Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 58 (2016) 1269–1292

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/rser

Historic and recent progress in solar chimney power plant

enhancing technologies
Hussain H. Al-Kayiem a,n, Ogboo Chikere Aja b,1
a
Mechanical Engineering Department, Universiti Teknologi PETRONAS, 32610 Bandar Seri Iskandar, Perak, Malaysia
b
Mechanical Engineering Department, Curtin University Sarawak, CDT 250, 98009 Miri, Sarawak, Malaysia

art ic l e i nf o a b s t r a c t

Article history: Upon the basic idea of the updraft solar heating, the solar chimney was proposed and implemented as a
Received 11 October 2014 model and a prototype by many research and industrial bodies. Although the system efficiency is below
Received in revised form 2%, but it is a promising technology to harness and convert the solar energy to electric power through
1 August 2015
three basic components; namely: solar collector, tower or chimney, and wind turbine-generator unit. The
Accepted 28 December 2015
low efficiency, the bulk size and the high dependency on the solar irradiation are the major issues
experienced in the solar chimney power plants. Since the implementation of the first prototype in
Keywords: Manzenares, numerous attempts have been reported to enhance the performance of the system. The
Energy conversion present paper is compiling most of the reported attempts to enhance the performance of the solar
Integrated solar system
chimney power plant. The conclusion drawn is that the system performance can be enhanced con-
Solar energy
siderably via integration with another source of thermal energy, or by using efficient solar thermal
Solar chimney power plant
Updraft solar heating energy storages. This paper provides a platform to the researchers in the field to understand and get
detailed literature on the enhancing technologies of the solar chimney power plant current updates.
& 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Contents

1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1270
1.1. Energy scenario . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1270
1.2. Energy and the environment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1270
1.3. Solar energy systems as alternative for power generation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1272
2. Fundamentals of solar chimney power plant . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1272
2.1. SCPP timeline. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1273
2.2. Investors on SCPP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1275
3. SCPP components . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1276
3.1. Open solar-air collector . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1276
3.1.1. Open-solar-air collector models . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1276
3.2. The chimney . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1277
3.2.1. Chimney principles and processes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1277
3.3. Power conversion unit (PCU) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1278
3.3.1. SCPP turbo-generators (turbine(s)) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1278
3.3.2. Air flow passage. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1278
4. Performance of SCPP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1280

n
Corresponding author. Tel.: þ 60 53687008.
E-mail addresses: hussain_kayiem@petronas.com.my (H.H. Al-Kayiem), fajannl@yahoo.com (O.C. Aja).
1
Tel.: þ60 169495674.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2015.12.331
1364-0321/& 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
1270 H.H. Al-Kayiem, O.C. Aja / Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 58 (2016) 1269–1292

4.1. Enhancement models of SCPP performance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1281

5. Cost modelling. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1285
5.1. Components cost analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1285
5.2. Electrical power cost model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1287
6. Conclusions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1288
Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1288
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1289

1. Introduction the basis of every social development and economic advancement

Solar updraft power plants (SUPP) are known as low tem-
perature solar power plants, which utilise the solar radiation to
warm up the atmosphere air, as working fluid. As proved techni-
que, the solar chimney power plant (SCPP) is representing a simple
configuration of the SUPP, but it is not efficient, where it comprises
four conversions of energy. Solar radiation is converted to thermal
energy in the absorbing medium, the thermal energy is converted
to kinetic energy in the collector passage, the kinetic energy is
converted to mechanical energy in the wind rotor, and finally, the
mechanical energy is converted to electrical power through the
generator. This series of conversions caused the system efficiency
to be as low as less than 0.1%. Numerous research works have been
reported attempting to enhance the system performance through
improvements of all the conversion processes starting from the
solar absorbing mechanism up to the generation of electrical
power. Review papers on the SUPP have been reported by Mustafa
et al. [1], but it is limited to some suggested ideas to enhance the
SUPP by integration with another resources of energy. Another
review paper on the SCPP is reported by Zhou et al. [2]. The
authors presented large number of related works, but with little
on the enhancing methods of the SCPP. The third review paper on
the SCPP is reported by Dhahri and Omri [3]. The paper presents
some historical background of the SCPP and some CFD simulation
and experimental investigations. Aja et al. [4] reported a review
paper with suggestion for modification on the SCPP. They have
summarised. Few enhancing attempts of the SCPP by other
researchers.
The present review paper on the SCPP totally differs from the
above mentioned four review papers in terms of comprehensively
and presentation manner of the practical problems and the
reported solutions. The paper includes discussion on the energy
roles on the civilisation development and the roles of the solar
energy, in particular. Then, the paper summarises the conversion
technologies of the solar energy to useful energy that can be uti-
lised by the human being for the daily domestic, industrial and
power generation activities. As the SCPP is the material of the
paper, the authors paid good effort to present a comprehensive
historical background of the SCPP technology. Then, the paper
presents all the attempts reported, so far, aiming to improve the
system performance. The authors extended the usefulness of the
paper by including cost modelling of the SCPP, which make the
paper useful for the technical researchers as well as to the
industrial and business people.
1.1. Energy scenario
Energy is the ultimate capacity for a body to do work which
supports human activities, technological advancement, economic
growth, maintenance of different individual life styles, security
and many more needs [5]. All types of activities, living or non-
living, depend on energy. In other words the quality of human life
depends to a large extent on energy availability. Thus, energy is
and it is the convertible currency of technology [6].
Energy requirements vary and depend primarily on the pros-
perity of a nation (industrial capacity and income per person),
climatic conditions (average winter and summer temperatures),
human populations, efficient use of energy and energy conversion
technologies. In general term, the global energy demand has been
aggravated by the world population growth which is rated at 1.4%
per year for the years 2000–2012 [7] coupled with the growing
trend of economic advancements and the choice of upper class
lifestyle.
The growing energy demand poses some pressure on natural
resources which leads to deforestation, greenhouse gas (GHG)
emissions, global warming and other environmental problems [8].
The energy employed by any nation to meet her energy demand is
dependent on the most easily accessible primary energy source
supported by the nation's policy. It may also connect to relation-
ship one nation has with other nations which has cheaper primary
energy source when the nation which need the energy can afford
the mature technology for such energy conversion to useful and
end-user products.
Fossil fuels are non-renewable energy sources which deplete
with time. Fossil fuels have been the major primary energy
resources that have contained over 86% of the continued growing
global energy demand [9]. The conventional energy supplies, such
as fossil fuel and nuclear energy have environmental burdens that
come with their usage. Similarly, fossil fuels are being exhausted at
a fast rate, and utilisation of fossil fuels together with net defor-
estation contributes to environmental degradation, increase GHG
emission and global warming [10–12].
A report on the world's primary energy consumption by fuels
for the years 2004–2014 in million tonnes of oil equivalent as
reported by BP energy outlook [13–23] is analysed as shown in
Table 1 with consideration of the percentage contribution of the
different fuels (fossil, nuclear, hydroelectricity and renewable
energy). The World primary energy consumption in the year 2012
and 2014, as shown in Table 1, infers that 86.94% and 86.31% of the
global energy need was supplied from fossil fuels (oil, gas and
coal) representing 10847.70 and 11158.40 million tonnes of oil
equivalent (MTOE) in the respective years. Similarly, in 2012, about
4.49% of global energy supply came from nuclear, 6.66% from
hydroelectricity, while only about 1.90% was supplied from
renewable energy (RE) sources (Geothermal, Solar, Wind, Wood
and Waste) out of the 12476.6 MTOE consumed in 2012. In 2014,
nuclear energy contributed 574.0 MTOE (4.44%), hydroelectricity
contributed 879.0 MTOE (6.8%) and renewable energy resource
contributed 316.9 MTOE (2.45%) of the 12928.3 MTOE consumed
in 2014 [23]. It was observed that the global energy demand is
growing at an annual rate of 2.1%.
1.2. Energy and the environment
The use of conventional energy sources, such as fossil fuel and
nuclear energy has some side effects on the environment and
indirectly on human health. Non-renewable energy resources like
 H.H. Al-Kayiem, O.C. Aja / Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 58 (2016) 1269–1292 1271

Table 1
World primary energy mix usage for year 2004–2014 in million tonnes oil equivalent (MTOE) and percentage (%) [13–23].

Year Fossil fuel Nuclear Hydropower Renewable energy Total

Oil Natural gas Coal Total (MTOE) (%) (MTOE) (%) (MTOE) (%) (MTOE)

(MTOE) (MTOE) (MTOE) (MTOE) (%)

2004 3798.6 2425.2 2798.9 9022.7 87.68 625.1 6.07 643.2 6.25 N/A N/A 10291.0
2005 3836.8 2474.7 2929.8 9241.3 87.70 627.2 5.95 668.7 6.35 N/A N/A 10537.2
2006 3910.9 2558.3 3041.7 9510.9 87.71 634.9 5.86 697.2 6.43 N/A N/A 10843.0
2007 3952.8 2637.7 3177.5 9768.0 88.01 622.0 5.60 709.2 6.39 N/A N/A 11099.2
2008 3959.9 2717.3 3286.4 9963.6 88.06 620.2 5.48 731.4 6.46 N/A N/A 11315.2
2009 3882.1 2653.1 3278.3 9813.5 87.90 610.5 5.47 740.3 6.63 N/A N/A 11164.3
2010 4031.9 2843.1 3532.0 10407.0 86.89 626.3 5.23 778.9 6.50 165.50 1.38 11977.7
2011 4081.4 2914.2 3628.8 10624.4 86.91 600.4 4.91 794.7 6.50 205.60 1.68 12225.1
2012 4130.5 2987.1 3730.1 10847.7 86.94 560.4 4.49 831.1 6.66 237.40 1.90 12476.6
2013 4179.1 3052.8 3867.0 11098.9 86.66 563.7 4.40 861.6 6.73 283.00 2.21 12807.2
2014 4211.1 3065.5 3881.8 11158.4 86.31 574.0 4.44 879.0 6.80 316.90 2.45 12928.3

N/A stands for “Not Available”.

Transportation 13.5%

Electricity and
Heat 24.6%

Carbon dioxide
Other fuel CO2 77%
Consumption 9%

Industry 10.4%

Fugitive emission 3.9%

HFCs, PFCs,
Land use change 18.2% SFs 1%

Methane
CH4 14%
Agriculture 13.5%

Waste 3.5% Nitrous oxide N2O 8%

Fig. 1. World GHG emissions flow chart [30].

the fossil fuels deplete gradually with time [10,11], while the use
of the fossil fuels and the growing rate of deforestation as a result
of development contribute to a great extent to environmental
pollution; increase GHG in the atmosphere and consequently
global warming [8–12].
The option of using nuclear energy as alternative to fossil fuel
has its challenges in relation to its waste disposal coupled with the
threat of radiation exposure in the case of plant accident/failure.
Some examples of nuclear power plant failures include the Three
Mile Island unit 2 (TMI2) nuclear power plant, Pennsylvania, USA
which failed on March 28, 1979, the Chernobyl Nuclear Power
Plant (Chernobyl 4) in Ukraine which failed on April 26, 1986 and
the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant (FDNPP), Japan inci-
dent which occurred on 11th March, 2011. The report on the above
mentioned nuclear power plant failure has devastating effects on
both human (health and psychological effect) and the environ-
ment in general as the release of radionuclides contaminates the
air within the environment, affects the soil, thereby hindering
some agricultural and social activities [24–28].
The need for solutions to energy demand challenges cannot be
over emphasised as the global energy demand is expected to
double by 2050 while the means to meet the demand are limited
[29]. To combat the above mentioned challenges associated with
conventional energy supply and usage, there is a need for an
alternative/renewable energy to supply a good percentage of the
global energy demand and strive to be the major energy source for
power generation. Secondly, some of the non-renewable energy
sources are also raw material for other industrial activities which if
other alternative/renewable energy supplies mix can be employed;
the usage life span of the non-renewable resources can be
extended. Considering the expected doubling of the global energy
demand and the impending energy shortage [29], one solution to
solving the problem is to tap more into the renewable energy
sources.
1272 H.H. Al-Kayiem, O.C. Aja / Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 58 (2016) 1269–1292

The global energy demand has continued to increase as shown
in Table 1 but the means of meeting this demand has been mainly
the use of non-renewable energy resources. The use of non-
renewable energy sources contributes to emission of GHG to the
atmosphere and global warming while the flaring exhaust hot flue
gas to the atmosphere contributes to thermal discomfort at the
location where the process occurs.
Globally, coal has been recorded as the highest carbon fuel
dominant in electric power generation which contribute greatly to
the emission of GHG to the atmosphere leading to climate change.
Similarly oil has contributed in no little quota to emission in the
power generation industries and the transport sector where it has
near monopoly status as the major source of energy [30,31].
The power generation sector is the highest contributor to glo-
bal GHG emission in 2005 which accounts for about 25 percent of
global GHG emissions as shown in Fig. 1 [30]. In the power gen-
eration sector, electricity generation accounted for 68% of the
emission which is about 17% of the total global GHG emissions.
Heat (including combined heat and power) was rated at about 5%
of worldwide emissions, and other energy industries account for
roughly 3 percent [30,31].
The use of conventional energy supply sources such as fossil
fuel burdens the environment with greenhouse gas emission and
global warming while the flared hot flue gas causes thermal dis-
comfort in the environment where the process occurs. As a means
to reducing the above mentioned side effects of using convectional
energy, alternative and renewable energy need to be harnessed
the more.
1.3. Solar energy systems as alternative for power generation
cost of installation reduces, SCPP can be employed for commercial
electrical power generation [33].
The SCPP is a solar-thermal power generation system which
utilises a combination of three technologies to harness and con-
vert solar energy to electrical energy. The principle involves the
absorption of solar energy in an open-solar-air collector (green-
house) which heats up the air in the enclosure. The heated air rises
(buoyancy effect) due to density drop and exit the greenhouse
through the chimney (chimney effect). At the base of the chimney
(exit of the open-solar-air collector and or the inlet of the chim-
ney), wind turbine(s) are installed to harness the kinetic energy in
the buoyancy driven hot air and convert it to electrical energy with
the help of generator. In other words SCPP is a solar thermal power
plant utilising a combination of a solar air collector and a central
updraft tube to generate convective air flow which drives sta-
tioned wind turbine(s) to generate electricity [34,35]. The open-
solar-air collector of the SCPP is a form of flat plat collector which
absorbs direct and diffused solar radiation.
In line with other solar thermal energy generation systems, the
SCPP has low efficiency but is favoured with well-developed
technologies that make of the system. The materials for the
development of the system are easily sourced locally. Thus, the
plant has a promising future as large-scale solar-electric power
plant. The SCPP is characterised with long life span, little main-
tenance, no combustible fuel, no cooling water and it is free of
GHG emissions. The SCPP technologies are simple, reliable and can
developed in technologically less developed countries, which are
sunny and often have limited raw material resources for other
advanced technologies [33,34].

Ultimately, all energy supplies on earth are derived directly or

2. Fundamentals of solar chimney power plant
indirectly from solar energy. The Sun is an ubiquitous form of
energy, but not as yet an economic one [32]. Solar energy provides a
The SCPP is a solar thermal energy conversion system that utilises
continuous stream of energy which warms us, causes crops to grow
a combination of three technologies (greenhouse, chimney and tur-
via photosynthesis, and heats the land and sea differentially to
bine) to harness and convert solar energy to electrical energy. The
causes winds and consequently waves and rain. Tidal rise and fall is
principle involves the absorption of solar energy using open-solar-air
the result of gravitational pull of moon and sun and geothermal
collector (greenhouse) to heat up air (working fluid) in the domain.
heat the result of radioactive decay deep in the earth [6]. The beauty
The heated air rises due to density variation as a result of temperature
of solar energy is its free supply, abundant in nature (ubiquitous
changes and leaves the domain through the chimney by buoyancy
form of energy) and characterised of environment-friendliness, but
(chimney/stack effect), as shown in Fig. 2. The chimney acts similar to
is not yet economical as compared to the well-established tech-
a penstock in the hydropower system to guide the buoyant air
nologies of conventional energy power plants [32].
through the turbine and exit to the atmosphere. At the base of the
Solar energy can be converted into other forms as useful energy
chimney (exit of the open-solar-air collector and or the inlet of the
employing different technologies such as photovoltaic cells (PV)
chimney), wind turbine(s) coupled with generator(s) is/are staged to
for direct solar energy conversion to electricity; flat plate solar
harness the kinetic energy in the moving air and convert it to elec-
collectors (FPSC) and concentrated solar collectors (CSC) for either
trical energy. In conclusion, SCPP is a solar-thermal power plant uti-
heating or indirect electrical power generation.
lising a combination of an open-solar-air collector and a central
The indirect electrical power generation system which are
characterised of high temperatures are classified as CSC technol-
ogies. The CSC technologies include parabolic trough collector
technology, linear Fresnel collector technology, concentrating solar
tower technology, and solar Stirling dish technology. On the other
hand, FPSCs are low temperature solar-thermal systems which
find wide application in domestic household hot-water heating
and space heating. FPSC are used in industrial systems either to
supply low-temperature demands or to preheat the heat transfer
fluid before entering a field of higher-temperature concentrating,
collectors. SCPP is also classified as one of the low temperature
solar energy conversion system which converts the energy from
the sun indirectly to electricity. It utilises the earth-ground as the
absorber plate which is covered with transparent cover raised
some height above the absorber to cause fluid flow that can be
harnessed for energy generation. For the purpose of power gen-
eration, if the performance efficiency of SCPP is improves and the Fig. 2. Schematic view of SCPP.
 H.H. Al-Kayiem, O.C. Aja / Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 58 (2016) 1269–1292
Fig 3. Leonardo da Vinci's chicken barbecue with a windmill and chimney [50].
Fig. 4. Solar engine project proposed by Col. Isidoro Cabanyes [51,53].
updraft tube/chimney to generate a convective air flow which drives
wind turbine(s) to generate electricity.
The SCPP is characterised with long life span, little main-
tenance, no combustible fuel, no cooling water and is free of
GHG emissions [33,34]. Because the plant technology is simple,
reliable and can be constructed with potential available mate-
rials, SCPP technologies can be developed in technologically
less developed countries which are sunny and often have lim-
ited raw material resources.
One major problem of SCPP is the low conversion efficiency
as determined by the thermal performance of the system
[4,36–44]. However, the conversion efficiency of SCPP
increases with the solar chimney height, open-solar-collector
area and solar radiation intensity [34]. The power output of a
SCPP is a function of the mass flow rate of the working fluid
which is determined by the collector area and the chimney
height. For SCPP to be economically viable for commercial
power production a high gigantic solar chimney and large
open-solar-air collector area are required to generate high
mass flow rate/driving force to rotate the turbine(s) [32–
35,45–48]. Higher conversion efficiency for large-scale SCPP
will lead to reduction in the produced energy cost.
1273
Fig. 5. Prof Bernard Dubos's proposed solar aero-electric power plant [53,54].
2.1. SCPP timeline
The concept of updraft has been in practice for centuries. The
famous Italian genius Leonardo da Vinci (1452–1519) created the
earliest system, which uses hot rising air in a chimney to drive a
windmill which rotates his roasting spit connected to the windmill
above a fireplace as shown in Fig. 3 [40,49,50].
After centuries, in 1903, a Spanish artillery colonel, Isidoro
Cabanyes first described the SCPP. His public proposition “Proyecto
de motor solar” (solar engine project) was described using an
apparatus consisting of an air heater attached to a chimney
designed house and a wind propeller place in the house to extract
the energy in the buoyant air for electricity generation as shown in
Fig. 4 [51–53].
In 1926 Prof Engineer Bernard Dubos proposed to the French
Academy of Sciences the construction of a SCPP to be located in
North Africa with its solar chimney on the slope of a sufficiently
high mountain as shown in Fig. 5 [53,,54]. Dubos's SCPP was
described and published in 1931 by Hanns Günther [53,,2,,55].
Günther's analysis of Dubos proposal inferred that an ascend-
ing air speed of 50 m/s can be reached in the chimney, where the
energy can be extracted using wind turbines. An experimental
description of the proposed system by Dubos is shown in Fig. 6
1274 H.H. Al-Kayiem, O.C. Aja / Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 58 (2016) 1269–1292
Fig. 6. Solar chimney proposal of Prof Dubos presented by Günther, 1931 [55].
Fig. 7. Improvements in or relating to apparatus for generating power from solar
heat [56].
Fig. 8. Schematic Diagram of Nazare’s SCPP patent [57,58].
where the plate and the spirit lamp represent the Sahara desert
and the solar heat, respectively; the small wind wheel at the top of
the chimney represents the wind turbines. The description indi-
cated that if the spirit lamp is positioned under the plate, warm air
flows concentrically through the plate reaching the tube. Conse-
quently, the ascendant flow impels the wind wheel [55].
In 1956, a patent was granted to Ridley [56]. His patent was
designed to incorporate two chimneys, where the first chimney
wall is heated by hot air generated from the greenhouse such that
cold air is drawn to the turbine at the base of the first chimney
through a tunnel connecting to the second chimney. Thus the
second chimney supplies cold air by downdraft principle while
first chimney creates updraft due to temperature difference at the
chimney walls and creates the channel for the air to exit, see Fig. 7.
Another record of an early patent application on the SCPP was a
French patent granted in 1964 to Nazare [57,58]. The model of the
invention is proposed for a tower of 100–300 m height with its
shape approximately that of a diffuser as shown in Fig. 8.
Up to the 1970s, there was scarce information about the SCPP
systems, and this is possibly due to the oil boom and the devel-
opment of conventional power generation systems that shifted the
energy supply source to the fossil fuel energy. Since after the oil
crisis in the 1970s the need for energy saving and alternative
energy ignited an energy revolution. Renewable energy systems
have become the topic of study for many researchers with differ-
ent theoretical and experimental studies being published.
Some of the related developments in SCPP since after the oil
crisis in the 1970s include the patents granted to Lucier [59–63]
between 1975 and 1981 as shown in Fig. 9.
SCPP resurfaced to limelight when Prof Schlaich in 1978 pre-
sented the SCPP technology in a congress [64]. Between 1980 and
1982, Prof Schlaich with his colleagues designed and constructed
the first SCPP prototype, Fig. 10, on a site provided at Manzanares,
Spain by the Spanish Utility Union Electrica Fenosa, while the
project was funded by the German Ministry of Research and
Technology [33–35,65,66].
 H.H. Al-Kayiem, O.C. Aja / Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 58 (2016) 1269–1292
Fig. 9. Diagram of Lucier's patents [59,63].
Fig. 10. Manzanares SCPP [33].
The Manzanares SCPP prototype is composed of a 195 m high
chimney of 10 m diameter; an open-solar-air collection area
(greenhouse) of 45,000 m2 (244 m diameter) which generated a
maximum power output of about 50 kW [34,45,67]. The trans-
parent cover of the open-solar-air collector was mainly plastic
membranes which covered about 40,000 m2 of the total collector
area while the rest area close to the chimney connection was
covered with glass. The mean height between the ground and the
transparent cover was about 1.85 m which allows ambient air to
flow into the greenhouse. The temperature rise in the greenhouse
was about 17 K above the ambient while the air velocity reached
an average of 12 m/s during turbine operation. The chimney
housed a 4-bladed single wind turbine which is situated at the
chimney base to harness the energy in the buoyant air [33].
The plant was operated from 1982 to 1989 until it was finally
decommissioned [53]. A brief on the design criteria, energy bal-
ance and cost of the Manzanares SCPP and the fundamental
investigation report of the plant was presented by Haaf el al. [65].
To buttress the success of the SCPP, test results of the Manzanares
pilot plant was reported showing feasibility of the technology [67].
SCPP requires large area for the collector which might be
expensive in city-centres. Study by some researchers has shown
that the most suitable construction sites of large-scale SCPPs are
vast desert regions where land may be cheap or free because of
the large land area requirement [68]. The applicability of using
SCPP in solving the energy need in rural areas has been investi-
gated and was found suitable for power generation in remote
1275
areas which will help solve the energy problem in less developed
countries [69–71].
2.2. Investors on SCPP
Since the successful proving of the SCPP technology using the
Manzanares prototype, SCPP underwent a revolution with many
countries planning for the installation of the plant. In 2001, the
Australia government voted in support of the construction of a
200 MW SCPP in Buronga, north of Mildura, Australia. The exclu-
sive Australian license for Solar Tower Technology was awarded to
EnviroMission to champion the establishment of SCPP in the
country [72]. The Plant was proposed to have 1000 m high solar
chimney with 120 m chimney diameter and 7000 m collector
diameter [2,72–75]. To enhance the night time power production,
it was planned to include additional thermal storage medium
which would cover 25% of the total collector ground area with
expected 24 h operation. The 200 MW plant was planned to
incorporate 32 pressure-staged horizontal-axis turbines of
6.25 MW each, symmetrically distributed on the ground close to
the stack inlet. The evaluated air temperature difference between
the working fluid and the ambient air is expected to be about 35 K
and the updraft average velocity would be around 15 m/s. The
plant has been downsized from 200 MW to 50 MW. The re-
engineered tower will now be 78 m diameter, 480 m tall chim-
ney structure, surrounded by a 3300 m diameter glazed solar
collector. At the perimeter, the roof will be separated from the
ground to 2.4 m high and the open-solar-air collector will gradu-
ally slope up to a height of about 15 m at the chimney base
[73,74,76].
Another large-scale SCPP is planned for South Africa [77–88]
with about 6900 m diameter collector, 1500 m high chimney and
160 m chimney diameter. The choice of the 1500 m high chimney
is based on the scale economy of chimney height effect. According
to Schlaich [34], the energy output of SCPP with 1500 m high
chimney yields about three times the power output of a 750 m
high chimney of equal collector area [78–81,87].
A SCPP of 200 kW in Jinshawan, Mongolia, China started
operation in 2010. The 1.38 billion RMB (USD 208 million) project
was started in May 2009 and it was aimed to build a facility
covering 277 hectares and producing 27.5 MW by 2013. The
greenhouses will also improve the climate by covering moving
sand, restraining sandstorms [2,89,90]. Another development in
China is the proposal for building 1000 m high solar chimney for
1276 H.H. Al-Kayiem, O.C. Aja / Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 58 (2016) 1269–1292
power generation and tourism development in Shanghai, China
was presented and its simulation was performed by Huazhong
University of Science & Technology team [2].
A SCPP is planned to be sited at Ciudad Real, Spain, entitled
Ciudad Real Torre-Solar which would stand 750 m tall, covering an
area of 350 hectares (3,500,000 m2) with expected power output
of 40 MW [2,89].
In Brazil, the MCTI News of the Ministry of Science and Tech-
nology in 2004 announced its plan of building a SCPP in the state
of Maranhão (Brazilian Northeastern region) [91] but has not
commenced construction [92].
Botswana's Ministry of Science and Technology designed and
built a small-scale solar chimney system for research. The plant
has 2 m chimney internal diameter of 22 m height and was
manufactured from glass-reinforced polyester material while col-
lector area was approximately 160 m2. The roof was made of a
5 mm thick clear glass that was supported by steel framework
[89].
The Namibian government in 2008 approved a proposal for the
construction of a 400 MW solar chimney called the “Green Tower”.
The tower is planned to be 1500 m tall and 280 m in diameter, and
the base will consist of a 37 km2 greenhouse in which cash crops
can be grown [2,89,93,94].
Other planned projects include Sri-Lanka's 200 MW project,
three 200 MW projects in the USA, the 200 MW plant in Rajas-
than, India and 200 MW plant in China [95]. Many SCPP experi-
mental setups focused on plant performance enhancement with
modification have been proposed and investigated by different
researchers across the globe [4,38,39,54,96–109].
3. SCPP components
SCPP is made up of three main components namely: the
greenhouse (open solar air collector), the solar chimney (solar
tower) and the turbine. This section will discuss some of the works
carried out on the different components.
3.1. Open solar-air collector
The open solar-air collector (greenhouse) of a SCPP is the heat
exchanger of the power plant where the solar radiation is absor-
bed and converted into thermal energy. The thermal energy is
converted to kinetic energy when the absorbed heat in the col-
lector is transferred to the air in the greenhouse. The open solar-
air collector consists of support matrix, column structure, trans-
parent roof and the ground. Fig. 11 shows the structural design of
Manzanares SCPP open solar-air collector.
In order to reduce the turbulent friction losses that may result
in the open-solar-air collector, Bonnelle [110] proposed a new
Fig. 11. Solar collector structure of the Manzanares SCPP [33].
Fig. 12. Irregular solar collector configuration [110].
collector concept with ribs containing their branching as shown in
Fig. 12. This proposed new design of the open solar-air collector
has air flow guides that direct the generated buoyant air towards
the chimney thereby reducing heat losses.
The ground which is a part of the open solar-air collector acts
as natural thermal storage medium as natural soil has certain
thermal storage capacity. But the thermal storage capacity of the
soil depends on the soil type and may not meet the needed energy
for the night or cloudy day operation of a SCPP. Thus the night
mode of the SCPP is always faced with little or no power genera-
tion, hence to combat this challenge and improve the performance
of SCPP during night time, some measures were proposed.
To improve the thermal absorption and heat storage capacity of
the ground, Pretorius [42] introduced intermediate secondary roof
between the transparent canopy and the ground. Investigation on
the improvement of the open solar air collector by utilising dif-
ferent varieties of glass quality and various types of soil was
conducted Pretorius and Kröger [84]. The use of water-filled tight
tubes embedded to the ground surface was introduced by Kreetz
[111,,33]. The water filled tube enhancement was also further
investigated by Bernardes [112].
Other thermal storage media include the use of solar pond.
Davey [113] proposed the use solar ponds as thermal storage
medium under in the open solar-air collector to enhance heat
storage and combat the poor power generation associated with
the night operation of SCPP. Other enhancement proposals and
models are discussed in the performance enhancement models
section of this literature review.
3.1.1. Open-solar-air collector models
Several analytical and numerical models have been developed
to study the fluid flow, thermal field process and performance of
open solar-air collector. Schlaich [34] presented an analytical
model of the SCPP collector. Different numerical models have been
developed for the collector by Kröger and Buys [114], Gannon and
Von Backstrom [115], Hedderwick [116], Kröger and Burger [117],
Bernardes [112], and Pretorius and Kroger [84]. It was shown that
the process involved heat transfer from the ground to the adjacent
air in the greenhouse and thus was considered as control volume
[41,42,83–85]. Without external force like wind, the air gains
energy by convection while the velocity increases as the flow gets
closer to the chimney. Thus, the changes of the air dynamics along
the radius of the collector from the collector periphery to the
central chimney was considered to be slow and steady state was
assumed [41,85,116]. Considering the state of the flow, the con-
tinuity, momentum and energy equations can be summarised as
follows:
Continuity,
∂

ρ v r hg  c ¼ 0 ð1Þ
∂r air coll  exit coll
 H.H. Al-Kayiem, O.C. Aja / Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 58 (2016) 1269–1292 1277

Momentum [33–35,45,127]. Literature infers that for a commercially viable

∂v ∂psys  air SCPP, the chimney height should be reasonably tall to about
ρair vcoll  exit hg  c coll  exit ¼ hg  c  τsys  air ð2Þ 1000 m high but with reduced height, an increase in the collector
∂r ∂r
area can stand as a compensation for the chimney height
where ρair is the density of air at any point within the collector [33,34,127]. Based on the characteristic height, the chimney
with reference to the collector radius structure faces threat from external forces that might result from
rcoll is the collector radius, wind storm or other environmental/natural forces and as such, the
vcoll-exit is the velocity of air at the collector exit, design must be well planned and structured to overcome such
hg–c is the air flow gap height (the distance between the ground threats [128–131].
and the cover) Many designs of the chimney structure have been proposed to
τair is the shear stress in buoyant air at the open-solar-air col- combat the effects of the natural forces with some considerations
lector due to friction between the air and the collector walls on construction cost without compromising the structural integ-
(ground and transparent cover) and the drag resulting from the rity and strength. The chimney can be constructed using guyed
struts that support the transparent cover above the ground. Pre- tubes as used for Manzanares [33,34,45,47,65,127], reinforced
torius and Kroger [42,85] presented the expression for τ as part of concrete, corrugated metal sheets, and cable-net with cladding or
the collector losses. membranes where the best method was suggested to be free-
psys–air is the pressure difference between the air in the system standing reinforced concrete as it is characterised with long life
and the air outside the system (ambient air) span of about 100 year in dry climate and availability of con-
The energy transfers to the collector are the energy gain by the struction material even in less developed countries [34,127,132].
ground and the cover from the sun, Sg and Sc, respectively; heat The effect of chimney height and diameter was investigated by
transfer from the ground by conduction to the underlying earth Schindelin [133] and found that the height of the chimney was a
crust, qg-cond; convective heat transfer to the air from the ground, major determinant for chimney efficiency while the increase in
qg-conv and radiation heat transfer to the transparent cover from chimney diameter reduces frictional losses.
the ground, qg-rad; the convective heat transfer from the air to the
cover , qair-conv; the convective heat transfer from the cover to the 3.2.1. Chimney principles and processes
ambient caused by wind effect, qc-wind; the radiation heat transfer The SCPP is dependent on the pressure differential created by
from the cover to the sky, qc-rad and the useful energy, qu. The the relatively buoyant warm air in the chimney and the corre-
energy transfer can be presented with respect to the collector sponding column of denser ambient air. Schlaich [34], presented
components (ground and the transparent cover) and the air. the pressure difference created by the chimney as Eq. (6)
Energy balance at the ground Z Hch


Sg ¼ qg  rad þqg  conv Δptot ¼ ρamb  air  ρair  in dh ð6Þ
 0
∂T g 
þ qg  cond qg  cond ¼  kg ð3Þ
∂h z ¼ 0 For dry air, the perfect gas relation gives the density, ρ ¼ p=RT;
considering the air at inlet of the collector with temperature Tair-in
Energy balance at the cover and air at chimney base at temperature Tair-base while assuming
Sc þ qg  rad þ qair  conv ¼ qc  wind þ qc  rad dry adiabatic lapse rate for the air inside and outside the solar
chimney and the chimney base, the pressure potential was
Sc þqg  rad ¼ qc  wind þ qc  rad þ qair  conv ð4Þ
expressed as Eq. (7) [134,135]
In Eq. (4), the convective heat transfer is considered in two 0 (
 )3:5 1
1  0:00975H =T 
situations: the first case represents a situation where heat is Δptot ¼ pair  in @1 
A
ch air in
 ð7Þ
transferred from air to the cover (air temperature is higher than 1  0:00975H ch =T air  base
the cover temperature) and the second case is heat transfer from
Noting that air inside the SCPP undergoes some thermo-
the cover to the air when the cover temperature is higher than the
dynamic processes, the conservation equations for continuity,
air temperature, thus the convective heat transfer equation is as
momentum, and air energy in the chimney were presented as Eqs.
shown in Eq. (5).
(8)–(10) respectively [41,85].
Energy balance in the flow
Continuity
qg  conv ¼ qair  conv þ qu
∂
 ∂ 
qg  conv þ qair  conv ¼ qu ð5Þ 2πρair  ch vair  ch r ch hch ¼ ρ V_ ¼0 ð8Þ
∂h ∂h air  ch air  ch
Several models have been developed based on these equations Momentum
at the collector section of SCPP. Most of the models assumed the ∂V_ air  ch ∂p 2τ
absorbed solar radiation in at the cover to be negligible [118–126]. ρair  ch V_ air  ch ¼  air  ch  air  ch  ρair  ch g ð9Þ
∂h ∂h r ch

3.2. The chimney where ρair-ch is the density of air at any height along the chimney
rair-ch is the chimney radius,
The chimney of a traditional SCPP is situated at the centre of vair-ch is the velocity of air along the chimney height,
the collector. It is the thermal engine of the plant, which creates hch is the air any height along the chimney till exit
suction that draws ambient air into the collector and enhances τair-ch is the shear stress in buoyant air as the air flows up the
buoyancy in the hot air in the system. It is a pressure tube with chimney
low friction losses due to the chimney surface to volume ratio. It V_ air  ch is the volume flow rate of air in the chimney
has been reported that the mass flow of the updraft air is Air flow energy in the chimney
approximately proportional to the collector air temperature rise ∂ 
Cpair  ch T air  ch ρair  ch V_ air  ch
and to the solar chimney height [2,33]. ∂h
The chimney height of SCPP contributes greatly to the effi- _ ∂

þρair  ch V air  ch Cpair  ch T air  ch
ciency of the chimney and the total efficiency of the system ∂h
1278 H.H. Al-Kayiem, O.C. Aja / Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 58 (2016) 1269–1292

∂
þ ρ g V_ ¼0 ð10Þ
∂h air  ch air  ch
where Cpair-ch is the specific heat of air at a specific height of the
chimney under consideration.
Tair-ch is the temperature of air at the chimney height
considered.
The air flow in the chimney has been modelled by different
researchers as either compressible [136–138] or observing the
Boussinesq principle of density variation with change in tem-
perature [139–143]. A comparison of compressible flow model of
air flow in the chimney and Boussinesq model of air flow in the
chimney using computational fluid dynamics (CFD) software was
conducted by Zhou et al. [144] for 1500 m high solar chimney
proposed by von Backström and Gannon [137].

3.3. Power conversion unit (PCU)

The power conversion unit (PCU) of large-scale SCPP consists of

one or several turbo-generators (turbine coupled with generator,
where the size is dependent of the design air mass flow rate), flow
passage from collector exit to solar chimney inlet, and grid con-
nection. It may include a diffuser designed to the chimney wall
behind the turbine for single vertical-axis turbine configuration.

3.3.1. SCPP turbo-generators (turbine(s))

The turbo-generator is the energy conversion equipment of the
SCPP which converts the kinetic energy in the moving air into
mechanical/electrical energy. It is characterized by the number of
rotor blades, specific speed of blades, axial orientation (vertical/
horizontal axis) and turbine diameter. The performance of SCPP
turbo-generator is measured between the performance of wind
turbine and gas turbine [40,145–152]. Turbine installation loca-
tions, configurations and layouts have been proposed by different
researchers for either the exit of the chimney [64] or the con-
ventional location at the chimney inlet/base [33–35,45,47,153].
Bonnelle [110] compared the static pressure fields of airflow in
different solar chimneys where the turbines were respectively
placed at the base and the top. The comparison showed that
relative negative pressure appeared in the chimney when the
turbine was placed at the chimney base, while relative positive
pressure appeared when the turbine was placed at the chimney
top which can be related to the fact that static pressure must drop
largely from the upstream to downstream of a turbine. In most
studies of SCPP, the turbines were proposed to be staged at the
chimney base mainly due to the inconvenience arising from
installation and maintenance of turbine generators at the chimney
top for large-scale SCPP. Considering the chimney base for the
installation of the turbine(s), many configurations/arrangements
have been studied for single and multiple turbines installation.
The single vertical axis turbine was the first employed SCPP
turbine which was designed by Schwarz and Knauss [154] and
used in the experimental investigation of the Manzanares proto-
type. Single vertical-axis turbine was presented by Schlaich [34]
for harnessing the energy of the buoyant air in the SCPP and was
designed such that the blades arms extends from the turbine
propeller at the centre of the chimney base to walls of the chimney
base with small clearance while at the exit of the turbine, the
chimney is designed for proper air diffusion for pressure drop
control Fig. 13. Single vertical-axis turbine for a large-scale SCPP
has the advantages of simplicity of the flow passage and small
numbers of parts while the disadvantages are the huge sizes of
turbine which is a challenge in the manufacturing, handling/
transportation, the huge torque that can be generated which
would require huge generator and lack of redundancy [145–148].
The multiple turbines of SCPP are arranged in either vertical or
Fig. 13. Schematic view of SCPP turbine configurations (a) single vertical-axis
turbine configuration (b) multiple vertical-axis turbine configuration and
(c) multiple horizontal-axis turbine configurations [34,154].
horizontal configuration [34]. The vertical configuration is for
vertical shaft turbines which are integrated into the chimney
(Fig. 13b) while the horizontal shaft configuration locates the
turbines around the chimney circumference with their axes per-
pendicular to the chimney axis (Fig. 13c) [34].
A vertical shaft configuration reduces cyclical stress on the
components due to gravity but requires a thrust bearing to carry
the weight of the whole rotor but for a horizontal shaft config-
uration, the pressure after the turbine section is sub-atmospheric
which makes sealing of the horizontal to vertical flow transition
section necessary [40].
Considering the different arrangements, a comparison of effi-
ciency, energy yield and impact of the various losses on the overall
performance of the three proposed configurations by Schlaich [34]
conducted by Fluri and von Backström [150] shows that the single
vertical axis turbine configuration has a slight advantage above
multiple vertical-axis and multiple horizontal-axis turbine con-
figurations with regards to efficiency and energy yield, but its peak
output torque is tremendous, which requires huge generator and
making its drive train costly and its feasibility questionable for
huge turbine. Similar conclusion was reported by Kolb and
Helmrich [155] on CFD study and comparison of a single vertical-
axis and the multiple horizontal axis turbine configurations for a
200 MW plant.
3.3.2. Air flow passage
The air flow passage is the path through which generated
buoyant air flows from the collector to the chimney base and
turbine. The air flow passage configuration induces different
magnitude of pressure losses [40,124,125,155–157]. To reduce
these pressure losses, Kolb and Helmrich [155] propose the use
intake geometry with converging sections and a transition from
 H.H. Al-Kayiem, O.C. Aja / Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 58 (2016) 1269–1292 1279

Straight junction Curved junction Curved junction with

conical deflector

Slanted canopy Conical chimney

Fig. 14. Configurations for air flow passage for Bernardes et al [157] study.

Table 2
Mass flow rate of different geometric configurations [158].

Case Hc1 (m) Rt1 (m) Rin (m) Rex (m) ṁ (kg/s)

Straight junction 0.02 0.05 – – 8.31  10  4

Curved junction 0.02 0.05 0.1 – 1.08  10  3
Slanted junction 0.07 0.05 0.1 – 1.29  10  3
Conic solar chimney 0.02 0.1 0.1 – 1.92  10  3
Curved junction with 0.02 0.05 0.1 0.12 1.1  10  3
guiding cone

Fig. 15. Schematic layout of SCPP of different configurations: (a) reference plant; (b) sloping collector with a cylindrical chimney; (c) constant absorber-cover gap height
system with convergent chimney; (d) constant absorber-cover gap height system with divergent chimney; (e) sloping collector with convergent chimney; (f) a sloping
collector with divergent chimney [159].

rectangular to circular and analyse it with CFD. Müller [156],
conducted CFD study on the proposed shape by Kolb and Helmrich
[155] for multiple vertical shaft turbines and found that such a
centrepiece intake geometry can reduce the inlet losses by 43%. An
investigation on the different design for the air flow passage was
conducted by Bernardes et al [157] using five geometric
configurations (straight junction, curved junction, slanted junc-
tion, conic solar chimney, and curved junction with guiding cone),
as shown in Fig. 14.
The geometric configurations, parameters and the mass flow
rate for the study is presented in Table 2. The analysis showed that
straight junction case gave smaller flows, due to the occurrence of
1280 H.H. Al-Kayiem, O.C. Aja / Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 58 (2016) 1269–1292
Fig. 16. Schematic diagram of turbine layouts (single rotor and counter rotating
turbines – with or without IGVs) [40].
junction flow recirculation. The recirculation reduces with the
smoothening of the junction. The curved junction allowed higher
flows, the use of conic solar chimney offers highest mass flow rate
which validates the claim of Yan et al. [158]. They also inferred that
the introduction of a deflector such as guiding cone at the centre
did not bring major thermal or hydrodynamic improvements.
Suggestion for more investigation was recommended by the
authors.
Koonsrisuk and Chitsomboon [159] presented a computational
simulation study on the influence of the flow area parameters of
SCPP on the behaviour of the air flow. They considered the effect of
different collector inlet areas and chimney exit area, while the
areas of the collector exit and the chimney entrance constant. The
six configurations considered are as shown in Fig. 15.
Their results inferred that a divergent chimney increases the
static pressure, mass flow rate and power compared to the
cylindrical chimney. The convergent chimney was characterized
with equal power output as the convergent chimney. The sloping
collector was found to enhance the static pressure across the roof
and the power at the roof entrance. Finally they inferred that SCPP
with sloping collector and divergent chimney of exit to inlet
chimney area ratio of 16 can produce 400 times the power of the
straight chimney.
The guiding of the generated hot air at the collector area to the
turbine (horizontal to vertical transition) is important in the SCPP
in order to reduce energy losses which can arise from recirculation
of the hot air at the collector exit. To achieve the proper guide of
the hot air to the turbines, inlet guide vanes (IGVs) are necessary.
For large-scale SCPP, the IGVs can be variable, and can serve to
control the plant output and to close off the turbine flow passage
(s) for emergency/maintenance [40]. Some investigations on IGVs
of SCPP were presented in [40,145–148,152]. Gannon [145]
designed a single vertical shaft turbine with inclusion of inlet
guide vanes. Kirstein and Von Backström [125] present a CFD
investigation of the effect of IGVs on air flow and the performance
of SCPP with single vertical axis turbine. Fluri [40] investigated the
effect of IGVs on horizontal-axis turbines of four configurations
(single rotor turbine without IGVs, single rotor turbine with IGVs,
counter rotating turbine without IGVs, and counter rotating tur-
bine with IGVs) as shown in Fig. 16. He found that the single rotor
layout without IGVs is the simplest and cheapest layout but its
total-to-static efficiency is low, because the swirl at the turbine
exit cannot be recovered. For the three other layouts the max-
imum total-to-static efficiency is much better and lies in a narrow
band, with the counter rotating turbines performing slightly better
at low speeds, which leads to a higher torque for the same power
output. Cai [160] investigated axial counter rotating turbine lay-
outs with and without guide vanes and considered the rotors to be
at different speeds making the exit swirl component to be equal to
the swirl component at the inlet. It concluded that for a counter
rotating turbine, the load capacity per unit engine length is much
higher than that of normal turbine. Counter rotating turbines with
and without IGVs was also investigated by Denantes and Bilgen
[161]. They studied the counter-rotating turbines application in
SCPP and determined the preliminary design parameters and their
operating conditions. They modified the analytical model of Von
Backstrom and Gannon [148] to accommodate layouts with
counter rotating rotors and to compare the performance of the
single rotor with counter rotating rotors with IGVs. They found
that the single rotor layout has a higher efficiency at the design
point but a lower efficiency at off-design conditions.
4. Performance of SCPP
Several mathematical models have been developed since the
inception of the Manzanares SCPP prototype in order to predict
SCPP performance. Haaf et al. [65] present the model, which they
used for the design of the Manzanares pilot plant. Mullet [37]
presented an analysis to derive the overall efficiency and sig-
nificant performance data for SCPP and it was claimed that
numerical values were consistent with the information from
Manzanares pilot plant. Pasumarthi and Sherif [64] show a more
detailed model, which was verified against their experimental
results [162] and results of the Manzanares pilot plant. Gannon
and Von Backström [115] adapt standard gas cycle in defining a
standard solar chimney cycle and compare the results from their
simple model to experimental results of the Manzanares plant.
Pastohr et al. [163] used FLUENT – a commercial computational
fluid dynamics (CFD) software package – to model the Manzanares
plant and compared the CFD result with result from their analy-
tical model which was developed for the collector.
Hedderwick [116] modelled the SCPP and the total performance
mathematically using energy and draught equations with respect
to boundary conditions, which consisted of the environmental
conditions that were applicable at the reference location.
To enhance the performance of the SCPP, Kreetz [111] intro-
duced the use of water-filled tight tubes or bags as heat storage
device at the open solar air collector. Pretorius [41] and Pretorius
et al. [83] presented SCPP performance model and find that the
total performance deteriorates with the presence of ambient
winds but chimney shadow does not significantly affect total
performance. A more comprehensive SCPP performance model
was presented by Pretorius and Kröger [85] which was an upgrade
of the model of Hedderwick [116].
Bernardes [112] developed a comprehensive model of SCPP
performance and investigated the possibility and impact of using
water-filled bags on the collector floor as heat storage device and
finds that its implementation smoothes out the daily fluctuation in
 H.H. Al-Kayiem, O.C. Aja / Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 58 (2016) 1269–1292
power output and also increases the power output after sunset but
reduces the peak power output during the day.
Pretorius [42] presented a model of SCPP to include the impacts
of ambient wind, various temperature lapse rates, nocturnal
temperature inversions and the use of the collector as a green-
house or agriculture on the performance of the plant. As the total
performance of the SCPP is a product of the performance of the
collector, turbine and the chimney, von Backstrom and Fluri [149]
used simple analytical models to indicate the importance of
finding the turbine pressure drop for maximum power output.
Various types of soil for the collector ground and a variety of glass
qualities for the collector roof were simulated by Pretorius and
Kröger [84] for their effect on plant performance.
Fig. 17. The use of water-filled tight tube as heat storage in SCPP [33,111].
Fig. 18. SCPP model of Pasumarthi and Sherif integrated with black canvas and plate [64,162,164].
1281
4.1. Enhancement models of SCPP performance
One of the first proposed enhancements of the SCPP was the
introduction of water-filled tight tubes in the open-solar-air col-
lector for heat storage. The water-filled tight tubes (Fig. 17) as
thermal storage medium was introduced by Kreetz [33,,111]. The
idea was based on the principle that the specific heat capacity of
water is much higher than that of soil and from natural convection
point of view, the heat transfer between water in the tube and the
tube wall is much more efficient than that between ground surface
and the soil layers underneath. The tubes or bags are filled with
water and tightened to avoid evaporation. The tubes are painted
black to enhance solar radiation absorption and transfer of the
gained thermal energy to the water during the hours of sunshine
(Fig. 17A). During the night time when the air in the collector starts
to cool down, the water releases the thermal energy it stored
during day time. The volume of water in the tank corresponding to
water layer thickness is selected according to the desired char-
acteristics of power output profiles during the day and night. The
analysis as in Fig. 17B shows that with the water filled tight tubes,
power can be generated in the night but with drop in the power
generated during the hours of sunshine.
Pasumarthi and Sherif [64,162,164] developed SCPP model
which incorporates black canvas and absorber plate to enhance
energy conversion at the greenhouse as shown in Fig. 18.
Bilgen and Rheault [165] proposed a SCPP with sloped solar
collector along a hillside and short chimney for high latitude
location (Fig. 19) to contain the challenges associated with tall
chimney. They claimed that the system had higher performances
for locations at high latitudes than the use of traditional SCPP.
In order to reduce the associated cost of constructing the rigid solar
chimney of SCPP, Papageorgiou [54,166–174] proposed a replacement
of the rigid concrete solar chimneys with lighter than air inflated
Fig. 19. Schematic of the SCPP with sloped surface at high latitudes [165].
1282 H.H. Al-Kayiem, O.C. Aja / Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 58 (2016) 1269–1292

Fig. 20. Floating solar chimney model of Papageorgiou [54,166,174].

Fig. 21. Sketch of the proposed SCPP design for mountainous regions [176].

fabric structures called Floating Solar Chimneys (FSC). The proposed

FSC technology can be constructed for 1500–3000 m high chimney
using polyester fabric as presented in Fig. 20. The lifting force is from
toroidal tubes filled with less-dense than air gases, like He/NH3.
Several patents have been granted to this invention in USA, Australia,
EU, China, India and South Africa [170–174].
In a recent publication about the FSC, Papageorgious et al. [175]
stated that using 5% of the existing desert or semi desert unused
land fields in all continents, the FSC can generate 50% of the
electricity demand in the areas. Serag-eldin [176] proposed the use
of steep mountains or cliffs with expanded valleys as chimney and
collector ground respectively such that the chimney stack would
be replaced by a duct running up the mountain/cliff while the
valley serves as the collector area. His proposal is similar to that of
Dubos as was presented by Günther [53]. The chimney is proposed
to be inclined at 45° to a horizontal valley as shown in Fig. 21 with Fig. 22. Schematic diagram of SCPP with mountain hollow solar chimney: (a) top
the turbine(s) horizontally staged at the at the bottle-neck section view and (b) vertical view [100].
of the chimney before the exit air is expanded through the
divergent chimney to the atmosphere. The work claims that the Cao et al. [177,178] numerically modelled and studied the
proposed design would cut cost on the construction of the chim- performance of sloped SCPP which uses the mountain as the col-
ney and also improve cycle efficiency. lector and also as part of the chimney height. The system as shown
Another novel design concept of the SCPP was introduced by in Fig. 23 operates on same principle as the traditional SCPP.
Zhou et al. [100] which consists a giant solar collector surrounding Zhou and Yang [179] extended investigation on floating SCPP
a hollow space excavated in a mountain. The giant hollow space is by stiffening the floating chimney to the side of mountain. As
connected to the exit of the solar collector as shown in Fig. 22 shown in Fig. 24, the collector is the base of the mountain which
where the solar radiation is absorbed and stored as heat in the soil implies that the selection of the collector location must be con-
of the mountain keeps the hollow warm thereby creating more sidered based on the location. For their study it is a location in the
suction and buoyancy as the heat is released even in the night. northern hemispheres meaning the mountain foot for the collector
Their analysis claimed that such concept provides safety and should face south.
reduces cost of construction materials as compared to the con- Alrobaei [96] proposed hybrid geothermal/PV/SCPP (Fig. 25) for
ventional chimney structure. prospective SCPP in the south region of Libya to enhance
 H.H. Al-Kayiem, O.C. Aja / Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 58 (2016) 1269–1292
Fig. 23. Schematic diagram of sloped SCPP [177,178].
Fig. 24. Novel solar thermal power plant with a floating chimney stiffened on a
mountainside, segment by segment [179].
Fig. 25. Hybrid geothermal/pv/SCPP [96].
performance and combat the night low energy production asso-
ciated with SCPP. Pumps were employed to pump geothermal hot
water from underground and circulate it through pipes embedded
on the soil surface of the open solar-air collector thus heating up
the adjacent air to generate artificial wind for power generation
while the PV generates DC electricity from the absorbed sunlight
which is converted using inverters to AC power.
Pretorius [42] introduced an intermediate secondary roof
under the first roof of the SCPP collector (Fig. 26), which divided
the collector into top and bottom parts. At the bottom section, he
introduced an airflow regulating mechanism to control the air
mass flow between the intermediate collector and the ground. Air
flow through the bottom section is effectively controlled by
1283
Fig. 26. Intermediate secondary roof to enhance heat storage in the soil of open
solar air collector [42].
Fig. 27. Hybrid solar pond and SCPP by Davey [113].
increasing or decreasing the pressure drop across the regulating
mechanism. By regulating the air that flows over the ground sur-
face, using the regulating mechanism, the plant can store and
release energy from the ground to regulate the power output of
the plant. When less power is required, the bottom section is
closed and energy is stored in the ground and when power
demand is high, the bottom section is opened in a controlled
manner, producing air flow under the secondary roof and releas-
ing the energy stored in the ground.
A conceptual application of hybrid SCPP and solar pond to
produce electrical power and distilled water at a site adjacent to
the sea was proposed by Wang et al. [180,181]. Another conceptual
design that uses solar ponds as a supplementary thermal energy
and storage of heat for SCPP was patented by Davey in 2008 [113]
as shown in Fig. 27. This concept was adopted for the proposed
large-scale EnviroMission's SCPP where saltwater ponds are
planned to sit outside the solar collector and trap heat in layers of
saltwater during the day and at night the heat is released to
generate hot air and power the turbines. Solar radiation is cap-
tured in the ponds and stored in the bottom level of the ponds
1284 H.H. Al-Kayiem, O.C. Aja / Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 58 (2016) 1269–1292
Fig. 28. Hybrid solar pond and SCPP by Akbarzadeh et al. [182].
such that the hot brine can be continuously extracted using heat
exchanger at about 35–50 °C above ambient temperature to
maintain air velocity that can sufficiently generate power day and
night, throughout the year [32,74].
Similarly, investigation on hybrid SCPP with salinity gradient
solar pond was conducted by Akbarzadeh et al. [182] where two
different configurations, Fig. 28, were studied. Both configurations
used pumps to circulate the hot brine in the collector area and
chimney base through a heat exchanger thus creating thermal
difference between the ambient air and the air in the SCPP
greenhouse.
More researches have been conducted on the hybrid SCPP with
seawater desalination by Zuo et al. [183–190]. They developed an
integrated SCPP with seawater desalination. The integrated system
consists of five major components; chimney, collector, turbine,
energy storage layer and basin solar still as shown in Fig. 29.
Another investigation on enhancing thermal performance of
modified solar chimney was proposed which employs flue gas
waste heat as a supplementary thermal energy for the system. The
proposed design used metal sheet as the absorber plate/collector
instead of the soil. The absorber plate stands as a heat exchanger
serving the purpose of extracting heat from hot flue gas that flows
underneath the bottom part of the collector and in the top/front
part of the absorber plate, which was housed by a transparent
cover, it absorbs the solar energy to generate air in motion that
rotates the turbine at the chimney base to generate electricity. The
first laboratory model was designed and investigated experimen-
tally by Al-Kayiem et al. [109] and simulated numerically by Al-
Kayiem et al. [191], as in Fig. 30. The system had one absorber
plate inclined at 45° and the flue gas was supplied by experimental
Gas Turbine unit, as shown in Fig. 30a.
The system has been modified and extended for outdoor
experimentation, as shown in Fig. 31. The absorber plate and the
flue channels were constructed to comprise two parts. The first
part was inclined by 15°, while the second part was inclined by 45°
and connected to chimney via conical diffuser at its upper outlet.
The details of the design and the experimental results were
reported by Aja [39] and patent number MyIPO: PI 2011001224
[192].
Azeemuddin et al. [193] and Azeemuddin et al. [194] suggested
an enhancement technique using waste heat energy in the flue
gases passing through conduits in the solar collector (Fig. 32). The
process of the heat and fluid flow was simulated using ANSYS
software and validated through comparison with Manzanares
prototype results. The simulated model showed good enhance-
ment for the performance as well as it contributes to the reduction
of global warming by reducing the flue gases temperature before
exhausting to the atmosphere. The proposed hybrid technique
befits to generate electricity 24 h.
Ninic and Nižetić [44] invented, and patent, a SCPP with short
diffuser and low-temperature solar collector. Their invention
claims to generate warm air at the low-temperature collector
which flows to the chimney base to forms a complex vortex
stream and exit through a short diffuser (Fig. 33), in which the
phenomenon is similar to a tornado funnel which they referred to
as the gravitational vortex column (GVC). At the chimney base, the
updraft air rotates the turbine and exits the turbine in a circular
upward swirl hence forming a sort of vertical fluid. They claim that
due to the rotation, the pressure in the vertical swirl is lower than
ambient air at the same altitude with the radial pressure differ-
ence greater at the bottom of the vertical fluid swirl such that near
the ground level, just above the turbines it displays a significantly
lower pressure than the ambient. They patent also claimed that
the generated vertical vortex stream field acts like an extension for
the solar chimney, which creates operating conditions favourable
to the turbines.where S – solar collector, D – short diffuser, E –
spiral canals, F – diffuser deflector, GVC – gravitational vortex
column, 1 – glass cover, 2 – absorbing ground, 3 – air guides, 4 –
diffuser neck, 5 – diffuser body, 6 – diffuser exit opening, 7 –
deflector surface, 8 – circulation pumps, 9 – nozzles, 10 – axial air
turbines, 11 – transmission mechanism, 12 – electricity generators,
13 – canal with water moisturising the warm air, 14 – rainwater
collecting canal, 15 – warm air stream, 16 – cold air stream [44].
Kashiwa and Kashiwa [195] presented a conceptual utilisation
of solar cyclone for harvesting fresh water from atmosphere which
also was inferred in the conclusion that it can be utilised for power
generation. The system is characterised by expansion cyclone
separator placed at the base of the chimney, along with a turbine
generator, the greenhouse and the chimney as shown in Fig. 34.
The expansion cyclone separator condenses and removes atmo-
spheric water while the turbine harnesses the energy from the
moving air.
On the quest for increased power output from renewable
power generation system, Yabuz [196] proposed and investigated a
 H.H. Al-Kayiem, O.C. Aja / Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 58 (2016) 1269–1292
Fig. 29. Schematic diagram of the integrated SCPP with water desalination [183–
190].
hybrid utilisation of the SCPP coupled with a solar receiver
mounted at the chimney top and heliostat mirror situated some
distance away from the collector inlet base as shown in Fig. 35.
The solar receiver and the heliostat generate steam for steam
power plant while the SCPP generates its energy from its princi-
ples. The process was to utilise the chimney for dual purpose as
pressure tube to the SCPP and tower for a solar receiver.
5. Cost modelling
The cost of construction and operation of any power plant is
important in understanding the economic feasibility of the plant.
For the SCPP, many researchers have presented some cost models.
Schlaich [34] and Schlaich et al. [35] presented estimated costs for
all components of SCPP for various plant sizes (5 MW, 30 MW and
100 MW) and evaluated the levelised electricity cost (LEC) and also
performed sensitivity analysis of LEC to the interest rate and the
length of the depreciation period. In their model, the land was
considered to be free while the cost of the collector was con-
sidered only for the glazing materials and the supporting struc-
ture. The materials and the labour costs are dependent on the
location and size of the plant. Bernardes [112] modelled the cost of
1285
Fig. 30. Modified inclined solar chimney integrated with flue gas source.
(a) Experimental setup, (b) velocity vector as predicted by CFD simulation.
[109,191].
a SCPP with consideration to LEC and derived a parametric cost
model for the collector, solar chimney and the power conversion
unit of a 100 MW capacity plant. The configuration of the plants
which the researchers analysed the cost is presented in Table 3.
In Table 3, the calculated electrical output for the various plants
configuration was presented. The electrical power generated per
annum varied from 281 GWh/a to 320 GWh/a for same plant
capacity. To cost of each plant is analysed in Table 4. The cost
analysis and the associated LEC per kWh as presented by Fluri
et al. [197] showed that there is great difference in the cost of the
plants modelled by Schlaich [34] and Schlaich et al. [35] from the
model presented by Bernardes [112]. Based on the variation in the
plants costs and the cost of electricity generated, Fluri et al.
[197,198] also presented a cost model for the SCPP with inclusion
of the impact of carbon credits on LEC which they compared their
model results with other SCPP cost model. Fluri et al. [197,198] put
together the fundamental assumptions on the various plants
present a well detailed cost analysis for the SCPP.
5.1. Components cost analysis
Fluri et al. [198] detailed the cost of the various components of
SCPP following cost assumptions shown in Table 5. The cost
assumptions may vary from location to location based on avail-
ability of the materials and nearness to procurement. The model
presented insight on materials and the estimate cost following
reports from previous models and simulation results of the per-
formance of SCPP.
Fluri et al. [197,198] also did a comparative life cycle cost
analysis for SCPP versus coal-fired power plant as presented in
1286 H.H. Al-Kayiem, O.C. Aja / Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 58 (2016) 1269–1292

Fig. 31. Hybrid solar flue gas chimney power plant [39,192].

Fig. 34. Schematic view of Solar Cyclone and the expansion cyclone separator
Chimney exhaust [195].
Flue gas re-
Flue gas panels
injected in the
chimney above
the turbine Fluri et al. [198]. The report of Fluri et al. [198] showed an
outlet
to the collector approximately 2.5 times higher initial cost for the collector and the
chimney than Bernardes [112]. However Fluri [40] showed that the
Ground
material assumed in Fluri et al. [198] was too high. Fluri et al. [197]
improved the model of Fluri et al. [198] and they compared their
Canopy
Ambient air inlet results to two selected reference SCPPs of 100 MW respectively
Flue gas inlet proposed by Schlaich et al. [35] and Bernardes [112]. Fluri et al.
[197] also evaluated the power output of the two selected refer-
Fig. 32. Simulation model of a solar chimney integrated with flue gas panels
[193,194]. ence SCPPs using Pretorius [42] thermodynamic model and found
that the peak power output for Schlaich et al. [35] and Bernardes
[112] 100 MW reference SCPP were 66 MW and 62 MW respec-
tively. With this peak power output, they evaluated the LEC for
Schlaich et al. [35] 100 MW SCPP with the same economic para-
meters (i.e., interest rate ¼6%, inflation rate¼ 3.5%, and deprecia-
tion period ¼ 30 years) and got €0.270/kWh while originally
Schlaich et al. [35] estimated the LEC per kilowatt-hour at €0.1. For
Bernardes [112] 100MW SCPP, with economic parameters (interest
rate¼8%, inflation rate¼ 3.25%, depreciation period ¼ 30 years, and
construction period ¼2 years), using Bernardes's model, they
evaluated the LEC per kilowatt-hour as €0.43 which was originally
estimated by Bernardes [112] as €0.125/kWh. Pretorius [42] in
chapter four of his PhD thesis also presents a simple cost model for
the SCPP using different chimney heights (500–1500 m) with
Fig. 33. Schematic view of SCPP with short diffuser invented by Ninic and Nižetić varying diameter and different collector diameters at varying inlet
[44]. heights.
 H.H. Al-Kayiem, O.C. Aja / Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 58 (2016) 1269–1292 1287

Table 4
Cost comparison of 100 MW SCPP from Schlaich [1], Schlaich et al. [2] and
Bernardes [3] models.

Configuration/process Schlaich [1] Schlaich et al. Bernardes [3]

[2]
Euro Euro Euro

Collector cost 134.8 131.0 190.0

Chimney cost 68.2 156.2 64.4
Power conversion unit cost 79.8 75.0 76.7
Roads, buildings, workshops 2.0 n/a 2.71
Infrastructure 4.3 n/a 6.5
Planning, site management 2.9 n/a n/a
Rounding 8.1 n/a n/a
Engineering, tests, misc. n/a 40 n/a
Electrical installations n/a n/a 10.5
Insurance n/a n/a 1.58
Overall investment cost 300.0 402.0 352.4
Operation and Maintenance cost 1.0 1.9 1.0
(1st year), (Million Euro)
Depreciation period (y) 20 30 30
Construction period (y) n/a n/a 2
Real interest rate,% n/a 6 8
Nominal interest rate (%) 8 n/a n/a
Inflation rate (%) 3.5 n/a n/a
LEC (Euro/kWh) 0.1045 0.1000 0.0370

Table 5
Cost assumptions guide to the analysis of SCPP components [4].

Components cost Price in Euro

2
Collector Glass cost/m € 11.40
Collector canopy structural support cost
Steel columns (IPEAA120)/m € 8.66
Cable guys/m € 1.84
Angle beam/m € 12.75
Concrete cost/m3 € 100.00
Reinforcement steel cost/ton € 750.00
Reinforcement quantity/m3 € 7.50
Cover cost – horizontal/m2 € 21.88
Cover cost – vertical/m2 € 15.63
Fig. 35. Hybrid Heliostat and SCPP for more energy production [196]. Chimney part
High performance concrete cost/m3 € 125.00
Normal concrete cost/m3 € 100.00
Reinforcement cost/ton for 120 kg/m3 € 750.00
Table 3 Construction, concrete cover and labour cost/m3 € 312.50
Configurations of 100 MW SCPP developed by Schlaich [1], Schlaich et al. [2] and Materials hoisting cost/ton € 250.00
Bernardes [3] and the electrical power output per annum. Ring stiffener cost/ton. € 1250.00
Construction and labour on the ring stiffeners and € 250.00
Configuration Schlaich [1] Schlaich et al. Bernardes [3] hoisting of ring stiffeners/link
[2] The transport cost/ton over an average distance of € 21.00
300 km
Capacity, MW 100 100 100 Material and construction costs of chimney support € 18.45 million
Chimney height (m) 950 1000 850 column with 12 shear walls of 50 m  8 m  0.5 m/
Chimney diameter (m) 115 110 110 column (foundation)
Collector diameter (m) 3600 4300 4950 Chimney shell for 110 m diameter chimney 4  cost of founda-
Glass roof height at inlet (m) 6.5 3 3.5 tion structure
Electricity output/Annual power 305.2 320 281 Power conversion unit for 66 MW
output (APO) (GWh/a) Turbine cost € 2.82 million
Central structure € 0.25 million
Ducts € 2.42 million
Supports € 0.10 million
Generators € 3.95 million
5.2. Electrical power cost model Power electronics € 1.95 million
Control € 0.18 million
The modelling of electrical power cost of SCPP takes into Balance of station € 15.23 million
Capital cost of CPU installation (total) € 26.87 million
account the plant operation and maintenance cost. The operation
and maintenance cost of the plant is dependent on the size of the
evaluated using Eq. (11) [199].
plant. Following the report of the cost comparison of 100 MW " #
N
SCPP as shown in Table 4, the operation and maintenance cost for A1 1þf
P OM ¼ 1 ð11Þ
the various plants varied in the range of 1.0 M€ to 1.9 M€. Con- f 1 1 þ i
sidering interest rate, i, inflation, f, and design depreciation life of
where A1 is the cash flow at the end of the first year
the plant, N, the present equivalent value of the operation and
The understanding of the present equivalent value of the
maintenance cost of the plant (POM) over the life time can be operation and maintenance cost of the plant over its life time will
1288 H.H. Al-Kayiem, O.C. Aja / Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 58 (2016) 1269–1292
aid the understanding of the present total value of the plant. Thus
the equivalent annual cost over the plant life time, A, can be
determined using Eq. (12) considering the present value of all cost
relating to the plant [199]
" #
ið1 þ iÞN
A¼P ð12Þ
ð1 þ iÞN 1
In the analysis presented by Bernardes [112], a consideration of
the construction year was a factor in the determination of the
investment cost of the plant with the assumption that the loan for
the construction of the plant was taken before the start of the
construction thus, the capital cost will include the interest rate
paid till the end of the construction. Including the interest rate
incurred through the construction period, the future equivalent
value of the plant, F, on completion can be evaluated using Eq. (13)
F ¼ P ð1 þ 1ÞN
The levelised electricity cost (LEC) of the plant can be deter-
mined by dividing the equivalent annual cost of the plant by the
annual power output (APO) as presented in Eq. (14)
A of the construction materials. The sloped SCPP was more cost-
LEC ¼
APO
The SCPP being an environmental friendly energy system can
be considered beneficial by evaluating the LEC with consideration
of the carbon credit impact of the plant [197]. Following the
impact of coal-fired power plant which emits 0.95 kg of CO2/kWh
[200] in analysing the LEC of SCPP electrical power output, the CO2
that can be reduced by using SCPP as power system will be
determined by multiplying the annual power output (APO) of SCPP
by the amount of CO2 emitted per kWh using coal-fired power
plant. Thus the CO2 emission reduced by using SCPP is as shown by
Eq. (15)
 
_CO2  reduced ¼ APO 0:95  106 kg=GWh ð15Þ
Considering Eq. (15), the benefit earned from the carbon credit
which a reduction in one ton of CO2 is valued at about €27.00
[201]. The LEC evaluation with the benefits earned from carbon
credit can be evaluated as Eq. (16)
A turbine efficiency. The collector efficiency varies with respect to
LEC ¼  
APOþ APO  27  0:95  106
Other researchers that presented cost modelling of SCPP
include Gholamalizadeh and Mansouri [98] who presented an
approximate cost model to illustrate the thermo-economic opti-
mal configurations of the pilot SCPP in Kerman, Iran. Nizetic et al.
[202] presented an approximate costs analysis of a SCPP of 550 m
chimney height, 82 m chimney diameter and 1250 m collector roof
diameter at Mediterranean region, which included a total invest-
ment estimate and the levelized electricity cost. The parameters
considered in the cost analysis include inflation rate of 6.0% p.a.,
maintenance and repair costs of 5.5% p.a., interest rate of 6.0–10%
p.a., under 20–40 years amortisation period. The cost structure
analysis showed that the chimney bears approximately 30–50% of
total costs, the collector roof constitutes about 20–40% of the
expenditures but if the collector roof is made of special plastic
film, the investment is reduced by about 30% compared to the
costs associated with the traditional glass covering. Depending on
the orientation of the collector roof, the price of single glass roof
amounts to 6.0–9.0 €/m2, for a reinforced concreted chimney, the
cost amounts to 250–500 €/m2 and for the turbine which depend
on the nominal power of turbine, it was estimated for 200 MW
turbine, amount to 700 €/kW, while, 5 MW cost about 1600 €/kW.
They concluded that the average price of electrical energy
produced by a SCPP was 0.24 and 0.78 €/kWh which was con-
siderably higher compared to the other power sources.
Cervone et al. [203] conducted a basic economic analysis of
floating SCPP of collector diameter 2700 m, chimney height
2500 m, and chimney internal diameter 100 m for a location in the
Mediterranean region focus on Sicily, Italy. They concluded that
the theoretical energy production was 302 GWh/year, but may
drop by 13.6% under wind influence. The construction cost was
estimated at 222-351 million euro and the energy production cost
at 18.4–29.0 euro cent.
In a recent publication about the floating solar chimney,
Papageorgious et al. [175] discussed a scale analysis of the system
using a simplified cost model and inferred that the system can
generate energy at lower cost of approximately 45 USD/MWh
using a moderate height FSC structures of 650 m.
Cao et al. [204] performed an economic analysis and compared
ð13Þ the suitability of conventional SCPP with sloped SCPP in Lanzhou,
Northwest China. In their study, they considered the influence of
investment cost, expected payback period, inflation rate, and
levelised electricity cost (LEC). The results reveal that SCPP
investment is influenced by the plant configuration and the price
ð14Þ
effective than the conventional SCPP of same size and power
output during the system life span. This is due to the reduced
volume of material when associated with the slope chimney
structure as the chimney is designed to lean on high-mountain.
They also inferred that large scale SCPP holds good competitive-
ness with conventional fossil fuel power plants.
Aja et al. [38] presented analysis of the economic benefit of
incline SCPP integrated with flue gas waste heat. The results
showed that the plant can be established in cities while the land
can still be used for other purposes. It also showed that with the
inclined collector, the chimney height will be reduced but analysis
did not present financial evidence to the claim.
6. Conclusions
The total efficiency of SCPP is low (less than 2%) which is a
product of the collector efficiency, chimney efficiency and the
ð16Þ
the collector material (soil type/absorber plate material and
transparent cover material), location, available solar radiation and
the slope of the collector. The open solar-air collector accounts for
about 50% of the investment cost of a SCPP and about 30% of the
overall system losses [112]. Improving its performance offers the
potential to make the SCPP cost competitive. The chimney effi-
ciency has been found to be mostly dependent on the chimney
height. Most research has focused on structural design of the
chimney while a few numerical investigations have been con-
ducted on varying shapes of the chimney. Conventionally the
straight chimney with uniform cross sectional area has been
mostly promoted which is based on the gigantic height associated
with the commercial SCPP. Chimney performance enhancement is
rarely reported in literature. The turbine performance is estimated
to be in the range of 60–80%. This has only been supported with
one experimental investigation [147] while others are analytical
and numerical investigations.
Acknowledgements
The authors would like to acknowledge Universiti Teknologi
PETRONAS (UTP) (STIRF 24/ 07-08) for the logistic and financial
support to produce and publish the paper. The second author
 H.H. Al-Kayiem, O.C. Aja / Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 58 (2016) 1269–1292
highly appreciates UTP support to carry out his PhD study under
the Graduate Assistance (GA) scheme.
References
[1] Mustafa AT, Al-Kayiem HH, Gilani SI. A survey on performance enhancement
of solar updraft tower power plants. Int J Eng Tech Res 2014;2:34–9.
[2] Zhou X, Wang F, Ochieng RM. A review of solar chimney power technology.
Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2010;14:2315–38.
[3] Dhahri A, Omri A. A review of solar chimney power generation technology.
Inte J Eng Adv Technol 2013;2:2249–8958.
[4] Aja OC, Al-Kayiem HH, Karim ZAA. Review on the enhancement techniques
and introduction of an alternate enhancement technique of solar chimney
power plant. J Appl Sci 2011;11:1877–84.
[5] Siraj MS. Energy resources—the ultimate solution. Renew Sustain Energy Rev
2012;16:1971–6.
[6] Dincer I. Renewable energy and sustainable development: a crucial review.
Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2000;4:157–75.
[7] World-Bank. Population growth (annual %); 2012. Available: http://data.
worldbank.org/indicator/SP.POP.GROW.
[8] Service RF. Is it time to shoot for the sun? Science 2005;309:548–51.
[9] Armaroli N, Balzani V. The future of energy supply: challenges and oppor-
tunities. Angew Chem Int Ed 2007;46:52–66.
[10] Hoel M, Kverndokk S. Depletion of fossil fuels and the impacts of global
warming. Resour Energy Econ 1996;18:115–36.
[11] Hubbert MK, Nuclear energy and fossil fuel, No 95, Shell Development
Company, Exploration and Production Research Division, Houston, Taxas, p.
13–18.
[12] Gullison RE, Frumhoff PC, Canadell JG, Field CB, Nepstad DC, Hayhoe K, et al.
Tropical forests and climate policy. Science 2007;316:985.
[13] BP. BP statistical review of world energy [Online]. Available: http://www.bp.
com/liveassets/bp_internet/globalbp/globalbp_uk_english/publications/
energy_reviews_2005/STAGING/local_assets/downloads/pdf/statistical_
review_of_world_energy_full_report_2005.pdf.
[14] BP. BP Statistical Review of World Energy [Online]. Available: http://www.bp.
com/liveassets/bp_internet/russia/bp_russia_english/STAGING/local_assets/
downloads_pdfs/s/Stat_Rev_2006_eng.pdf.
[15] BP. BP Statistical Review of World Energy [Online]. Available: http://www.bp.
com/liveassets/bp_internet/globalbp/globalbp_uk_english/reports_and_pub
lications/statistical_energy_review_2007/STAGING/local_assets/downloads/
pdf/statistical_review_of_world_energy_full_report_2007.pdf.
[16] BP. BP statistical review of world energy [Online]. Available: http://www.bp.
com/liveassets/bp_internet/globalbp/globalbp_uk_english/reports_and_pub
lications/statistical_energy_review_2008/STAGING/local_assets/downloads/
pdf/statistical_review_of_world_energy_full_review_2008.pdf.
[17] BP. BP Statistical Review of World Energy [Online]. Available: http://www.bp.
com/liveassets/bp_internet/globalbp/globalbp_uk_english/reports_and_pu-
blications/statistical_energy_review_2008/STAGING/local_assets/
2009_downloads/statistical_review_of_world_energy_full_report_2009.pdf.
[18] BP. BP statistical review of world energy 2010 [Online]. Available: http://
www.bp.com/liveassets/bp_internet/globalbp/globalbp_uk_english/reports_
and_publications/statistical_energy_review_2008/STAGING/local_assets/
2010_downloads/statistical_review_of_world_energy_full_report_2010.pdf.
[19] BP. BP statistical review of world energy [Online]. Available: http://www.bp.
com/assets/bp_internet/globalbp/globalbp_uk_english/reports_and_publica
tions/statistical_energy_review_2011/STAGING/local_assets/pdf/statistical_
review_of_world_energy_full_report_2011.pdf.
[20] BP. BP Statistical Review of World Energy [Online]. Available: http://www.bp.
com/assets/bp_internet/globalbp/globalbp_uk_english/reports_and_publica
tions/statistical_energy_review_2011/STAGING/local_assets/pdf/statistical_
review_of_world_energy_full_report_2012.pdf.
[21] BP. BP Statistical Review of World Energy [Online]. Available: http://www.bp.
com/content/dam/bp/pdf/statistical-review/statistical_review_of_world_
energy_2013.pdf.
[22] BP. BP Statistical Review of World Energy; 2014 [Online]. Available: http://
www.bp.com/content/dam/bp/pdf/Energy-economics/statistical-review-
2014/BP-statistical-review-of-world-energy-2014-full-report.pdf.
[23] BP. BP Statistical Review of World Energy; 2015 [Online]. Available: http://
www.bp.com/content/dam/bp/pdf/Energy-economics/statistical-review-
2015/bp-statistical-review-of-world-energy-2015-full-report.pdf.
[24] Christodouleas JP, Forrest RD, Ainsley CG, Tochner Z, Hahn SM, Glatstein E.
Short-term and long-term health risks of nuclear-power-plant accidents. N
Engl J Med 2011;364:2334–41.
[25] Balonov M, Crick M, Louvat D. Update of impacts of the Chernobyl accident:
Assessment of the Chernobyl Forum (2003–2005) and UNSCEAR (2005–
2008); 2010, p. 13–18.
[26] Malko MV. Chernobyl accident: the crisis of the international radiation
community. Imanaka T, Research activities about the radiological con-
sequences of the Chernobyl NPS accident and social activities to assist the
sufferers of the accident; 1998.
[27] Buesseler K, Aoyama M, Fukasawa M. Impacts of the Fukushima nuclear
power plants on marine radioactivity. Environ Sci Technol 2011;45:9931–5.
1289
[28] Endo S, Kimura S, Takatsuji T, Nanasawa K, Imanaka T, Shizuma K. Mea-
surement of soil contamination by radionuclides due to the Fukushima Dai-
ichi Nuclear Power Plant accident and associated estimated cumulative
external dose estimation. J Environ Radioact 2012;111:18–27.
[29] WWE council. World energy issues monitor; 2013 [Online]. Available: http://
www.worldenergy.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/02/2013-World-Energy-
Issues-Monitor-Report-Feb2013.pdf.
[30] Baumert K, Herzog T, Pershing J. Navigating the numbers: greenhouse gases
and international climate change agreements. World Resources Institute;
2005 ISBN: 1-56973-599-9.
[31] Herzog T. World greenhouse gas emissions in 2005. Washington DC: World
Resources Institute; 2009.
[32] Dennis C. Solar energy: radiation nation. Nature 2006;443:23–4.
[33] Schlaich J, Bergermann R, Schiel W, Weinrebe G. Design of commercial solar
updraft tower systems - Utilisation of solar induced convective flows for
power generation. J Sol Energy Eng Trans ASME 2005;127:117–24.
[34] Schlaich J. The solar chimney: electricity from the sun. Edition Axel Menges;
1995.
[35] Schlaich J, Bergermann R, Schiel W, Weinrebe G. Sustainable electricity
generation with solar updraft towers. Struct Eng Int: J Int Assoc Bridge
Struct Eng 2004;14:225–9.
[36] Gruenstein E. Solar tower technology.
[37] Mullett LB. The solar chimney—overall efficiency, design and performance.
Int J Ambient Energy 1987;8:35–40.
[38] Aja OC, Al-Kayiem HH, Karim ZAA, Review on the enhancement techniques
and a novel alternate of solar chimney power plant. In: International con-
ference on production, energy and reliability (ICPER 2010). Kuala Lumpur,
Malaysia; 2010.
[39] Aja OC, Alkayiem HH, Karim ZAA. Thermal field study and analysis in hybrid
solar flue gas chimney power plant. In: National postgraduate conference
(NPC). Tronoh, Perak: Universiti Teknologi Petronas; 2011, p. 1–6.
[40] Fluri TP. Turbine layout for and optimization of solar chimney power con-
version units. Stellenbosch: University of Stellenbosch; 2008.
[41] Pretorius JP. Solar tower power plant performance characteristics. Stellen-
bosch: University of Stellenbosch; 2004.
[42] Pretorius JP. Optimization and control of a large-scale Solar Chimney Power
Plant. Stellenbosch: University of Stellenbosch; 2007.
[43] Xinshi G, Hong Y. Solar chimney electric generating system and analysis of
its intrinsic thermodynamic defect. Acta Energiae Sol Sin 2004;25:263–8.
[44] Ninić N, Nižetić S. "Solar power plant with short diffuser. United States of
America Patent WO/2009/060245; 2007.
[45] Schlaich J, Schiel W, Friedrich K. Solar chimneys. In: Meyers RA, editor.
Encyclopedia of physical science and technology. 3rd ed. . p. 1–10.
[46] Sherif SA, Padki MM. Solar chimneys. In: Parker SP, editor. In 1994 McGraw-
Hill yearbook of science and technology. New York, USA: McGraw-Hill
Professional Book Group, McGraw-Hill, Inc.; 1993.
[47] Schlaich J, Mayr G, Haaf W. Upwind power plants – the demonstration plant
in Manzanares, Spain (Aufwindkraftwerke – Die Demonstrationsanlage in
Manzanares/Spanien). In: Proceedings of the national conference on power
transmission. Hamburg, Germany; 1980, p. 97–12.
[48] Francke W, de Richter R, Petersen O, Petersen J. A realistic growth path for
solar wind power. Appl Mech Mater 2013;283:57–64.
[49] Ritchie-Calder PRRC, Ritchie-Calder B. Leonardo and the age of the eye.
Heinemann; 1970 [Simon and Scheuster, the University of Michigan].
[50] Pastohr H. Thermodynamische modellierung eines aufwindkraftwerkes
(thermodynamic modeling of a solar chimney) [Doctoral degree – Ph.D.
doctoral thesis. Weimar, Germany: Civil Engineering, Bauhaus-Universität
Weimar; 2004.
[51] Lorenzo E. De los archivos históricos de la energía solar; las chimeneas
solares: de una propuesta española en 1903 a la Central de Manzanares. It
reviews the history of the SUPPs technology; 2002.
[52] Cabanyes I. Las chimeneas solares (Solar chimneys). La ernergia eléctrica;
1903.
[53] dos Santos Bernardes MA. Solar chimney power plants – developments and
advancements. In: Belmiloudi A, editor. Solar energy. Brazil: InTech; 2011.
p. 171–86.
[54] Papageorgiou C. Floating solar chimney technology. In: Rugescu RD, editor.
Solar energy; 2010. p. 187–222.
[55] Günther H. In hundert jahren-die künftige energieversorgung der welt (in
hundred years-future energy supply of the world). Stuttgart, Germany:
Kosmos, Franckh'sche Verlagshandlung Stuttgart; 1931.
[56] Ridley N. Improvements in or relating to apparatus for generating power
from solar heat. Great Britain Patent GB748,700, 1956-05-09; 1956.
[57] Nazare EH. Générateur de cyclones artificiels (Generating artificial cyclones).
France Patent FR1439849, 1966-05-27; 1964.
[58] Hamilton TJ. Mad like Tesla underdog inventors and the relentless pursuit of
clean energy; 2011. Available: http://books.google.com.my/books?id ¼
pvruo9QrxxoC&pg ¼ PA100&dq ¼ solarþ chimneyþ patentþ -þ Nazare&hl ¼
en&sa ¼ X&ei¼ V1NJUd2dG4SOrQeA8oCwBg&ved ¼ 0CC8Q6AEwAA#v ¼one
page&q¼ solar%20chimney%20patent%20-%20Nazare&f ¼false.
[59] Lucier RE. Utilization of solar energy. Canada Patent, 1978-01-03; 1975.
[60] Lucier RE. System and apparatus for converting solar heat to electrical
energy. Israel Patent, 1979-12-30; 1976.
[61] Lucier RE. Apparatus for converting solar to electrical energy. Australia
Patent AU499934 (B2) ― 1979-05-03, 1979-05-03; 1976.
1290 H.H. Al-Kayiem, O.C. Aja / Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 58 (2016) 1269–1292
[62] Lucier RE. Converting solar heat energy to electrical energy. Australia Patent
AU1097476 (A), 1977-08-18; 1976.
[63] Lucier RE. System for converting solar heat to electrical energy. USA Patent,
1981-06-23; 1979.
[64] Pasumarthi N, Sherif S. Experimental and theoretical performance of a
demonstration solar chimney model—Part I: mathematical model develop-
ment. Int J Energy Res 1998;22:277–88.
[65] Haaf W, Friedrich K, Mayr G, Schlaich J. Solar chimneys part I: principle and
construction of the pilot plant in Manzanares. Int J Sol Energy 1983;2:3–20.
[66] Castillo M. A new solar chimney design to harness energy from the atmo-
sphere. The spirit of enterprise; 1984, p. 58–59.
[67] Haaf W. Solar chimneys, part II: preliminary test results from the Manza-
nares pilot plant. Int Jf Sol Energy 1984;2:141–61.
[68] Zhou X, Yang J, Xiao B, Shi X. Special climate around a commercial solar
chimney power plant. J Energy Eng 2008;134:6–14.
[69] Padki M, Sherif S, Chan A. Solar chimney for power generation in rural areas.
In: Seminar on energy conservation and generation through renewable
resources. Ranchi, India: The Indian Institute of Metals Ranchi, India; 1989,
p. 91–96.
[70] Onyango FN, Ochieng RM. The potential of solar chimney for application in
rural areas of developing countries. Fuel 2006;85:2561–6.
[71] Wolf MI. Solar updraft towers: their role in remote on-site generation. MIT;
2008, p. 1–32.
[72] Thomas MH, Davey RC. The solar tower: large scale renewable energy power
station development. In: Proceedings of the 19th world energy congress.
Sydney, Australia; 2004.
[73] Meyer CM, Mancha L. Towers of power: the solar updraft tower. Energize
2008:51–4.
[74] Fraser J. EnviroMission's solar tower of power. 2006.
[75] EnviroMission. Clean, green renewable energy: technology overview; 20th
January, 2012. Available: http://www.enviromission.com.au/IRM/content/
technology_technologyover.html.
[76] McLaren W. Solar tower project pipped at the post. Treehugger [Environ-
mental care DIEM]; 2006. http://www.treehugger.com/solar-technology/
solar-tower-project-pipped-at-the-post.html.
[77] Stinnes W. On a 200 MW solar power station in the Northern Cape Province.
South Africa: Consultancy for the Northern Cape Province, Republic of South
Africa, Northern Cape Province; 1997.
[78] Stinnes W. Extension of the feasibility study for the greenhouse operation:
the 200 MW solar power-station in the Northern Cape province. Energy
Manag News 2001;6:4–12.
[79] Stinnes W. Greentower: performance guarantees through insurance policies.
In: Industrial and commercial use of energy conference. Cape Town, South
Africa; 2004.
[80] Stinnes W. Greentower stops climate change by CO2 sequestration. In:
Industrial and commercial use of energy conference. Cape Town, South
Africa; 2004.
[81] Van Dyk C. The realisation of the solar chimney inlet guide vanes. Stellen-
bosch: Stellenbosch University; 2004.
[82] Mills D. Advances in solar thermal electricity technology. Sol Energy
2004;76:19–31.
[83] Pretorius JP, Kröger DG, Buys JD, von Backström TW. Solar tower power plant
performance characteristics. In Proceedings of the 5th ISES europe solar
conference – EuroSun 2004. Freiburg, Germany; 2004, p. 870–879.
[84] Pretorius JP, Kröger DG. Critical evaluation of solar chimney power plant
performance. Sol Energy 2006;80:535–44.
[85] Pretorius JP, Kroger DG. Solar chimney power plant performance. J Sol
Energy Eng Trans ASME 2006;128:302–11.
[86] Pretorius JP, Kröger DG. Sensitivity analysis of the operating and technical
specifications of a solar chimney power plant. J Sol Energy Eng Trans ASME
2007;129:171–8.
[87] Van Dyk C. A methodology for radical innovation: illustrated by application
to a radical civil engineering structure. Stellenbosch: University of Stellen-
bosch; 2008.
[88] Pretorius JP, Kröger DG. The influence of environment on solar chimney
power plant performance. R&D J 2009;25:1–9.
[89] Solaripedia. Project: solar updraft towers generate mega power; 2008–2013
23rd August 2012. Available: http://www.solaripedia.com/13/371/5025/
solar_updraft_tower_in_manzanares_spain.html.
[90] Zhou X, Bernardes MADS, Ochieng RM. Influence of atmospheric cross flow
on solar updraft tower inflow. Energy 2012;42:393–400.
[91] M. o. S. a. T. Ministério da Ciência e Tecnologia – MCT. MCTI news – studies
for solar chimney plant in Maranhão; 2004. Available: http://agenciact.mct.
gov.br/.
[92] Martins FR, Abreu SL, Pereira EB. Scenarios for solar thermal energy appli-
cations in Brazil. Energy Policy 2012;48:640–9.
[93] Cloete R. Solar tower sheds light on little used technology. Engineering news
online; 2008. Available: http://www.engineeringnews.co.za/article/solar-
tower-sheds-light-on-littleused-technology-2008-07-25.
[94] Cloete R. Namibia backing 400 MW solar tower-agri concept. Engineering
news online; 2008. Available: http://www.engineeringnews.co.za/article/
namibia-backing-400-mw-solar-toweragri-concept-2008-07-24.
[95] Serag-Eldin A. New developments in large Scale solar energy conversion. In:
Ramov B, editor. New trends in technologies. InTech; 2010.
p. 109–32 10.5772/77587 [ISBN: 978-953-7619-62-6].
[96] Alrobaei H. Hybrid geothermal/solar energy technology for power genera-
tion; 2007.
[97] Gholamalizadeh E, Mansouri SE. A study on the optimization of performance
of a small-scale prototype solar chimney power plant. In: Proceedings of the
5th international conference on energy sustainability. Washington, DC, USA;
2011.
[98] Gholamalizadeh E, Mansouri SH. A comprehensive approach to design and
improve a solar chimney power plant: a special case – Kerman project. Appl
Energy 2013;102:975–82.
[99] Zhou X, Yang J. A novel concept for constructing a leaning solar chimney
power plant supported by a mountain. Renew Energy 2006;4:2315–38.
[100] Zhou X, Yang J, Wang J, Xiao B. Novel concept for producing energy inte-
grating a solar collector with a man made mountain hollow. Energy Convers
Manag 2009;50:847–54.
[101] Zhou X, Yang J. Temperature field of solar collector and application potential
of solar chimney power systems in China. J Energy Inst 2008;81:25–30.
[102] Papageorgiou CD. Turbines and generators for floating solar chimney power
stations. Relation 2001;2:2.
[103] Alawin A, Badran O, Awad A, Abdelhadi Y, Al-Mofleh A. Feasibility study of a
solar chimney power plant in Jordan. 2012/10/01. Applied Solar Energy
2012;48:260–5.
[104] Al-Dabbas MA. The first pilot demonstration: solar updraft tower power
plant in Jordan. Int J Sustain Energy 2011;31:399–410.
[105] Al-Dabbas MA. A performance analysis of solar chimney thermal power
systems. Therm Sci 2011;15:619–42.
[106] Asnaghi A, Ladjevardi SM. Solar chimney power plant performance in Iran.
Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2012;16:3383–90.
[107] Asnaghi A, Ladjevardi SM, Kashani AH, Izadkhast PS. Solar chimney power
plant performance analysis in the central regions of Iran. J Sol Energy Eng
Trans Asme 2013;135 011011-1–7.
[108] Sangi R. Performance evaluation of solar chimney power plants in Iran.
Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2012;16:704–10.
[109] Al-Kayiem HH, Git HM, Lee SL. Experimental investigation on solar-flue gas
chimney. J Energy Power Eng 2009;3:25–31.
[110] Bonnelle D. Solar chimney, water spraying energy tower, and linked renew-
able energy conversion devices: presentation, criticism and proposals [Doc-
toral thesis]. France: University Claude Bernard-Lyon 1; 2004.
[111] Kreetz H. Theoretische untersuchungen und auslegung eines temporaren
wasserspeichers fur das aufwindkraftwerk. Berlin, Germany: Diploma, Ener-
gieverfahrenstechnik und Umwandlungstechniken regenerativer Energien-
EVUR, Technical University Berlin; 1997.
[112] dos Santos Bernardes MA. Technische, ökonomische und ökologische analyse
von aufwindkraftwerken. Universitätsbibliothek; 2004 [D Eng dissertation,
Stuttgart. ISSN:0938-1228].
[113] Davey RC. Device for generating electricity from solar power. Australia
patent; 2008.
[114] Kröger D, Buys J. Radial flow boundary layer development analysis. S Afr Inst
Mech Eng R&D J 1999;15:95–102.
[115] Gannon AJ, Von Backström TW. Solar chimney cycle analysis with system loss
and solar collector performance. J Sol Energy Eng Trans ASME 2000;122:133–7.
[116] Hedderwick RA. Performance evaluation of a solar chimney power plant.
Stellenbosch: University of Stellenbosch; 2000.
[117] Kröger DG, Burger M. Experimental convection heat transfer coefficient on a
horizontal surface exposed to the natural environment. In: ISES EuroSun -
International Sonnenforum 1. Freiburg, Germany; 2004, p. 422–430.
[118] Adedej A, Avveda J, Lasode O, Estimation of service life for a solar chimney-
collector system. In: Proceedings of World Congress on Engineering. London,
UK; 2010.
[119] Bernardes MADS. Convective heat transfer coefficients for solar chimney
power plant collectors. In: Belmiloudi A, editor. Heat transfer – mathematical
modelling, numerical methods and information technology. Brazil: InTech;
2011. p. 607–20.
[120] Bernardes MADS, Backström TW, Kröger DG. Critical evaluation of heat transfer
coefficients applicable to solar chimney power plant collectors. In: Goswami DY,
Zhao Y, editors. Proceedings of ISES world congress 2007, I–V. Berlin, Heidelberg:
Springer; 2009. p. 1706–13 10.1007/978-3-540-75997-3_350.
[121] Bernardes MADS, Von Backström TW, Kröger DG. Analysis of some available
heat transfer coefficients applicable to solar chimney power plant collectors.
Sol Energy 2009;83:264–75.
[122] Bernardes MADS, Zhou X. On the heat storage in solar updraft tower col-
lectors – water bags. Sol Energy 2013;91:22–31.
[123] Guo P-H, Li JY, Wang Y. Numerical simulations of solar chimney power plant
with radiation model. Renew Energy 2014;62:24–30.
[124] Kirstein C. Flow through a solar chimney power plant collector-to-chimney
transition section. Stellenbosch: Stellenbosch University; 2004.
[125] Kirstein CF, Von Backström TW. Flow through a solar chimney power plant
collector-to-chimney transition section. J Sol Energy Eng Trans ASME
2006;128:312–7.
[126] Ming T, Liu W, Pan Y, Xu G. Numerical analysis of flow and heat transfer
characteristics in solar chimney power plants with energy storage layer.
Energy Convers Manag 2008;49:2872–9.
[127] Schlaich J. Tension structures for solar electricity generation. Eng Struct
1999;21:658–68.
[128] Krätzig WB, Harte R, Graffmann M. Optimization of solar updraft chimneys
by nonlinear response analysis. App Mech Mater 2013;283:25–34.
 H.H. Al-Kayiem, O.C. Aja / Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 58 (2016) 1269–1292
[129] Harte R, Van Zijl GPAG. Structural stability of concrete wind turbines and
solar chimney towers exposed to dynamic wind action. J Wind Eng
Ind Aerodyn 2007;95:1079–96.
[130] Lupi F, Niemann HJ, Borri C, Peil U. Design of solar towers for extreme storm
conditions and for vortex excitation. App Mech Mater 2013;283:35–9.
[131] Lupi F, Borri C, Niemann HJ. Bi-stable flows in wind pressures on very slender
circular towers: a stochastic dilemma. Mecc Matere Strutt 2012;3:1–8.
[132] Von Backström TW, Harte R, Höffer R, Krätzig WB, Kröger DG, Niemann HJ,
et al. State and recent advances in research and design of solar chimney
power plant technology. VGB PowerTech 2008;88:64–71.
[133] Schindelin H. Entwurf eines 1500 m hohen turms eines Solar- aufwindk-
raftwerks – parameteruntersuchung zur geometrieoptimierung (Draft
1500 m high tower of a solar chimney power plant – parameter study of
geometry optimization). Wuppertal, Germany: Civil Engineering Depart-
ment, Bergische Universität Wuppertal; 2002.
[134] Kröger D, Blaine D. Analysis of the driving potential of a solar chimney power
plant. SAI MechE R&D J 1999;15:85–94.
[135] Kröger DG, Buy JD. Solar chimney power plant performance characteristics.
R&D J 2002;18:31–6.
[136] Li G, Huang HL, Chen X, Zhang H, Liu JB. A compressible transient model of
the solar chimney and heat collector. Appl Mech Mater 2013;283:15–21.
[137] Von Backström TW, Gannon AJ. Compressible flow through solar power plant
chimneys. J Sol Energy Eng Trans ASME 2000;122:138–45.
[138] Zhou X, Yuan S, Bernardes MADS. Sloped-collector solar updraft tower power
plant performance. Int J Heat Mass Transf 2013;66:798–807.
[139] Neves L, Roriz M, da Silva FM. Modeling a solar chimney for maximum solar
irradiation and maximum airflow, for low latitude locations. In: Proceedings
of the 12th conference of international building performance simulation
association. Sydney; 2011, p. 1119–1126.
[140] Saifi N, Settou N, Dokkar B, Negrou B, Chennouf N. Experimental study and
simulation of airflow in solar chimneys. Energy Procedia 2012;18:1289–98.
[141] Somsila P, Teeboonma U, Seehanam W. Investigation of buoyancy air flow
inside solar chimney using CFD technique. In: PEA-AIT international con-
ference on energy and sustainable development: issues and strategies (ESD
2010). The Empress Hotel, Chiang Mai, Thailand; 2010, p. 1–7.
[142] Fu WS, Huang Y, Wang WH. An investigation of natural convection in a three
dimensional tapered chimney without Boussinesq assumption. Int Commun
Heat and Mass Transf 2012;39(4):509–13.
[143] Padki M, Sherif S. Fluid dynamics of solar chimneys. In: ASME Annual
Meeting. Chicago Illinois; 1988, p. 43–46.
[144] Zhou X, Yang J, Xiao B, Hou G, Wu Y. Numerical investigation of a com-
pressible flow through a solar chimney. Heat Transf Eng 2009;30:670–6.
[145] Gannon AJ. Solar chimney turbine performance. Stellenbosch: University of
Stellenbosch; 2002.
[146] Gannon AJ, Backstrom TWV. Solar chimney turbine: part 1 of 2 – design. In:
ASME conference proceedings; 2002. Vol. 2002, p. 335–341.
[147] Gannon AJ, Backstrom TWV. Solar chimney turbine: part 2 of 2 – experimental
results. In: ASME conference proceedings; 2002. Vol. 2002, p. 343–349.
[148] von Backström TW, Gannon AJ. Solar chimney turbine characteristics. Sol
Energy 2004;76:235–41.
[149] von Backström TW, Fluri TP. Maximum fluid power condition in solar chimney
power plants – an analytical approach. Sol Energy 2006;80:1417–23.
[150] Fluri TP, Von Backström TW. Performance analysis of the power conversion
unit of a solar chimney power plant. Sol Energy 2008;82:999–1008.
[151] Fluri TP, von Backström TW. Comparison of modelling approaches and lay-
outs for solar chimney turbines. Sol Energy 2008;82:239–46.
[152] Gannon AJ, Von Backström TW. Solar chimney turbine performance. J Sol
Energy Eng Trans ASME 2003;125:101–6.
[153] Schiel W, Schlaich J. Solar-thermal upwind power plant. Sol Auf
1988;40:444–9.
[154] Schwarz G, Knauss H. Stromungstechnische auslegung des aufwindkraft-
werks Manzanares (aerodynamic design of the solar chimney power plant in
Manzanares). Technical Report. Stuttgart, Germany: Institut fur Aero-
dynamik, Unversitat Stuttgart; 1981.
[155] Kolb S, Helmrich T. Strömungstechnische auslegung eines aufwindkraftwerks
mit 200 MW Leistung (aerodynamic design of a 200 MW solar chimney
power plant). Diploma thesis. Germany: Institut für Strömungsmechanik und
hydraulische Strömungsmaschinen, , Universität Stuttgart; 1996.
[156] Müller M. Dreidimensionale simulation der strömungskontur eines auf-
windkraftwerks (three dimensional simulation of the flow in a solar chimney
power plant). Diploma Project Report. Germany: Institut für Strö-
mungsmechanik und hydraulische Strömungsmaschinen, , Universität
Stuttgart; 2002.
[157] dos Santos Bernardes MA, Molina Valle R, Cortez MFB. Numerical analysis of
natural laminar convection in a radial solar heater. Int J Therm Sci
1999;38:42–50.
[158] Yan M, Sherif S, Kridli G, Lee S, Padki M. Thermo-fluid analysis of solar
chimneys. In: Industrial applications of fluid dynamics – 112th ASME Winter
Annual Meeting. Atlanta, Georgia, USA; 1991, p. 125–130.
[159] Koonsrisuk A, Chitsomboon T. Effects of flow area changes on the potential of
solar chimney power plants. Energy 2013;51:400–6.
[160] Cai R. Basic analysis of counter-rotating turbines. Int J Turbo Jet Engines
1990;9:1–10.
[161] Denantes F, Bilgen E. Counter-rotating turbines for solar chimney power
plants. Renew Energy 2006;31:1873–91.
1291
[162] Pasumarthi N, Sherif S. Experimental and theoretical performance of a
demonstration solar chimney model—part II: experimental and theoretical
results and economic analysis. Int J Energy Res 1998;22:443–61.
[163] Pastohr H, Kornadt O, Gürlebeck K. Numerical and analytical calculations of
the temperature and flow field in the upwind power plant. Int J Energy Res
2004;28:495–510.
[164] Pasumarthi N, Sherif S. Performance of a demonstration solar chimney model
for power generation. Acramento, CA (USA): California State Univ; 1997. p.
203–40.
[165] Bilgen E, Rheault J. Solar chimney power plants for high latitudes. Sol Energy
2005;79:449–58.
[166] Papageorgiou CD. Solar turbine power stations with floating solar chimneys.
In: IASTED proceedings of power and energy systems, EuroPES 2004. Rhodes
Greece; 2004, p. 151–158.
[167] Papageorgiou CD. Efficiency of solar air turbine power stations with floating
solar chimneys. In: IASTED proceedings of power and energy systems con-
ference. Florida; 2004, p. 127–134.
[168] Papageorgiou CD. External wind effects on floating solar chimney. In: IASTED
proceedings of power and energy systems, EuroPES 2004. Rhodes Greece;
2004, p. 159–163.
[169] Papageorgiou CD. Floating solar chimney versus concrete solar chimney
power plants. In: Proceedings of iInternational conference on clean electrical
power (ICCEP) 2007. Capril, Italy; 2007, p. 760–765.
[170] Papageorgiou CD. Self suspended solar chimney. Greece Patent GR1004334
(B1); 2003.
[171] Papageorgiou CD. Floating solar chimney. World intellectual property orga-
nization patent WO2004085846 (A1); 2004.
[172] Papageorgiou C. Floating solar chimney. EU patent EP1618302 (A1); 2006.
[173] Papageorgiou C. Floating solar chimney. USA patent US2006272240 (A1);
2006.
[174] Papageorgiou C. Floating solar chimney. US7735483 (B2); 2010.
[175] Papageorgiou CD, Psalidas M, Sotiriou S. Floating solar chimney technology
scale analysis. In: Proceedings of the IASTED international conference, power
and energy systems (EuroPES 2011). Crete, Greece; 2011, p. 55–59.
[176] Serag-Eldin M. Analysis of a new solar chimney plant design for mountainous
regions. Adv Comput Methods Heat Transf IX 2006;53:437–46.
[177] Cao F, Zhao L, Guo L. Simulation of a sloped solar chimney power plant in
Lanzhou. Energy Convers and Manag 2011;52:2360–6.
[178] Cao F, Zhao L, Li H, Guo L. Performance analysis of conventional and sloped
solar chimney power plants in China. Appl Therm Eng 2013;50:582–92.
[179] Zhou X, Yang J. A novel solar thermal power plant with floating chimney
stiffened onto a mountainside and potential of the power generation in
China's deserts. Heat Transf Eng 2009;30:400–7.
[180] Wang Y, Fang Z, Zhu L, Yang Z, Wang J, Han L. Study on the integrated uti-
lization of seawater by solar chimney. Taiyangneng Xuebao/Acta Energiae Sol
Sin 2006;27:382–7.
[181] Wang Y, Wang J, Zhu L, Yang Z, Fang Z. The study of sea desalination and hot
wind electric power integrated system by solar chimney. Taiyangneng Xue-
bao/Acta Energiae Sol Sin 2006;27:731–6.
[182] Akbarzadeh A, Johnson P, Singh R. Examining potential benefits of combining
a chimney with a salinity gradient solar pond for production of power in salt
affected areas. Sol Energy 2009;83:1345–59.
[183] Zuo L, Yuan Z, Yujun S, Bo Q, Zhigang Y, Zhiquan H, et al. Solar chimney
power generation – an experimental research on comprehensive sea water
distillation system. In: Sustainable power generation and supply. SUPERGEN
'09. Nanjing, China; 2009, p. 1–6.
[184] Zuo L, Yuan Z, Yujun S, Bo Q, Zhiquan H, Tingchun W et al. Experimental
study of the influence of seawater depth on solar chimney-sea desalination
integrated system. In: Sustainable power generation and supply. SUPERGEN
'09. Nanjing, China; 2009, p. 1–6.
[185] Zuo L, Yuan Z, Zhenjie L, Yujun S, Yongzhi W. Solar chimney power genera-
tion and analysis for synthetic system performance of sea water desaliniza-
tion. In: Sustainable power generation and supply. SUPERGEN '09. Nanjing,
China; 2009, p. 1–5.
[186] Zuo L, Zheng Y, Li Z, Sha Y. Solar chimneys integrated with sea water desa-
lination. Desalination 2011;276:207–13.
[187] Zuo L, Yuan Y, Li Z, Zheng Y. Experimental research on solar chimneys
integrated with seawater desalination under practical weather condition.
Desalination 2012;298:22–33.
[188] Zuo L, Zheng Y, Li Z, Sha Y. The influence of chiimney structural parameters
on the solar chimneys integrated with seawater desalination. In: Sustainable
power generation and supply (SUPERGEN 2012). Hangzhou, China; 2012, p.
1–5.
[189] Zuo L, Yuan Y, Li Z, Liu W. Numerical analysis of flow heat transfer char-
acteristics in solar chimneys integrated with seawater desalination. In: Sus-
tainable power generation and supply (SUPERGEN 2012). Hangzhou, China;
2012, p. 1–7.
[190] Zuo L, Yuan Y, Li Z, Liu W. The influence of heat collector structural para-
meters on the solar chimneys integrated with seawater desalination. In:
Sustainable power generation and supply (SUPERGEN 2012). Hangzhou,
China; 2012, p. 1–7.
[191] Al-Kayiem HH, Yin KY, Sing CY. Numerical simulation of solar chimney
integrated with exhaust of thermal Power Plant. In: Sundén B, Brebbia CA,
Poljak D, editors. Advanced computational methods and experiments in heat
transfer XII. UK: WIT; 2012. p. 61–72.
1292 H.H. Al-Kayiem, O.C. Aja / Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 58 (2016) 1269–1292
[192] Al-Kayiem HH, Lee SL, Aja OC, Khor YY, Al-Kayiem Hussain H, Lee Seow Lee,
Yin Khor Yin, Chekere Aja Ogboo. Patent no Malaysia Patent; 2011.
[193] Azeemuddin I, Al-Kayiem HH, Gilani SI. Simulation of solar chimney power
plant with an external heat source. In: Proceedings of the 4th International
Conference on Energy and Environment (ICEE 2013). Putrajaya, Malaysia;
2013, p. 1–4.
[194] Azeemuddin HH, Al-Kayiem, Gilani SI. Simulation of a collector using waste
heat energy in a solar chimney power plant system. Putrajaya, Malaysia:
Sustainable City VIII; 2013. p. 933–44.
[195] Kashiwa BA, Kashiwa CB. The solar cyclone: a solar chimney for harvesting
atmospheric water. Energy 2008;33:331–9.
[196] Yabuz ZR. Güneş bacasında konstrüktif iyileştirme çalışmaları ve performans
artırıcı yöntemlerin araştırılması (Constructive improvement studies and
investigation of methods to increase solar chimney performance) [MSc the-
sis]. SDÜ Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü; 2009 ISPARTA.
[197] Fluri T, Pretorius J, Dyk CV, Backström TWV, Kröger D, Zijl GV. Cost analysis of
solar chimney power plants. Sol Energy 2009;83:246–56.
[198] Fluri T, Pretorius J, van Dyk C, von Backström TW, Kröger D, van Zijl GPAG.
Cost analysis of solar chimney power plant. In: EuroSun, ISES. Glasgow; 2006.
[199] Sullivan WG, Wicks EM, Koelling CP, Kumar P, Kumar N. Engineering econ-
omy. USA: Pearson Prentice Hall; 2009.
[200] Outlook AE. Energy information administration. Department of Energy;
2010.
[201] Kossoy A, Oppermann K, Platonova-Oquab A, Suphachalasai S, Höhne N,
Klein N et al. State and trends of carbon pricing; 2014.
[202] Nizetic S, Ninic N, Klarin B. Analysis and feasibility of implementing solar
chimney power plants in the Mediterranean region. Energy 2008;33:1680–90.
[203] Cervone A, Romito DZ, Santini E, Design of solar chimney power plant for
Mediterranean countries. In: Proceedings of international conference on
clean electrical power (ICCEP). Ischia – Italy; 2011, p. 480–484.
[204] Cao F, Li H, Zhao L, Guo L. Economic analysis of solar chimney power plants
in Northwest China. J Renew Sustain Energy 2013;5:021406.