as the
storage medium. Moreover, the ammonia–water cycle can be used
with a simpler storage system compared to the ones required for
direct vapor generation systems. These technical advantages suggest
that ammonia-water cycle plants can be economically more ben-
eficial regarding concentrating solar power applications.
The studies focused on the exergy analysis of solar thermal power
plants show the importance of taking into account the exergy losses
of these installations in order to have a better understanding of the
efficiency of the energy conversion sub-processes taking place. As
most studies show, most of the irreversibilities of these plants occur
in the solar-to-thermal conversion devices (solar receivers, collec-
tors). This is mainly because of the relatively low temperatures at
which the working fluid is heated, since most solar collector types
do not operate above 300 °C. A technology that could be used to
overcome these limitations is the solar tower plants. Another
common finding from these studies is the strong dependence of the
exergy efficiency of the plants on the intensity of the solar radia-
tion (DNI), with which it is negatively correlated. As a result, solar
power plants tend to have lower exergetic efficiency during the
summer.
4.8. Desalination and distillation
A great deal of research has been focused on the utilization of
solar energy for desalination and water distillation purposes. These
applications are of great interest especially regarding decentral-
ized areas located in arid climate zones, in which access to drinkable
water is limited and there is a high potential of solar radiation. A
comprehensive review if this type of systems is presented in
Ref. [148] where the exergy analysis of seawater and of desalina-
tion systems is presented.
132 S.A. Kalogirou et al. / Progress in Energy and Combustion Science 56 (2016) 106–137
Fig. 23. The solar ORC desalination system investigated by Nafey and Sharaf [150].
Nematollahi et al. [149] developed a model to simulate the
operation of a solar-driven desalination system based on
humidification-dehumidification technology. The solar collectors heat
an air stream to a maximum of 65 °C, which absorbs vapor from a
saline water stream. The air-vapor mixture is subsequently con-
densed to produce desalinated water. They validated the model with
experimental data obtained from a special test-facility that they de-
signed. The model showed good agreement with the data. They
concluded that there is a minimal tower length under which the
exergetic efficiency of the system is maximized, and therefore this
is the optimal length. They also found out that the efficiency is maxi-
mized when the temperature of the inlet air decreases and the
diameter of the tower increases.
Nafey and Sharaf [150] investigated solar water-steam and organic
Rankine cycles with reverse osmosis desalination, shown schemat-
ically in Fig. 23. They considered flat plate collectors, parabolic trough
collectors and compound parabolic concentrators for the solar heat
input to the Rankine cycle systems examining different working fluids
and configurations including saturated and superheated working
fluid vapor at the expander inlet. The highest overall exergetic ef-
ficiency was obtained for superheated toluene and water and a solar
thermal system consisting of parabolic trough collectors at 320 °C,
estimated at 14.06% and 22.52%, respectively. However, a wet turbine
is required for the operation with water, since the dryness frac-
tion at the turbine outlet ranged between 0.7 and 0.95. Another
obstacle in the application of a steam-water Rankine cycle for the
specific application is the extremely high operation pressure, which
is at 85.9 bar. The authors stressed out the importance of obtain-
ing high collector temperatures due to its positive impact on several
parameters such as turbine power, cycle efficiency, pump work, spe-
cific power consumption and collector area requirements. Therefore,
they recommend the PTC system as the most suitable collector type.
Zoori et al. [151] compared the energy and exergy efficiencies
in a weir type cascade solar still. The maximum energy and exergy
efficiencies were estimated equal to 83.3% and 10.5% for a minimum
inlet brine flow rate of 0.065 kg/min. When the brine flow rate
obtains its maximum value of 0.2 kg/min, the energy and exergy
efficiencies drop significantly, being equal to 44.1% and 3.14%, re-
spectively. The authors noticed that the variations in the energy and
exergy efficiencies were positively correlated and proportional to
the intensity of the solar irradiance. On the other hand, the ambient
temperature had a negative effect on these parameters. The com-
ponent exhibiting the highest exergy destruction occurred in the
absorber plate, with an exergy destruction corresponding to 84.17%
of the systems total irreversibility. This result shows the impor-
tance of properly selecting the absorber plate in such systems.
Ranjan and Kaushik [152] presented an extensive review on the
energy, exergy and thermo-economic analysis of solar distillation
systems. They reported that conventional solar stills have a low
energy efficiency, ranging between 20% and 46%, and a low daily
capacity, which does not surpass 6 L/m2, even under optimized op-
erating conditions and design. On the other hand, better performance
results can be obtained with the use of multi effect solar stills. In
fact, triple effect systems have been shown to exhibit exergetic ef-
ficiencies in the range of 19% to 26%, while double effect systems
operate with efficiency between 17% and 20%. Single effect systems
have the lowest performance, with an exergy efficiency of 5%. The
authors also provide an estimate of the cost of desalination tech-
nology through solar stills, which is in the range of 0.014 $/L to 0.237
$/L (2013 data).
Banat and Jwaied [153] performed an exergy analysis of desal-
ination unit based on solar-powered membrane distillation. The
analysis is based on real systems developed and installed in Jordan.
The first compact unit, installed in northern Jordan, consists of a
10 m2 membrane distillation module and a 6 m2 solar collector area,
a membrane pump and a photovoltaic module. The large unit con-
sists of a hydraulic loop of the collector field which is separated from
the seawater loop where the membrane distillation module and a
flat plate heat exchanger are installed. The total area of the collec-
tors is equal to 72 m2. The exergy efficiency of the compact and large
units was estimated to be equal to 0.01% and 0.05%, respectively,
when considering the exergy of the solar irradiance as the input
exergy to the system. When the exergy collected by the solar col-
lectors is considered, the exergy efficiency of the two systems is
about 0.3% and 0.5%, respectively. According to the authors, most
of the exergy destruction of both systems occurs in the mem-
brane distillation modules, which is equal to 98.81% and 55.14% of
the total exergy input in the compact and large system, respective-
ly. The authors note that the only way to potentially decrease the
exergy destruction in this specific component is increasing the
surface area of the membrane. However, they point out the low cost
effectiveness of this method.
4.9. Other domestic applications (solar
roofs/buildings/chimney/cooker)
Fiaschi and Bertolli [154] investigated the application of pipe-
lines at the lower side of copper roofs to be used as solar collectors.
 S.A. Kalogirou et al. / Progress in Energy and Combustion Science 56 (2016) 106–137
The authors carried out an exergy analysis in order to evaluate the
concept for different design cases, such as the unglazed and the glazed
solar roof. They also investigated the coupling of the solar roof to a
domestic hot water system. The optimized design was found to consist
of a rectangular plate with four ducts and an insulation layer on the
lower side. The authors also estimated that if the unglazed and glazed
solar roof systems are used for producing domestic hot water, an
annual primary energy saving of 53% and 62% can be attained.
However, they estimated that the savings of a reference commer-
cial flat plate collector are significantly higher, equal to 76%.
Nevertheless, they stressed out the importance of the aesthetic value
of the solar roof systems, which can be a decisive factor in some cases.
Bayrak et al. [155] performed an energy and exergy analysis of
solar air heaters for building application with integrated porous
baffles for the enhancement of heat transfer. The porous materials
selected were closed-cell aluminum foams with a thickness varying
from 6 mm to 10 mm and covering a total surface area of 50 cm2.
The energy and exergy efficiency of the various collectors ranged
between 39.35% to 77.57% and 21.55% to 54.54%, respectively. The
highest exergy efficiency was exhibited by the collectors having stag-
gered arrays of baffles with a thickness of 10 mm. However, the
collectors having a baffle thickness of 6 mm had a higher energy
efficiency by around 2%. The authors concluded that the efficiency
of the collectors is influenced by the surface, geometry, absorber
plate and air mass flow rate. The porous baffles actually lead to im-
proved energy and exergy efficiency of the solar air heater. The
obstacles to the air flow lead to higher efficiencies by increasing the
turbulence and reducing the dead zones within the collector.
Maia et al. [156] carried out an energy and exergy analysis of
the airflow inside a solar chimney. A chimney with a height of 12.3 m
and a greenhouse (collector) diameter of 25 m was considered. The
height of the collector varied from 0.05 m in the entrance to 0.5 m
in the symmetry axis. The authors noted that there is a close cor-
relation between the incident solar radiation on the collector and
the profiles of air temperature and velocity inside the chimney. They
also concluded that high solar radiation leads to higher exergy losses
in the system due to the unused heat provided to the airflow, since
the scope of the system did not include power generation.
Koroneos and Tsarouhis [157] performed a study combining the
exergy analysis and the life cycle assessment of solar heating and
cooling systems for building applications. They conducted an anal-
ysis based on a residential application in Northern Greece. The
proposed systems utilize solar and geothermal energy. Solar and geo-
thermal heat is used to provide heat to the absorption cooling
module of the system. A PV system is also included in order to cover
the electric demands of the residence and provide additional heat
when the heat produced from the geothermal and solar evacu-
ated tube collector systems is not sufficient. The overall system
consists of a solar heating system, a solar cooling system, a hot water
system and of a PV system. The solar heating and cooling systems
were found to have an exergetic efficiency of 2.32 and 6.74%, while
the exergy efficiency of the domestic hot water system was calcu-
lated equal to 3.91%. The component with the lowest exergy
efficiency is the solar collectors. Regarding the LCA analysis results,
the greatest environmental impact was that of the solar cooling
system, followed by the solar space heating system.
Farooqui [158] examined the effect of the load variation on the
energy and exergy efficiency of a single vacuum tube based solar
cooker utilizing an one dimensional solar tracker. The maximum
temperature of the cooker is 250 °C. A series of experiments were
carried out, varying the water load of the cooker from 3 to 7 kg. The
energy efficiency values ranged from 15.13% (7 kg) to 21.09% (6 kg).
However, the exergy efficiency ranged between a minimum value
of 2.3% to a maximum value of 3.8%, thus having a weak depen-
dence on the load. Other parameters investigated were the peak
exergy output power, temperature difference at peak power, quality
133
factors, heat loss coefficient and others. Most of these parameters
show a considerable improvement as the load increases, but decline
at full load.
5. Conclusions
In this paper a review of exergy analysis of solar thermal col-
lectors and processes is presented. The review includes analysis of
various types of solar collectors and solar thermal processes. Solar
collectors include flat-plate collectors, air solar heaters, evacuated
tube collectors, concentrating collectors which include the para-
bolic trough collectors and parabolic dish collectors and hybrid
photovoltaic/ thermal collectors. Applications and processes include
the use phase change materials either in the collection or storage
of thermal energy, drying, heating cooling and multigeneration,
trigeneration, solar cooling, solar assisted heat pumps, domestic co-
generation, hydrogen production, hybridization with other
renewables, solar ponds, power plants and desalination/distillation.
As solar collectors are an important component, exergy analy-
sis, which gives a more representative performance evaluation, is
a valuable method to evaluate possible configurations of these
systems. This analysis proved to be useful when considering either
the solar collectors alone or the complete system to identify sources
of irreversibility. Various concluding remarks are shown in the
various sections of the paper and may not be repeated again here.
Acknowledgments
The authors thank the reviewers for their useful comments and
suggestions in improving the paper.
Appendix A
This appendix is intended to show a clearer presentation of the
connection between the second law efficiency and the first law ef-
ficiency and thus it is another way of presenting Eqs. (8) to (10).
The case considered is that of a heat engine operating between
two heat reservoirs, which are at temperatures TL and TH, with TH > TL.
The engine consumes heat at a rate Q H and rejects a heat at a rate
Q L to the lower temperature heat reservoir. The maximum power
(work rate) that could be produced, W  max , is that corresponding to
a Carnot cycle engine operating between these two temperature
levels, and its thermal efficiency is computed from:
TL
ηCarnot = 1 − (A1)
TH
Thus, the maximum power that could be produced can be ex-
pressed as:
 max = ηCarnot Q H = ⎛ 1 − TL ⎞ Q H
W (A2)
⎜⎝ ⎟
TH ⎠
 from the same amount
In practice, the actual power produced W
of heat rate Q H will be lower due to irreversibility and the corre-
sponding lost power will be:
 lost = W
W  = ⎛ 1 − TL ⎞ Q H − Q H − Q L
 max − W ( ) (A3)
⎜⎝ ⎟
TH ⎠
which can also be rewritten as:
 
 lost = Q L − TL Q H = TL ⎛ Q L − Q H ⎞
W (A4)
⎜⎝ T ⎟
TH L T H ⎠
The term inside the parenthesis in Eq. (A4) is the entropy gen-
eration rate S gen , as defined by Eq. (7) in the paper.
134 S.A. Kalogirou et al. / Progress in Energy and Combustion Science 56 (2016) 106–137

Thus, the lost power can be expressed as: concepts of solar radiation energy and exergy is presented in this
Appendix.
 lost = TL S gen
W (A5) The analysis is performed by considering a basic solar collec-
tor, with constant fluid flow rate through the collector and assuming
The deviation of the real process from the ideal reversible (Carnot) zero pressure drop in the collector, as shown in Fig. B1.
one is measured by the work ratio W  W
 max as:
The solar radiation heat rate onto the surface of the solar col-
lector, shown in Figure B1, of aperture area Ap is:
W  max − W
W  lost W lost TL S gen
 max =  max = 1 −  max = 1 −  max (A6)
W W W W Q S = Ap IT (B1)

In the common case in which the cold reservoir is the environ- where IT [W/m2] represents the total incident solar irradiance on
ment, TL = T0, Eq. (A5) can be written as: the collector surface.
The useful heat rate to the fluid is given by Eq. (33):
 lost = T0 S gen
W (A7)
Q u = mc
 p (Tout − Tin ) (B2)
This is Eq. (9) in the paper. It also represents the destroyed exergy
in the heat engine. The thermal efficiency of the collector is then given by Eq. (28)
Additionally, in this case, the work ratio W  W max coincides with
in the paper:
the exergetic efficiency ηII, also called second-law efficiency, which
from Eq. (8) is: Q
η =  u ≡ ηI (B3)
  QS
W W
ηII =  = (A8)
Wmax ⎛ 1 − T0 ⎞ Q This is also referred to as first law efficiency and denoted by ηI.
⎜⎝ ⎟ H
TH ⎠ Based on the definition of the first law efficiency, the exergy ef-
ficiency can be expressed with the help of two functions, f and g.
The heat engine’s thermal efficiency, also called first law effi- The first function involves the reference “dead state” temperature
ciency, is derived from Eq. (A8) as: T0 and the temperature of the surface of the sun TS and expresses
 the ratio of the solar radiation exergy rate to the solar radiation heat
W ⎛ T ⎞
ηI =  = ηII ⎜ 1 − 0 ⎟ = ηII ηCarnot (A9) rate on the collector:
QH ⎝ TH⎠

Ex
As TL = T0, this is effectively Eq. (10) in the paper. f (TS , T0 ) =  S (B4)
QS

The second function gives the ratio of the exergy increase of the
Appendix B fluid to the useful fluid heat rate and is defined as a function of
the fluid inlet and outlet temperatures as well as the reference
This appendix is intended to present the concepts of exergy anal- temperature.
ysis of solar thermal collectors and in particular exergy efficiency
and how this is related to the energy efficiency.  out , f − Ex
Ex  in, f
It should be noted that the exergy efficiency calculation method
g (Tout , Tin, T0 ) =  (B5)
Q u
presented here relies on Farahat’s proposal [9], which could be
further improved by considering the heated flow’s mechanical ir- The exergy efficiency of the solar collector is defined as the ratio
reversibility, real fluid’s thermodynamic properties (real gas behavior of the increase of the fluid exergy rate to the exergy rate of solar
and variable specific heat, compressible gases, etc.), by proposing radiation, as given by Eq. (30) in the paper:
improved exergy definition correlations that could be agreed upon
the research community in a way to deal with the disparity of the
 out , f − Ex
Ex  in, f
ηII = ExS (B6)
results given by different equations. A proposal on how to connect

Input energy from the sun = QS

Absorbed energy: Q Ab = (τα ) QS

Outlet: m , Tout, pout=pin

Ambient, T0

Inlet: m , Tin, pin

Fig. B1. Basic connection of a solar collector.
 S.A. Kalogirou et al. / Progress in Energy and Combustion Science 56 (2016) 106–137 135

Considering the above equations, one may derive: If one considers that Tin = 288 K and Tout = 303 K, it follows that
g (Tout , Tin, T0 ) = 0.0251. According to Eq. (B7), this results to an
Q u ⋅ g (Tout , Tin, T0 ) g (Tout , Tin, T0 ) exergy efficiency of ηII = 0.0132 (1.32%).
ηII = = ηI (B7)
Q S ⋅ f (TS , T0 ) f (TS , T0 ) If, however, the same solar collector operates under the same
conditions, but heating water from Tin = 353 K to Tout = 368 K, ac-
Equation (B7) provides the connection between energy (first law) cording to Eq. (B7), the exergy efficiency is ηII = 0.1057 (10.57%).
and exergy (second law) efficiencies. It remains to define func- It should be noted that some authors, when defining the two ef-
tions f and g for the calculation of exergy efficiency. ficiencies, take as reference for the solar radiation on the collector
The function f (TS , T0 ) is defined by Eqs. (20)–(23) in the paper, area, the heat rate Q S , and its corresponding exergy. There are
depending on the approach for computing the exergy rate of solar authors however that take as reference the absorbed solar radia-
radiation, Ėxs. tion, Q Ab = (τα ) Q S , and its corresponding exergy, respectively. So a
For example, by considering TS = 5770K and Ta = T0 = 288K: direct comparison of the values given in the various cases pre-
sented in this paper should be done with care, ensuring that the
- the Jeter’s [4] proposal, according to Eq. (20) leads to same primary definitions and equations are applied.
f (TS , T0 ) = 0.950 ;
- the Spanner’s [5] proposal, according to Eq. (21) leads to References
f (TS , T0 ) = 0.933.
[1] Kalogirou SA. Solar thermal collectors and applications. Prog Energy Combust
Therefore, changing the values of TS or T0 and the correlation used Sci 2004;30(3):231–95.
leads to different values of f (TS , T0 ). Thus when comparing results [2] Petela R. Exergy of heat radiation. ASME J Heat Transf 1964;68:187–92.
[3] Petela R. Exergy of heat radiation [Ph.D. thesis]. Faculty of Mechanical
published by different authors who considered different approaches Engineering Technology, Silesian Technical University, Gliwice (in Polish); 1961.
for estimating solar radiation exergy, the reader should carefully [4] Jeter SM. Maximum conversion efficiency for the utilization of direct solar
compare them as this difference may lead to a different exergetic radiation. Sol Energy 1981;26:231–6.
[5] Spanner DC. Introduction to thermodynamics. London: Academic Press; 1964.
efficiency values even if the same conditions regarding the working [6] Bejan A. Unification of three different theories concerning the ideal conversion
fluid temperatures (same function g and same first law efficiency) of enclosed radiation. J Sol Energy Eng 1987;109:46–51.
are considered. [7] Neri M, Luscietti D, Pilotelli M. Computing the exergy of solar radiation from
real radiation data on the Italian area, 12th Joint European Thermodynamics
In order to define the function g (Tout , Tin, T0 ) , the increase of Conference, Brescia, July 1-5, 2013.
the fluid exergy rate is computed according to Eq. (31) in the paper, [8] Najian MR. Exergy analysis of flat plate solar collector [M.S. thesis]. Department
based on the fluid exergy definition and considering no pressure of Mechanical Engineering, College of Engineering, Tehran University, Tehran,
Iran; 2000.
drop: [9] Farahat S, Sarhaddi F, Ajam H. Exergetic optimization of flat plate solar
collectors. Renew. Energy 2009;34:1169–74.
 p ⎛⎜ Tin − T0 − T0 ln in ⎞⎟
 p ⎛⎜ Tout − T0 − T0 ln out ⎞⎟ − mc
 out , f − Ex
 in, f = mc T T [10] Landsberg PT, Mallinson JR. Thermodynamic constraints, effective temperatures
Ex
⎝ T0 ⎠ ⎝ T0 ⎠ and solar cells, Coll. Int. sur l’Electricite Solaire. Toulouse: CNES, pp. 27–35,
1976.
(B8) [11] Press WH. Theoretical maximum for energy from direct and diffuse sunlight.
Nature 1976;264:734–5.
Thus: [12] Badescu V. Is Carnot efficiency the upper bound for work extraction from
thermal reservoirs. Europhys Lett 2014;106:18006.

 p ⎛⎜ Tout − Tin − T0 ln out ⎞⎟

 out , f − Ex
 in, f = mc T [13] Badescu V. Maximum reversible work extraction from a blackbody radiation
Ex (B9) reservoir. A way to closing the old controversy. Europhys Lett 2015;109:40008.
⎝ Tin ⎠ doi:10.1209/0295-5075/109/40008.
[14] Badescu V. Unified upper bound for photothermal and photovoltaic conversion
Applying Eqs. (B9) and (B3) in Eq. (B5), one may get: efficiency. J Appl Phys 2008;103:054903.
[15] Badescu V. Exact and approximate statistical approaches for the exergy of
Tout Tout blackbody radiation. Cent Eur J Phys 2008;6(2):344–50.
Tout − Tin − T0 ln T0 ln [16] Sciubba E, Wall G. A brief commented history of exergy from the beginnings
Tin Tin
g (Tout , Tin, T0 ) = = 1− (B10) to 2004. Int J Thermodyn 2007;10(1):1–26.
Tout − Tin Tout − Tin [17] Sakhrieh A, Al-Ghandoor A. Experimental investigation of the performance
of five types of solar collectors. Energy Convers Manag 2013;65:715–20.
Or by introducing the mean thermodynamic temperature of the [18] Kalogirou SA. Solar energy engineering: processes and systems. 2nd ed.
Amsterdam: Academic Press, Elsevier Science; 2013 ISBN: 978-0-12-397270-5.
working fluid:
[19] Ge Z, Wang H, Wang H, Zhang S, Guan X. Exergy analysis of flat plate solar
collectors. Entropy 2014;16:2549–67.
Tout − Tin [20] Swinbank WC. Long – wave radiation from clear skies. Quart J Royal Meteorol
T f ,m = (B11)
T Soc 1963;89:339–48.
ln out [21] Duffie J, Beckman W. Solar engineering of thermal processes. Hoboken, NJ:
Tin John Wiley & Sons Inc; 2006.
[22] Mc Adams WH. Heat transmission. McGraw-Hill New York; 1954.
Eq. (B10) becomes: [23] Suzuki A. A fundamental equation for exergy balance on solar collectors. J Sol
Energy Eng 1988;110(2):102–6.
T0 [24] Jafarkazemi F, Ahmadifard E. Energetic and exergetic evaluation of flat plate
g (Tout , Tin, T0 ) = 1 − (B12) solar collectors. Renew. Energy 2013;56:55–63.
T f ,m [25] Badescu V. Optimal control of flow in solar collectors for maximum exergy
extraction. Int J Heat Mass Transf 2007;50:4311–22.
Therefore, the working fluid temperatures level may also influ- [26] Motahar S, Alemrajabi AA. An analysis of unglazed transpired solar collectors
based on exergetic performance criteria. Int J Thermodyn 2010;13(4):153–60.
ence the exergetic efficiency when comparing the values given [27] Gupta MK, Kaushik SC. Exergetic performance evaluation and parametric
by two different authors, even if they have used the same solar studies of solar air heater. Energy 2008;33(11):1691–702.
radiation exergy approach (same f function) and the fluid is [28] Malhotra A, Garg HP, Palit A. Heat loss calculation of flat plat solar collectors.
heated with the same temperature difference (same Q u and thus J Therm Energy 1981;2:2.
[29] Bhatt MK, Channiwala SA. Review of top loss coefficient correlations for flat
same ηI). plate collector, 4th International Conference on Mechanical Engineering,
For example, one may consider a collector having an energy ef- December 26–28, Dhaka, Bangladesh/pp. III, pp. 7–12, 2001.
ficiency of ηI = 0.500, operating at T0 = 288 K, and heating water from [30] Luminosu I, Fara L, Pop N, Cstache M, Fara S. Exergy analysis of the air solar
collector based on experimental data. Environ Eng Manage J 2012;11(8):1367–74.
inlet to outlet by 15K. Considering Jeter’s [4] approach, it follows [31] Mohseni-Languri E, Teherian H, Masoodi R, Reisel J. An energy and exergy study
that f (TS , T0 ) = 0.950 = 0.950. of a solar thermal air collector. Therm Sci 2009;13(1):205–16.
136 S.A. Kalogirou et al. / Progress in Energy and Combustion Science 56 (2016) 106–137
[32] Kaze A, Rene T. Computational investigation of unglazed selective collector
and single one with plexiglas as cover based on exergetic performance criteria.
Eur Sci J 2014;10(12):159–78.
[33] Kargarsharifabad H, Behshad Shafii M, Taeibi Rahni M, Abbaspour M. Exergy
analysis of a flat plate solar collector in combination with heat pipe. Int J
Environ Res 2014;8(1):39–48.
[34] Johari D, Yadav A, Verma R. Study of solar water heaters based on exergy
analysis, Proceedings of the National Conference on Trends and Advances in
Mechanical Engineering, Haryana, 2012.
[35] Nagpure S, Aharwal KR, Bhagoria JL. Thermal efficiency and exergy analysis
of a solar collector by using roughened absorber plate. Int J Eng Res Technol
2014;3(7):555–62.
[36] Singh AP, Sahu MM. Exergy analysis of solar air collector having W shaped
artificial roughness. Adv Mater Sci Mech Eng Res 2014;1(1):17–24.
[37] Kurtbas I, Turgut E. Experimental investigation of solar air heater with free
and fixed fins: efficiency and exergy loss. Int J Sci Technol 2006;1(1):75–82.
[38] Esen H. Experimental energy and exergy analysis of a double-flow solar air
heater having different obstacles on absorber plates. Build Environ
2008;43:1046–54.
[39] Akpinar EK, Koçyigit F. Energy and exergy analysis of a new flat-plate solar
air heater having different obstacles on absorber plates. Appl Energy
2010;87:3438–50.
[40] Sharma MV. Performance estimation of artificially roughened solar air heater
duct provided with continuous ribs. Int J Energy Environ 2010;1(5):897–
910.
[41] Bennamoun L. An overview on application of exergy and energy for
determination of solar drying efficiency. Int J Energy Eng 2012;2(5):184–94.
[42] Tyagi VV, Panwar NL, Rahim NA, Kothari R. Review on solar air heating system
with and without thermal energy storage system. Renew Sustain Energy Rev
2012;16:2289–303.
[43] Kim KH, Han CH. A review on solar collector and solar organic cycle (ORC)
systems. J Autom Control Eng 2015;3(1):66–73.
[44] Park SR, Pandey AK, Tyagi VV, Tyagi SK. Energy and exergy analysis of typical
renewable energy systems. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2014;30:105–23.
[45] Mansour M. Exergy and thermal performance analysis of evacuated-tube
versus flat-plate solar collector [Master thesis]. Jordan; 2011.
[46] Pandey AK. Exergy analysis and exergoeconomic evaluation of renewable
energy conversion systems [Ph.D. thesis]. School of Energy Management, Shri
Mata Vaishno Devi University, Katra, India; 2013.
[47] Al-Tahaineh H, Damseh R. Exergy analysis of a single-ended glass direct flow
evacuated tube solar collector. Int J Adv Res Eng Technol 2013;4(7):1–9.
[48] Ngo L. Exergetic analysis and optimisation of a parabolic dish collector for low
power application, Centre for Renewable and Sustainable Energy Studies,
University of Pretoria, <http://www.crses.sun.ac.za/files/services/conferences/
annual-student-symposium-2012/22_November/6_Ngo.pdf>; [accessed:
10.05.15]; 2012.
[49] Kahrobaian A, Malekmohammadi H. Exergy optimization applied to linear
parabolic solar collectors. J Fac Eng 2008;42(1):131–44.
[50] Nixon JD, Davies PA. Cost-exergy optimisation of linear Fresnel reflectors. Sol
Energy 2012;86(1):147–56.
[51] Mukhopadhyay S, Ghosh S. Energetic and exergetic performance evaluation
of a solar dish based dual receiver combined cycle. Int J Emerg Technol Adv
Eng 2013;3(Special3):234–43. ICERTSD 2013.
[52] Stanciu D, Stanciu C, Dobrovicescu A, Gheorghian A. Exergy analysis of a solar
Stirling engine assembly. Environ Eng Manage J 2011;10(9):1345–53.
[53] Madadi V, Tavakoli T, Rahimi A. Estimation of heat loss from a cylindrical cavity
receiver based on simultaneous energy and exergy analyses. J Non-Equil
Thermodyn 2015;40(1):49–61.
[54] Ozturk M, Cicek N, Ozek N. Optical energetic and exergetic analyses of parabolic
trough collectors. Chin Phys Lett 2007;24(7):1787–90.
[55] Hu Y. Advanced exergy analysis for a solar double stage absorption chiller
[Ph.D. thesis]. Carnegie Mellon University; 2012.
[56] Sciubba E, Toro C. Modeling and simulation of a hybrid PV/thermal collector,
Proceedings of ECOS 2011, 2011.
[57] Sandnes B, Rekstad J. A photovoltaic/thermal (PV/T) collector with a polymer
absorber plate. Experimental study and analytical model. Sol Energy
2002;72(1):63–73.
[58] Hepbasli A, Key A. Review on exergetic analysis assessment renewable energy
sources sustainable future. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2008;12:593–661.
[59] Badescu V. First and second law analysis of a solar assisted heat pump based
heating system. Energy Convers Manag 2002;43:2539–52.
[60] Saidur R, BoroumandJazi G, Mekhlif S, Jameel M. Exergy analysis of solar energy
applications. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2012;16(1):350–6.
[61] Saitoh H, Hamada Y, Kubota H, Nakamura M, Ochifuji K, Yokoyama S, et al.
Field experiments and analyses on a hybrid solar collector. Appl Therm Eng
2003;23(16):2089–105.
[62] Fujisawa T, Tani T. Annual exergy evaluation on photovoltaic-thermal hybrid
collector. Sol Energy Mat Sol Cells 1997;47(1–4):135–48.
[63] Sahin DA, Dincer I, Rosen MA. Thermodynamic analysis of solar photovoltaic
cell systems. Sol Energy Mat Sol Cells 2007;91(2–3):153–9.
[64] Gunerhan H, Hepbasli A. Exergetic modeling and performance evaluation
of solar water heating systems for building applications. Energy Build
2007;39(5):509–16.
[65] Kara O, Ulgen K, Hepbasli A. Exergetic assessment of direct-expansion
solar-assisted heat pump systems: review and modeling. Renew Sustain Energy
Rev 2008;12(5):383–401.
[66] Bouadila S, Lazaar M, Skouri S, Kooli S, Farhat A. Energy and exergy analysis
of a new solar air heater with latent storage energy. Int J Hydrogen Energy
2014;39(27):15266–74.
[67] Yang L, Zhang X, Xu G. Thermal performance of a solar storage packed bed
using spherical capsules filled with PCM having different melting points.
Energy Build 2014;68(Pt B):639–46.
[68] Utlu Z, Aydın D, Kıncay O. Comprehensive thermodynamic analysis of a
renewable energy sourced hybrid heating system combined with latent heat
storage. Energy Convers Manag 2014;84:311–25.
[69] Shabgard H, Bergman TL, Faghri A. Exergy analysis of latent heat thermal
energy storage for solar power generation accounting for constraints imposed
by long-term operation and the solar day. Energy 2013;60:474–84.
[70] Kousksou T, Strub F, Castaing Lasvignottes J, Jamil A, Bédécarrats JP. Second
law analysis of latent thermal storage for solar system. Sol Energy Mat Sol
Cells 2007;91(14):1275–81.
[71] Fudholi A, Sopian K, Yazdi MH, Ruslan MH, Gabbasa M, Kazem HA. Performance
analysis of solar drying system for red chili. Sol Energy 2014;99:47–54.
[72] Fudholi A, Sopian K, Othman MY, Ruslan MH. Energy and exergy analyses of
solar drying system of red seaweed. Energy Build 2014;68(Pt A):121–9.
[73] Celma AR, Cuadros F. Energy and exergy analyses of OMW solar drying process.
Renew. Energy 2009;34(3):660–6.
[74] Midilli A, Kucuk H. Energy and exergy analyses of solar drying process of
pistachio. Energy 2003;28(6):539–56.
[75] Akbulut A, Durmuş A. Energy and exergy analyses of thin layer drying of
mulberry in a forced solar dryer. Energy 2010;35(4):1754–63.
[76] Kurtbas İ, Durmuȿ A. Efficiency and exergy analysis of a new solar air heater.
Renew. Energy 2004;29(9):1489–501.
[77] Alta D, Bilgili E, Ertekin C, Yaldiz O. Experimental investigation of three different
solar air heaters: energy and exergy analyses. Appl Energy 2010;87(10):2953–
73.
[78] Benli H. Experimentally derived efficiency and exergy analysis of a new solar
air heater having different surface shapes. Renew. Energy 2013;50:58–67.
[79] Ceylan I. Energy and exergy analyses of a temperature controlled solar water
heater. Energy Build 2012;47:630–5.
[80] Xiaowu W, Ben H. Exergy analysis of domestic-scale solar water heaters. Renew
Sustain Energy Rev 2005;9(6):638–45.
[81] Rezaie B, Reddy BV, Rosen MA. Exergy analysis of thermal energy storage in
a district energy application. Renew. Energy 2015;74:848–54.
[82] Lalji MK, Sarviya RM, Bhagoria JL. Exergy evaluation of packed bed solar air
heater. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2012;16(8):6262–7.
[83] Tiwari A, Dubey S, Sandhu GS, Sodha MS, Anwar SI. Exergy analysis of
integrated photovoltaic thermal solar water heater under constant flow rate
and constant collection temperature modes. Appl Energy 2009;86(12):2592–7.
[84] Torio H, Schmidt D. Exergetic assessment and contribution of solar energy
systems to the energy performance of buildings, other, Proc. of the Nordic
Symposium of Building Physics, vol. 2, Copenhagen, Denmark, pp. 637–644,
<http://web.byv.kth.se/bphys/copenhagen/pdf/248.pdf>; 2008 [accessed
10.05.15].
[85] Cho H, Mago PJ, Luck R, Chamra LM. Evaluation of CCHP systems performance
based on operational cost, primary energy consumption, and carbon dioxide
emission by utilizing an optimal operation scheme. Appl Energy
2009;86(12):2540–9.
[86] Martins LN, Fábrega FM, D’Angelo JVH. Thermodynamic performance
investigation of a trigeneration cycle considering the influence of operational
variables. Procedia Eng 2012;42:1879–88.
[87] Maraver D, Sin A, Sebastián F, Royo J. Environmental assessment of CCHP
(combined cooling heating and power) systems based on biomass combustion
in comparison to conventional generation. Energy 2013;57:17–23.
[88] Hernández-Santoyo J, Sánchez-Cifuentes A. Trigeneration: an alternative for
energy savings. Appl Energy 2003;76(1–3):219–27.
[89] Xu D, Liu Q, Jin H. Combined cooling heating and power system with
integration of middle-and-low temperature solar thermal energy and methanol
decomposition. Energy Procedia 2014;61:1364–7.
[90] Al-Sulaiman FA, Dincer I, Hamdullahpur F. Exergy modeling of a new solar
driven trigeneration system. Sol Energy 2011;85(9):2228–43.
[91] Zhai H, Dai YJ, Wu JY, Wang RZ. Energy and exergy analyses on a novel hybrid
solar heating, cooling and power generation system for remote areas. Appl
Energy 2009;86(9):1395–404.
[92] Eicker U, Pietruschka D, Haag M, Schmitt A. Systematic design and analysis
of solar thermal cooling systems in different climates. Renew. Energy
2015;80:827–36.
[93] Allouhi A, Kousksou T, Jamil A, Bruel P, Mourad Y, Zeraouli Y. Solar driven
cooling systems: an updated review. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2015;44:159–
81.
[94] López-Villada J, Ayou DS, Bruno JC, Coronas A. Modelling, simulation and analysis
of solar absorption power-cooling systems. Int J Refrig 2014;39:125–36.
[95] Pridasawas W, Lundqvist P. An exergy analysis of a solar-driven ejector
refrigeration system. Sol Energy 2004;76(4):369–79.
[96] Millán MI, Hernández F, Martín E. Available solar exergy in an absorption
cooling process. Sol Energy 1996;56(6):505–11.
[97] Onan C, Ozkan DB, Erdem S. Exergy analysis of a solar assisted absorption
cooling system on an hourly basis in villa applications. Energy 2010;
35(12):5277–85.
[98] Aman J, Ting DSK, Henshaw P. Residential solar air conditioning: energy and
exergy analyses of an ammonia–water absorption cooling system. Appl Therm
Eng 2014;62(2):424–32.
 S.A. Kalogirou et al. / Progress in Energy and Combustion Science 56 (2016) 106–137
[99] Gomri R. Simulation study on the performance of solar/natural gas absorption
cooling chillers. Energy Convers Manag 2013;65:675–81.
[100] Song FP, Gong LX, Wang LW, Wang RZ. Study on gradient thermal driven
adsorption cycle with freezing and cooling output for food storage. Appl Therm
Eng 2014;70(1):231–9.
[101] Ozgener O, Hepbasli A. A review on the energy and exergy analysis of solar
assisted heat pump systems. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2007;11(3):482–
96.
[102] Suleman F, Dincer I, Agelin-Chaab M. Energy and exergy analyses of an
integrated solar heat pump system. Appl Therm Eng 2014;73(1):559–66.
[103] Badescu V. Model of a space heating system integrating a heat pump,
photothermal collectors and solar cells. Renew. Energy 2002;27:489–505.
[104] Sobhnamayan F, Sarhaddi F, Alavi MA, Farahat S, Yazdanpanahi J. Optimization
of a solar photovoltaic thermal (PV/T) water collector based on exergy concept.
Renew. Energy 2014;68:356–65.
[105] Ozturk M. Energy and exergy analysis of a combined ground source heat pump
system. Appl Therm Eng 2014;73(1):362–70.
[106] Dincer I, Acar C. Review and evaluation of hydrogen production methods for
better sustainability. Int J Hydrogen Energy 2015;40(34):11094–111.
[107] Koumi Ngoh S, Ayina Ohandja LM, Kemajou A, Monkam L. Design and
simulation of hybrid solar high-temperature hydrogen production system using
both solar photovoltaic and thermal energy. Sust Energy Technol Assess
2014;7:279–93.
[108] Ahmadi P, Dincer I, Rosen MA. Energy and exergy analyses of hydrogen
production via solar-boosted ocean thermal energy conversion and PEM
electrolysis. Int J Hydrogen Energy 2013;38(4):1795–805.
[109] Ratlamwala TAH, Dincer I. Comparative energy and exergy analyses of two
solar-based integrated hydrogen production systems. Int J Hydrogen Energy
2015;40(24):7568–78.
[110] Ozcan H, Dincer I. Energy and exergy analyses of a solar driven Mg–Cl hybrid
thermochemical cycle for co-production of power and hydrogen. Int J Hydrogen
Energy 2014;39(28):15330–41.
[111] Hacatoglu K, Dincer I, Rosen MA. Exergy analysis of a hybrid solar
hydrogen system with activated carbon storage. Int J Hydrogen Energy
2011;36(5):3273–82.
[112] Melvin A. The impracticability of large-scale generation of hydrogen from
water photolysis by utilization of solar radiation. Int J Hydrogen Energy
1979;4(3):223–4.
[113] Bard AJ, Fox MA. Artificial photosynthesis: solar splitting of water to hydrogen
and oxygen. Acc Chem Res 1995;28(3):141–5.
[114] Ropero-Vega JL, Pedraza-Avella JA, Niño-Gómez ME. Hydrogen production by
photoelectrolysis of aqueous solutions of phenol using mixed oxide
semiconductor films of Bi–Nb–M–O (M = Al, Fe, Ga, In) as photoanodes. Catal
Today 2015;252:150–6.
[115] Varghese OK, Grimes CA. Appropriate strategies for determining the
photoconversion efficiency of water photoelectrolysis cells: a review with
examples using titania nanotube array photoanodes. Sol Energy Mat Sol Cells
2008;92(4):374–84.
[116] Grätzel M, McEvoy AJ. Hydrogen production by solar photolysis of water.
American Physical Society Symposium «Basic Research for the Hydrogen
Economy». Montreal, Canada; 2004.
[117] Conibeer GJ, Richards BS. A comparison of PV/electrolyser and photoelectrolytic
technologies for use in solar to hydrogen energy storage systems. Int J
Hydrogen Energy 2007;32(14):2703–11.
[118] Uchida T, Sugimura H, Sekiguchi A, Kitamura N, Shimo N, Masuhara H.
An international journal devoted to all aspects of electrode kinetics,
interfacial structure, properties of electrolytes, colloid and biological
electrochemistryphotoelectrolysis of water on a titanium dioxide/platinum
microelectrode array. J Electroanal Chem 1993;351(1):343–8.
[119] Nair MP, Rao KVC, Nair CGR. Investigation of the mixed oxide materials –
TiO2–SiO2, TiO2–SiO2–Al2O3, TiO2–SiO2–In2O3 and TiO2–SiO2–RuO2—In regard
to the photoelectrolysis of water. Int J Hydrogen Energy 1991;16(7):449–59.
[120] Gratzel M. Photoelectrochemical cells. Nature 2001;414(6861):338–44.
[121] Bak T, Nowotny J, Rekas M, Sorrell CC. Photo-electrochemical hydrogen
generation from water using solar energy. Materials-related aspects. Int J
Hydrogen Energy 2002;27(10):991–1022.
[122] Khaselev O, Bansal A, Turner JA. High-efficiency integrated multijunction
photovoltaic/electrolysis systems for hydrogen production. Int J Hydrogen
Energy 2001;26(2):127–32.
[123] Nowotny MK, Bak T, Nowotny J, Sorrell CC. Titanium vacancies in
nonstoichiometric TiO2 single crystal. Phys Stat Solidi (b) 2005;242(11):R88–
90.
[124] Santato C, Ulmann M, Augustynski J. Photoelectrochemical properties of
nanostructured tungsten trioxide films. J Phys Chem B 2001;105(5):936–
40.
[125] Karellas S, Braimakis K. Energy–exergy analysis and economic investigation
of a cogeneration and trigeneration ORC–VCC hybrid system utilizing biomass
fuel and solar power. Energy Convers Manag 2016;107:103–13. <http://dx
.doi.org/10.1016/j.enconman.2015.06.080>.
[126] Li Q-Y, Chen Q, Zhang X. Performance analysis of a rooftop wind solar hybrid
heat pump system for buildings. Energy Build 2013;65:75–83.
[127] Calderón M, Calderón AJ, Ramiro A, González JF, González I. Evaluation of a
hybrid photovoltaic-wind system with hydrogen storage performance using
exergy analysis. Int J Hydrogen Energy 2011;36(10):5751–62.
137
[128] Ravaghi-Ardebili Z, Manenti F, Corbetta M, Pirola C, Ranzi E. Biomass
gasification using low-temperature solar-driven steam supply. Renew. Energy
2015;74:671–80.
[129] Karakilcik M, Bozkurt I, Dincer I. Dynamic exergetic performance assessment
of an integrated solar pond. Int J Energy 2013;12(1):70–86.
[130] Bozkurt I, Karakilcik M. Exergy analysis of a solar pond integrated with solar
collector. Sol Energy 2015;112:282–9.
[131] Cau G, Cocco D. Comparison of medium-size concentrating solar power plants
based on parabolic trough and linear Fresnel collectors. Energy Procedia
2014;45:101–10.
[132] Quoilin S, Broek MVD, Declaye S, Dewallef P, Lemort V. Techno-economic
survey of Organic Rankine Cycle (ORC) systems. Renew Sustain Energy Rev
2013;22:168–86.
[133] Baghernejad A, Yaghoubi M. Exergy analysis of an integrated solar combined
cycle system. Renew. Energy 2010;35(10):2157–64.
[134] Al-Sulaiman FA. Exergy analysis of parabolic trough solar collectors integrated
with combined steam and organic Rankine cycles. Energy Convers Manag
2014;77:441–9.
[135] Wang J, Yan Z, Zhao P, Dai Y. Off-design performance analysis of a solar-
powered organic Rankine cycle. Energy Convers Manag 2014;80:150–7.
[136] Rovira A, Montes MJ, Varela F, Gil M. Comparison of heat transfer fluid and
direct steam generation technologies for integrated solar combined cycles.
Appl Therm Eng 2013;52(2):264–74.
[137] Ruzzenenti F, Bravi M, Tempesti D, Salvatici E, Manfrida G, Basosi R. Evaluation
of the environmental sustainability of a micro CHP system fueled by
low-temperature geothermal and solar energy. Energy Convers Manag
2014;78:611–16.
[138] Rao W-J, Zhao L-J, Liu C, Zhang M-G. A combined cycle utilizing LNG and
low-temperature solar energy. Appl Therm Eng 2013;60(1–2):51–60.
[139] Sun F, Zhou W, Ikegami Y, Nakagami K, Su X. Energy–exergy analysis and
optimization of the solar-boosted Kalina cycle system 11 (KCS-11). Renew.
Energy 2014;66:268–79.
[140] Yang Y, Yan Q, Zhai R, Kouzani A, Hu E. An efficient way to use medium-or-low
temperature solar heat for power generation – integration into conventional
power plant. Appl Therm Eng 2011;31(2–3):157–62.
[141] Delgado-Torres AM, García-Rodríguez L. Analysis and optimization of the
low-temperature solar organic Rankine cycle (ORC). Energy Convers Manag
2010;51(12):2846–56.
[142] Pei G, Li J, Ji J. Analysis of low temperature solar thermal electric generation
using regenerative Organic Rankine Cycle. Appl Therm Eng 2010;30(8–9):998–
1004.
[143] Gang P, Jing L, Jie J. Design and analysis of a novel low-temperature solar
thermal electric system with two-stage collectors and heat storage units.
Renew. Energy 2011;36(9):2324–33.
[144] Ganesh SN, Srinivas T. Design and modeling of low temperature solar thermal
power station. Appl Energy 2012;91(1):180–6.
[145] Xu C, Wang Z, Li X, Sun F. Energy and exergy analysis of solar power tower
plants. Appl Therm Eng 2011;31(17–18):3904–13.
[146] Peng S, Wang Z, Hong H, Xu D, Jin H. Exergy evaluation of a typical 330 MW
solar-hybrid coal-fired power plant in China. Energy Convers Manag
2014;85:848–55.
[147] Modi A, Knudsen T, Haglind F, Clausen LR. Feasibility of using ammonia–water
mixture in high temperature concentrated solar power plants with direct
vapour generation. Energy Procedia 2014;57:391–400.
[148] Kalogirou SA. Seawater desalination using renewable energy sources. Prog
Energy Combust Sci 2005;31(3):242–81.
[149] Nematollahi F, Rahimi A, Gheinani TT. Experimental and theoretical energy
and exergy analysis for a solar desalination system. Desalination 2013;317:23–
31.
[150] Nafey AS, Sharaf MA. Combined solar organic Rankine cycle with reverse
osmosis desalination process: energy, exergy, and cost evaluations. Renew.
Energy 2010;35(11):2571–80.
[151] Zoori AH, Tabrizi FF, Sarhaddi F, Heshmatnezhad F. Comparison between
energy and exergy efficiencies in a weir type cascade solar still. Desalination
2013;325:113–21.
[152] Ranjan KR, Kaushik SC. Energy, exergy and thermo-economic analysis of solar
distillation systems: a review. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2013;27:709–
23.
[153] Banat F, Jwaied N. Exergy analysis of desalination by solar-powered membrane
distillation units. Desalination 2008;230(1–3):27–40.
[154] Fiaschi D, Bertolli A. Design and exergy analysis of solar roofs: a viable solution
with esthetic appeal to collect solar heat. Renew. Energy 2012;46:60–71.
[155] Bayrak F, Oztop HF, Hepbasli A. Energy and exergy analyses of porous baffles
inserted solar air heaters for building applications. Energy Build 2013;57:338–
45.
[156] Maia CB, Castro Silva JO, Cabezas-Gómez L, Hanriot SM, Ferreira AG. Energy
and exergy analysis of the airflow inside a solar chimney. Renew Sustain
Energy Rev 2013;27:350–61.
[157] Koroneos C, Tsarouhis M. Exergy analysis and life cycle assessment of solar
heating and cooling systems in the building environment. J Clean Prod
2012;32:52–60.
[158] Farooqui SZ. Impact of load variation on the energy and exergy efficiencies
of a single vacuum tube based solar cooker. Renew. Energy 2015;77:152–
8.