TUGAS 2

MATA KULIAH
METODE DAN ETIKA PENELITIAN
DAN PUBLIKASI ILMIAH

DOSEN PENGAMPU
Prof. Ir. Hasan Basri, Ph.D

SEPTIANI WULANDARI
03032622226001

PROGRAM STUDI MAGISTER TEKNIK MESIN

JURUSAN TEKNIK MESIN
FAKULTAS TEKNIK MESIN
UNIVERSITAS SRIWIJAYA
2022
Rincian Tugas Minggu ke-2
1. Survey paper online dengan menggunakan aplikasi Endnote atau Mendeley
sesuai dengan Topik penelitian masing-masing.
2. Jelaskan perbedaan antara Narrative Review Paper dan Meta Review Paper dan
lampirkan Contoh-contoh paper Narrative Review Paper dan Meta Review
Paper.
 PENCARIAN ARTIKEL ILMIAH MENGGUNAKAN
MENDELEY

Langkah pertama
1. Download aplikasi Mendeley Manager for Desktop
2. Klik icon

3. Setelah klik icon tersebut, tampilan akan muncul seperti ini

4. (Catatan : Anda sudah melakukan Registrasi Sign Up dan Log In pada Aplikasi Mendeley)
Setelah masuk pada aplikasi Mendeley, klik menu Tools dan Search for articles online.

5. Berikut merupakan tampilan setelah anda klik menu Search for articles online
(Catatan : Anda harus terhubung koneksi internet)
 6. Klik menu “Search” pada aplikasi Mendeley sesuai dengan keywords “Penelitian
yang ingin Anda cari”.

7. Tampilan setelah Anda search penelitian berdasarkan “keyword”

Untuk kolom “year” merupakan pilihan Tahun Journal terbit dan jumlah journal terbit pada
tahun tersebut.
8. Beberapa pilihan di Mendeley, untuk kolom “Document Type” merupakan
pilihan tipe dokumen yang ingin anda cari.
Untuk kolom “Journal” merupakan spesifik tipe jurnal yang ingin anda cari
dan silahkan anda klik kolom tersbut.

9. Tampilan setelah anda lebih spesifik mencari Journal yang anda inginkan.
10. Kolom “Author” merupakan kolom penulis yang ingin anda cari, dan pada
pilihan “+ Add to Library” merupakan pilihan jika anda ingin membaca
Journal anda pada saat offline. Journal yang anda simpan pada “Library”
dengan otomatis akan tersimpan di Aplikasi Mendeley secara Offline.
11. Berikut merupakan Tampilan Aplikasi Mendeley, setelah anda save
Journal.

12. Berikut merupakan Langkah jika anda ingin membaca Journal yang telah
anda search dan save add to library. Klik “Get PDF”secara otomatis akan
ter-upload pada halaman baca.
13. Pilih “Read” dan setelah itu klik icon “X” pada tanda panah tersebut.

14. Berikut merupakan tampilan setelah anda mengikuti langkah-langkah

survey paper atau journal melalui aplikasi Mendeley.
Tahapan selesai, dan anda bisa menikmati membaca paper atau journal
secara online maupun offline.
 PERBEDAAN NARRATIVE REVIEW PAPER DAN META
REVIEW PAPER

A. Narrative Review Paper

Narrative review adalah sebuah metode yang sistematis, eksplisit dan reprodusibel untuk
melakukan identifikasi, evaluasi dan sintesis terhadap karya-karya hasil penelitian dan
hasil pemikiran yang sudah dihasilkan oleh para peneliti dan praktisi. Narrative review
bertujuan untuk membuat analisis dan sintesis terhadap pengetahuan yang sudah ada
terkait topik yang akan diteliti untuk menemukan ruang kosong bagi penelitian yang akan
dilakukan. Tujuan yang lebih rinci dijelaskan oleh Okoli & Schabram (2010) yaitu (1)
menyediakan latar/basis teori untuk penelitian yang akan dilakukan, (2) mempelajari
kedalaman atau keluasan penelitian yang sudah ada terkait topik yang akan diteliti dan (3)
menjawab pertanyaan-pertanyaan praktis dengan pemahaman terhadap apa yang sudah
dihasilkan oleh penelitian terdahulu.

B. Meta Review Paper

Meta review adalah salah satu cara untuk melakukan sintesa hasil secara statistik (teknik
kuantitatif). Cara lain untuk melakukan sintesis hasil adalah teknik naratif (teknik
kualitatif). Dengan kata lain, Meta review adalah bagian dari metode systematic review
dengan pendekatan kuantitatif.
1. Meta Review sebagai Metode Systematic Review Kuantitatif
Meta Review adalah metode mengkombinasikan hasil penelitian kuantitatif secara
statistik (secara kuantitatif) maka langkah-langkah dalam melakukan meta-analisis
adalah sama dengan langkah-langkah melakukan systematic review secara umum.
Langkah-langkah tersebut adalah sebagai berikut (Perry & Hammond, 2002):
• Identifikasi pertanyaan penelitian (pertanyaan penelitian meta-analisis)
• Mengembangkan protokol penelitian meta-analisis
• Menetapkan lokasi data-base hasil penelitian sebagai wilayah pencarian
• Seleksi hasil-hasil penelitian yang relevan
• Pilih hasil-hasil penelitian yang berkualitas
• Ekstraksi data dari studi individual
• Sintesis hasil-hasil penelitian dengan metode meta-analisis
• Penyajian hasil penelitian dalam laporan penelitian hasil meta-analisis
2. Meta Review sebagai Metode Systematic Review Kualitatif
Hampir sama dengan langkah-langkah systematic review kuantitatif, maka systematic
review kualitatif mencakup langkah-langkah sebagai berikut (Francis &
Baldesari, 2006):
• Memformulasikan pertanyaan penelitian (formulating the review question)
• Melakukan pencarian literatur systematic review (conducting a systematic
literature search)
• Melakukan skrining dan seleksi artikel penelitian yang cocok (screening and
selecting appropriate research articles)
• Melakukan analisis dan sintesis temuan-temuan kualitatif (analyzing and
synthesizing qualitative findings)
• Memberlakukan kendali mutu (maintaining quality control)
• Menyusun laporan akhir (present findings)
 CONTOH

NARRATIVE REVIEW PAPER

 Clinical Update

Writing narrative literature reviews for

peer-reviewed journals: secrets of
the trade
Bart N. Green, DC, MSEd, DACBSPa,
Claire D. Johnson, DC, MSEd, DACBSPb,
Alan Adams, DC, MS, MSEd, DACBNc

a
Associate Editor, National University of Health Sciences. bEditor, National University of Health Sciences.
c
Vice President of Academic Affairs and Program Development, Texas Chiropractic College
Submit requests for reprints to: Dr. Bart Green, National University of Health Sciences, 200 E. Roosevelt Rd,
Lombard, IL 60148, bgreen@nuhs.edu
Sources of support: This article is reprinted with permission. Its original citation is: Green BN, Johnson CD,
Adams A. Writing narrative literature reviews for peer-reviewed journals: secrets of the trade. J Sports
Chiropr Rehabil 2001;15:5–19.

ABSTRACT
Objective: To describe and discuss the process used to write a narrative review of the literature for publication in
a peer-reviewed journal. Publication of narrative overviews of the literature should be standardized to increase
their objectivity.

Background: In the past decade numerous changes in research methodology pertaining to reviews of the literature
have occurred. These changes necessitate authors of review articles to be familiar with current standards in the
publication process.

Methods: Narrative overview of the literature synthesizing the findings of literature retrieved from searches of
computerized databases, hand searches, and authoritative texts.

Discussion: An overview of the use of three types of reviews of the literature is presented. Step by step instructions
for how to conduct and write a narrative overview utilizing a ‘best-evidence synthesis’ approach are discussed,
starting with appropriate preparatory work and ending with how to create proper illustrations. Several resources
for creating reviews of the literature are presented and a narrative overview critical appraisal worksheet is
included. A bibliography of other useful reading is presented in an appendix.

Conclusion: Narrative overviews can be a valuable contribution to the literature if prepared properly. New and
experienced authors wishing to write a narrative overview should find this article useful in constructing such a
paper and carrying out the research process. It is hoped that this article will stimulate scholarly dialog amongst
colleagues about this research design and other complex literature review methods. (J Chiropr Med 2006;5:101–
117)

Key Indexing Terms: Review Literature; Authorship; Peer Review, research; Manuscripts; Meta-
analysis

0899-3467/Clinical Update/1002-049$3.00/0
JOURNAL OF CHIROPRACTIC MEDICINE 101
Copyright © 2006 by National University of Health Sciences
Volume 5 • Number 3 • Fall 2006
INTRODUCTION
Background
The purpose of this article is to describe and discuss
the research design known as a review of the litera-
ture and to delineate how to write a particular vari-
ety of this research design, the narrative overview of
the literature. Another intention of this article is to
provide educational information and assistance for
those who have not yet published a literature re-
view and to decrease potential author frustration
that can arise during the peer review process. It is
important to note that the general classification of
’literature review’ has three varieties: narrative re-
view, qualitative systematic review and quantitative
systematic review. Each will be addressed in this
article. However, the primary focus of this article
will be on the writing of a narrative review.
A literature review is a type of research article pub-
lished in a professional peer-reviewed journal. The
purpose of a literature review is to objectively report
the current knowledge on a topic and base this
summary on previously published research.1 A lit-
erature review provides the reader with a compre-
hensive overview and helps place that information
into perspective.2
The literature review research design is different
from other research designs because rather than
patients, data to write the report are collected from
the published literature.3,4 These full length articles
provide a new conclusion to the literature, not the
brief summary of literature that is given typically in
the introduction or discussion sections of other re-
search designs.2,5 In creating a literature review, the
author searches through the literature, retrieves nu-
merous sources of information and synthesizes the
findings of all relevant sources into one article.2,3,6
Thus, a vast amount of information is brought to-
gether and written in a manner in which the reader
can clearly understand the topic.
There are several reasons to read reviews of the
literature. For the clinician, they can save valuable
time when reviewing or searching for information
about patient care by condensing a great amount of
information into a few pages.1,6,7 The clinician can
read one paper instead of sifting through the whole
of the literature to find the answer to a clinical
question; the author of the literature review has
already done most of this work for him. Literature
102
reviews also provide information for decision mak-
ers and are used by researchers to identify, justify
and refine hypotheses and to recognize and avoid
pitfalls in previous research.1,8 Additionally, reviews
of the literature provide a basis for validating as-
sumptions,9 provide insight into the dynamics un-
derlying the findings of other studies10 and may
offer more conclusive results than a single primary
research study.11 Depending on the variety of litera-
ture review, they may provide a very high level of
evidence for making clinical practice decisions.
One of the cautions that one must consider with
literature reviews is the bias that is often associated
with them.10,11,12,13 As an author, it is important to
attempt to reduce bias as much as possible through
appropriate writing and research techniques. An in-
crease in objectivity leads to improved utility and
credibility in publications.14 While certain criteria
for literature reviews have been published,1 little
has been accomplished in terms of standardizing
and verifying the validity of the criteria pro-
posed.1,14 Indeed, many changes have taken place
in recent years regarding publication standards for
literature reviews10,12 and it is important for authors
to keep current with these changes. This paper
clearly states the minimum acceptable criteria they
pertain to narrative overviews of the literature.
METHODS
Information used to write this paper was collected
from the sources listed in table 1.
DISCUSSION
Three Varieties of Reviews of the Literature
The three basic types of literature reviews are nar-
rative reviews, qualitative systematic reviews, and
Table 1
Sources Used for This Overview
• MEDLINE search 1966–January 2001. Key words:
Review of the Literature; Authorship; Meta-analysis;
Narrative overview.
• CINAHL search from 1982 to December 2000. Key
words: Review of the Literature; Authorship;
Meta-analysis; Narrative overview.
• Hand searches of the references of retrieved
literature.
• Personal and college libraries searching for texts
on research methods and literature reviews.
• Discussions with experts in the field of reviews of
the literature.
• Personal experience participating in and writing
several reviews of the literature.

quantitative systematic reviews (meta-analyses).
The amount of clinical evidence afforded by each of
these designs increases as the methods employed to
conduct them become more detailed and elaborate.
In this section, the emphasis will be placed on nar-
rative reviews, since they are the subject of this
article; a brief description of qualitative and quanti-
tative systematic reviews will also be given.
Narrative Literature Review
There are three types of narrative reviews of the
literature: editorials, commentaries, and overview
articles.4,15
Editorials, typically written by the editor of the jour-
nal or an invited guest, may be a narrative review if
the author retrieves and synthesizes information
about a particular topic for the reader. Usually these
types of narrative reviews are based upon a short,
select and narrowly focused review of only a few
papers.15 However, editorials may be no more than
the editor’s comments regarding a current issue of
the journal or a current event in health care. There-
fore, editorials do not automatically qualify as nar-
rative reviews.
Commentaries may also be written as a narrative
review, however they are typically written with a
particular opinion being expressed.4 In these articles
research methodology is usually not presented and
the author’s synthesis of the articles demonstrates
bias. Commentaries are usually shorter than a full
length review article and it is expected that the
author possesses expertise in the content area of the
commentary. In short, a commentary is a biased
narrative review that draws upon the wisdom of the
commentator. Usually the purpose of a commentary
is to provoke scholarly dialog among the readers of
the journal.
Narrative overviews, also known as an unsystematic
narrative reviews,16 are comprehensive narrative syn-
theses of previously published information. The de-
tails of how to prepare this type of article are pre-
sented in this paper. This type of literature review
reports the author’s findings in a condensed format
that typically summarizes the contents of each ar-
ticle.1 Some researchers suggest that a proper narra-
tive overview should critique each study in-
cluded,2,17 but other authors write that this is not
necessarily a property of overviews.1 It is up to the
Fall 2006 • Number 3 • Volume 5
author to determine which of these two paths to
take when writing the article.
There are many good reasons to write a quality
narrative overview. Narrative overviews are useful
educational articles since they pull many pieces of
information together into a readable format. They
are helpful in presenting a broad perspective on a
topic and often describe the history or development
of a problem or its management.2,10 Faculty like to
use overviews in the classroom because they are
often more up to date than textbooks, provide a
single source for students to read from, and expose
students to peer reviewed literature. Narrative over-
views are also used as educational articles to bring
practitioners up to date with certain clinical proto-
cols.7,11 Some journals, publish quizzes related to
such articles; these quizzes can be submitted to
regulating boards for continuing education credit.
Often discussing theory and context, narrative over-
views can serve to provoke thought and contro-
versy. For this reason, these reviews may be an
excellent venue for presenting philosophical per-
spectives in a balanced manner. Philosophical ar-
ticles can be excellent for stimulating scholarly dia-
log amongst readers. Readers can participate in this
process by writing to the letters to the editor section
of the journal and present their opinions and critical
appraisal. The letters to the editor section can be a
dynamic part of a journal; several times in the his-
tory of health care tremendous insight into patient
management and research design has been pre-
sented in this forum.7
Authors of narrative overviews are often acknowl-
edged experts in the field and have conducted re-
search themselves.6,7,15,18 Editors sometimes solicit
narrative overviews from specific authors in order to
bring certain issues to light.18 Authors must be care-
ful to avoid a common pitfall of the overview de-
sign, which is to present an opinion oriented argu-
ment based upon a myriad of references,3 rather
than objective conclusions based upon the literature
reviewed. For this reason, some studies have deter-
mined that some experts are less likely to adhere to
high levels of methodological rigor when writing
these papers than non-experts.14 Therefore, wheth-
er one is a novice or expert, the critical factor in
writing a good narrative review is to use good meth-
ods.
Once quite common, overviews are slowly falling
into disfavor in some journals due to a lack of
103
Volume 5 • Number 3 • Fall 2006
systematic methods that should be employed to
construct them.11,19 Rarely have the methods used
in creating the paper been divulged to the
reader,1,10,11 which is a problem identified as early
as 1987.20 Usually the number of sources employed
to find the literature are incomplete,4,10 possibly
creating an insignificant knowledge base from
which to draw a conclusion. In this rather unsys-
tematic approach, selection of information from
primary articles is usually subjective, lacks explicit
criteria for inclusion and leads to a biased re-
view.4,7,10,13,16 The author’s interpretation and syn-
thesis of information should take into account ma-
jor differences between studies, such as if patients
samples in one study are completely different than
in another4 or that research designs are not compa-
rable.3,7 Without identifying these differences, one
takes the risk of providing faulty conclusions or
incorrect information. All of these potential pitfalls
are avoidable if the author is aware of them and
takes the appropriate steps to avoid them.
In the past, many reviews of the literature were
constructed based upon the personal papers of the
author, creating a bias that was slanted to what that
author found interesting or controversial.3 When
this occurs it is difficult to discern if the author has
constructed an objective review of the literature or a
lengthy commentary. Biased writers will draw con-
clusions based more on opinion than data, which is
not a truthful representation of the research.13,16
Often times this faulty synthesis is then repeated by
other authors and the mistakes are handed down
from one study to the next,1 thus perpetuating the
errors. The aforementioned problems related to lit-
erature reviews are a potential danger in health care
if readers make patient health care decisions based
upon faulty reviews.13,18
While narrative overviews are great papers to read
to keep up to date, receive continuing education
credits, or challenge your way of thinking, they are
not a form of evidence that should be used fre-
quently when making decisions about how to solve
specific clinical patient problems. Narrative over-
views are one of the weakest forms of evidence to
use for making clinical decisions in regard to patient
care,21 primarily because they deal more with
broader issues than focused clinical problems. Addi-
tionally, there is a higher degree of bias involved in
overviews than some other research designs.21,22
Nevertheless, narrative overviews constitute an im-
portant component in the literature base.
104
Qualitative Systematic Literature Review
A systematic review is a type of literature review
that employs detailed, rigorous and explicit meth-
ods.4,22,23 A detailed search of the literature based
upon a focused question or purpose is the hallmark
of a systematic review.4,22 Since the review is struc-
tured around a focused clinical question, it allows
the researcher to develop criteria that determine if a
research publication should be included or excluded
in the final synthesis.22,23 Step-by-step methodology
used in the research is described. Authors of system-
atic reviews attempt to obtain all original (primary)
research studies published on the topic under study
by searching in multiple databases, performing hand
searches and contacting authors of previously pub-
lished research. Additionally, authors will attempt
to locate articles that may not have been published
because the results of the study did not support the
research hypothesis.1,4,22,23
Each paper is reviewed in a systematic and consis-
tent manner, usually by several independent re-
viewers, and usually rated using a scoring system by
the authors.1,4,23 Each piece of evidence drawn from
a paper for the literature review is extracted in the
same fashion to help decrease the bias that occurs
when this information extraction is done subjec-
tively, such as in a narrative overview.22 Authors
create data, or evidence tables, in order to tease out
the differences in the results of different studies.24
These reviews of the literature are called qualitative
because the process by which the individual studies
are integrated includes a summary and critique of
the findings derived from systematic methods, but
does not statistically combine the results of all of the
studies reviewed.22,24
Because of the rigorous methods employed in con-
ducting qualitative systematic reviews, they are a
more powerful evidence-based source to garner
clinical information than narrative reviews, case re-
ports, case series, and poorly conducted cohort stud-
ies.21
Quantitative Systematic Literature
Review (Meta-analyses)
A systematic review that critically evaluates each
paper and statistically combines the results of the
studies is called a quantitative systematic review of
the literature, also known as a meta-analy-
sis.1,10,22,23,24 Introduced in 1976, meta-analyses
 Fall 2006 • Number 3 • Volume 5

aim to make an objective science out of research
synthesis.10 Meta-analyses employ all of the rigor-
ous methodology of qualitative systematic reviews.
In addition to the inherent strengths of the system-
atic review process, the major benefit of a meta-
analysis is the pooling of data between studies. In
this process, the authors of a meta-analysis will
gather the original patient data from each of the
studies under review, pool it all together in a data-
base, and perform the appropriate statistics on this
larger sample size. This is especially useful when
clinical trials exist in the literature but possess low
sample sizes that prevent the authors from making
conclusions that can be generalized to the popula-
tion at large.1 This can be particularly powerful if
the studies under review are very similar in their
construction because several studies can be com-
bined as one larger base of data leading to more
powerful conclusions.23
The pooling of data that can be analyzed statistically,
which is the strength of the meta-analysis,25 can
also be a drawback because it is difficult to find
studies that are similar enough to one another to
draw valid comparisons.4,25,26 There is disagreement
amongst experts about the most appropriate meth-
ods to combine the data from studies with different
variables (eg, patient populations, clinical outcome
measures, treatments).25,26,27
Meta-analyses are considered to be a very high form
of evidence for making clinical decisions because the
results of the review are produced from a rigorous
critical appraisal and pooling of data from the stud-
ies reviewed.11,12,16,26 This leads to a more general-
izable conclusion.21
Writing a Narrative Review of the Literature,
Step By Step
Preparation
Before involving oneself completely in the research
endeavor, it is important to observe a few tips that
will sustain the author during the process of the
project. These pearls of wisdom, presented in table
2, are gathered from experienced authors and are
useful for novice as well as experienced writers.
The first step in writing a narrative overview is to
perform a preliminary search of the literature.24 In
this endeavor, the author should search the litera-
ture to see what other work in the area of interest
has already been published.5,17 This initial work
should help the author to refine the topic and ob-
jective of the overview being written. For example,
if one wishes to publish a review of the literature
about the effect of chiropractic adjustments on cer-
vical spine pain, the initial search should reveal if
someone has recently published such a study. In
addition, this initial work will also give the author a
preview of the number of articles available on the
topic. If an article is already published on the very
same topic that the author wishes to write about,
then it may be better to select a slightly different
topic or to slightly modify the focus of the objective.
On the other hand, if there has never been a review
published about the topic, then this helps to estab-
lish the need for this particular contribution.5,17
Once armed with a refined topic, it is time to pro-
ceed with the next steps.
General guidelines
The text that follows delineates what would prob-
ably be acceptable in many journals. These recom-

Table 2
Words of Wisdom for Authors Writing Narrative Overviews
Interesting Topic Select a topic that you are very interested in, lest you do a lot of work and
then lose momentum to finish the project. There are many half-finished
papers collecting dust on shleves because authors lost the drive and
interest to complete the task. Select an enticing and engaging topic that will
keep you fascinated throughout the process.
Doable Project Select a topic with a feasible focus. A narrative review on ‘headaches’ is an
impossible task, whereas ‘chiropractic management of muscle tension
headaches’ can be a manageable narrative review. Keep the focus clear and
defined and you will be able to complete the paper.
Get Help Get help early and often. Call upon people around you who have writing
experience, such as colleagues or faculty who have published narvative
reviews. Consider asking them for their opinions before you begin the paper
and then ask them to review drafts of your paper before submitting it. Some
journal editors can direct you to others that may be of assistance and may be
able to help you themselves when time permits.

105
Volume 5 • Number 3 • Fall 2006
mendations follow the approach put forth by Robert
Slavin, which is called a “best-evidence synthesis”.10
However, there are no rigid published guidelines
designating exactly what should or should not be
included in a quality narrative overview.10 A suc-
cessful narrative review should do the following:
present information that is written using the re-
quired elements for a narrative review, be well
structured, synthesize the available evidence per-
taining to the topic, and convey a clear message.
An objective and scientific approach on behalf of the
author should be conveyed and the paper should
follow the formatting guidelines published in the
Uniform Requirements for Manuscripts Submitted to Bio-
medical Journals. These guidelines describe in detail
what is necessary in order to prepare a manuscript
for submission to a peer reviewed journal. Preparing
a manuscript using these guidelines is essential to
insure that manuscripts are uniform in nature, as
objective as possible, and can be processed by edi-
tors in an expeditious manner, thus providing the
author with a better chance for earlier accep-
tance.28,29 The Uniform Requirements can be found
on the Internet at http://www.icmje.org/
index.html.
The presentation of a narrative review should be as
objective as possible. It is essential that prospective
authors remember that the intention of a narrative
review is to describe and synthesize the available
literature on a topic, providing a conclusion from
this evidence.18 The necessary elements of a narra-
tive review are similar to those required of any form
of scholarly article (Table 3). A detailed rating scale
for narrative reviews of the literature is also in-
cluded in this article as Appendix A.
Title
The title of the article should be interesting and
clearly describe the topic being reviewed.30 It is also
Table 3
Components of a Narrative Overview in
Order of Appearance in the Manuscript
1. Title
2. Structured abstract
3.
4.
Introduction
Methods
5. Discussion
6. Conclusion
7. Acknowledgements (if applicable)
8. References
9. Tables
10. Figures
11. Figure captions
106
helpful to readers if the words “literature review” or
“review of the literature” appear somewhere in the
title to make it clear to readers what research design
is being used. The reader instantly knows what the
major topic is and that previous publications about
the topic are being synthesized. A good example of a
title is Injuries Associated with Soccer: A Review of Epi-
demiology and Etiology. A bad example of a literature
review title might be The Epidemiology of Soccer Inju-
ries. This title would infer that a population based
study was performed to determine the kinds and
frequency of soccer injuries, which would be mis-
leading to the reader.
Abstract
The abstract is a structured summary of the article
that offers the reader a brief presentation of the
review and relates the most important informa-
tion.11 The abstract and the title are entered into
computer databases and indexing systems, and are
essentials for those conducting literature searches. A
well written abstract allows people searching the
literature to find the information in their search and
discern whether or not they should retrieve the
paper.29,30
Abstracts should be written in a structured format.31
Structured abstracts are required in order to assure
that all necessary information for an abstract is re-
ported for the reader. In the past, narrative abstracts
were often used by journals, but authors sometimes
did not adequately report the necessary elements of
the study in the abstract. Thus, most journals
adopted the structured abstract format over ten
years ago.30,31 Subsections for abstracts of narrative
overviews of the literature typically consist of the
following, further described in table 4: objective,
background, methods, discussion; conclusion, key
words.28
Introduction
Early in the introduction, the author should clearly
state the research purpose or focus. Clearly stated
aims tell the reader that the study was planned out
in advance, usually resulting in a well outlined
study that presents useful information.3,18,24
Next, the author must make a case for the need or
importance of the study. This is essential in order to
relate the importance of this research to the reader.
This usually requires that the author has already
reviewed the literature pertaining to the topic and
 Fall 2006 • Number 3 • Volume 5

Table 4
Standard Subsections of the Narrative Overview Structured Abstract
Subsection Description
Objective • Clearly state the purpose of the paper.
Background • Describe what prompted this review or why it is being written.
• Briefly present a context for the overview.
Methods: • Briefly describe the methods used to conduct the ovewview.
Discussion: • Describe what information the overview presents to the reader.
Conclusion • Summarize what the overview contributes to the literature.
• State what new conclusion is drawn as a result of the synthesis of the
literature reviewed.
Key words • Use terms found in the Index Medicus database, which are called medical
subheadings (MeSH).9 MeSH can be found at the PubMed home page
(http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=mesh).
• List additional words that may be unique to the topic or to the profession.

has discovered a deficiency of a well written review
of the literature in the area. Authors can use the
results of their preparatory literature search dis-
cussed previously as well as further reading un-
veiled during the course of conducting the formal
literature review, described later, for this purpose.
This information should be written in the introduc-
tion to state why the study is important and place it
in context with other published information.10,24
The author should also define any unusual terms or
words that are essential to understanding the infor-
mation in the paper.10 For example, if the paper is
about isometric low back extension endurance tests,
it would be paramount that the author clearly de-
fine what these tests are and what they do.
Methods
The methods section of the article should describe
step by step how the study was performed.11,14,18,24
Sources of information: The most efficient way to be-
gin a literature search is to use electronic databases.
There are many different databases available for
searching and it is important that the appropriate
databases are searched, depending on the objective
and topic of the paper.9 Unfortunately, many people
think that only searching MEDLINE is adequate, but
it is not.4 This is especially true in when writing on
topics pertaining to chiropractic and allied health
disciplines because many journals from these pro-
fessions are listed, or indexed, in databases other
than MEDLINE. It is usually necessary to search at
least two databases appropriate for the area of study
in order to provide a reasonable breadth and depth
on a topic. Searches through the references of ar-
ticles that are retrieved, authoritative texts, personal
contacts with experts, and reviews of unpublished
primary research may also be warranted and impor-
tant to include.17 The breadth and depth of search-
ing is dependent on the topic and objective. Sum-
marily, the author should look in all the locations
that are appropriate for finding the information they
need.
Examples of common databases used in the health
sciences and their areas of focus are listed in table 5.
Some of these databases are free of charge while
others are not. If an author wishes to avoid paying
to perform searches in some of these databases, they
are often available in health science libraries for
students and alumni to use at no cost. Consult a
local chiropractic or other health science library to
find out which databases they carry and also to
inquire about search fees.17 Authoritative texts may
also be found at college libraries or even in your
own personal library. At college libraries there are
usually computerized databases that catalog all of
the books in the library’s holdings. These too can be
searched using search terms.24
It is crucial to divulge the databases that were
searched in the article.3,7,13 This means that it is
important for the author to keep track of the
databases searched and the terms used, in order
to report them to the readers. Some authors
also like to keep track of how many ‘hits’ or
article citations that are found with each search. A
sample tracking sheet is provided in table 6. Mini-
mum requirements for narrative reviews are that
authors should state the database searched, a
starting year, and the ending year and month
of the search. The following example is adequate,
“MEDLINE was searched using the terms ‘low back
pain’ and ‘manipulation’ from 1966 through June,
2000.” Stating, “We searched MEDLINE from 1980

107
Volume 5 • Number 3 • Fall 2006

Table 5
Databases to Consider When Performing a Literature Search
Name of Database How to Access Internet Site Pay Site?
PubMed Online software http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/ No
query.fcgi
Emphasis: medicine, nursing, dentistry, veterinary medicine, and preclinical sciences.
Also includes citations for chiropractic, complementary medicine, and allied health.
Index to Chiropractic Online software http://www.chiroindex.org No
Literature Emphasis: chiropractic publications
MANTIS Online search software or http://www.healthindex.com Yes
CD-ROM
Emphasis: Health promotion, prevention, and conservative alternative therapies,
including: acupuncture, allopathic medicine, chiropractic, herbal medicine,
homeopathy, naturopathy, osteopathic medicine, physical therapy, traditional Chinese
medicine.
ERIC (Educational Online search software http://www.ericsp.org/ No
Resources Emphasis: Contains more than one million abstracts of education-related documents
Information Center) and journal articles, including health sciences.
AMED (Allied and Online search software, http://www.bl.uk/collections/health/ Yes
Complementary CD-ROM, disc, print amed.html
Medicine Database) Emphasis: Unique bibliographic database produced by the Health Care Information
Service of the British Library. Journals related to complementary medicine,
physiotherapy, occupational therapy, rehabilitation, podiatry, palliative care.
CINAHL (Cumulative Online search software http://www.cinahl.com Yes
Index to Nursing and Emphasis: Citations for nursing, allied health, complementary medicine, including
Allied Health chiropractic.
Literature)
EMBASE/Excerpta Online search software, http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/ Yes
Medica CD-ROM, print bibliographicdatabasedescription
.cws_home/523328/
description#description
Emphasis: Diverse database including: biomedical sciences, human medicine, health
policy and management, occupational and environmental health, alternative and
complementary medicine, nursing.
SPORT Discus Online software vendors http://www.sirc.ca/products/ Yes
sportdiscus.cfm
Emphasis: Sports medicine, physical education, physical fitness, sport law,
administration, training, sport science, kinesiology, coaching, physical therapy,
recreation.
Current Contents Online search software http://scientific.thomson.com/products/ Yes
ccc
Emphasis: Clinical medicine; life sciences; agriculture; biology and environmental
sciences; arts and humanities; physical, chemical and earth sciences; engineering,
computing and technology; social and behavioral sciences.
Cochrane Database of Online search software http://www.cochrane.org/reviews/en/ Yes
Systematic Reviews
Emphasis: High quality evidence to inform people providing and receiving care, and
those people responsible for research, teaching, funding and administration at all
levels.
DARE (Database of Online search software http://www.york.ac.uk/inst/crd/ No
Abstracts and crddatabases.htm
Reviews of
Effectiveness)
Emphasis: Database of abstracts of systematic reviews assessed for effectiveness.

to the present.” is grossly insufficient because
the reader is not told what the word “present”
actually means. Months can slip away between the
day of the search and publication, so it must be
defined.
Search terms & delimiting: Setting the specific param-
eters for the literature search is necessary in order to
make the project feasible since it is not reasonable to
review every single paper that has even the most
minute relation to the topic of study.17,24 The
boundaries set in this step must be comprehensive
enough to insure that the author may retrieve all
relevant studies, but narrow enough to focus the
effort.13,17
To do this, one should take the primary concepts or
themes of the topic under study and turn them into

108

Table 6
Sample Literature Search Tracking Sheet.
Date of Search Database Years Searched
1/12/99 PubMed 1975–12/1998
1/12/99 PubMed 1975–12/1998
1/12/99 Cinahl 1966–12/1998
single words, which can be used as search terms. In
addition, insure that the search terms used are rec-
ognized by the vocabulary of the computer data-
base. This is usually easy to do since most comput-
erized indices have a key word search function
within them that will find synonyms in its database
for the word that you enter. Most journals use the
MeSH vocabulary system adopted by the National
Library of Medicine.9 These key words will be the
ones that you will also list in the key terms section
of the abstract.17
It is not necessary to search databases using solely
key words of the database. Most databases will allow
you to search using additional words that you find
appropriate. This is sometimes helpful in finding
more articles since the databases usually search
through title, abstract and key words of the articles
indexed. If the right terms are not used during the
literature search, then chances are high that some
important studies will be missed. General terms,
such as ‘pain’ may result in so many articles to
search through that the authors miss studies. Like-
wise, highly focused words may narrow the search
down too far, revealing no research. Just as with
reporting the databases used, each search term used
to conduct the search ought to be divulged to the
reader.3 How terms are connected together would
also be useful to know.
When writing papers using terms unique to a pro-
fession, it is important to recognize that the term
may have a different meaning in various database.
For example, the term “subluxation” in the medical
literature has a distinctly different meaning than in
the chiropractic literature. The spelling of words
should also be considered, based upon the data-
base being searched. Exemplary is that in the Index
to Chiropractic Literature database, a search using the
spelling “technique” will provide different results
than a search with “technic”. This occurs because
the chiropractic profession historically used the
latter term to describe different chiropractic ad-
justing procedures and the indexing system con-
Fall 2006 • Number 3 • Volume 5
Search Terms Strings of Terms # Hits
Health promotion None used 11330
Health promotion; Health promotion and 6
chiropractic chiropractic
Preventive medicine, Preventive medicine 0
chiropractic and chiropractic
tinues to use this term. This is also an excellent
example of why it is important to verify the key
words vocabulary of each database. Therefore, to
properly delimit a literature search, authors need
to select key words, including MeSH, keep track
of the terms and search strings used, and report
this information to the reader when writing the
paper.
Selection criteria employed: It is important to briefly
describe what selection criteria were used to include
or exclude a study from the review.7,10,11,18 This
helps keep the paper focused and helps to insure
that papers are included because of their relevance
to the topic rather than how much the author
agrees or disagrees with the study.13,18 Exclusion
criteria should be identified that the authors used to
eliminate studies from consideration that were not
pertinent to the focused purpose of the study. Rea-
sons for exclusion may be old data (early research)
or inappropriate topics.17 For example, researchers
studying the use of isometric muscle endurance of
the lumbar spine would exclude papers found that
discuss standard orthopedic muscle testing of the
low back because it is not the type of muscle testing
being reviewed.
Inclusion criteria should tell the reader what factors
the authors considered in order to include a paper
in the review. This should include articles pub-
lished in various languages, and other factors perti-
nent to the purpose of the paper. Be careful not to
place too many limiting exclusion criteria or have
inclusion criteria that are too wide; papers outside
the domain of the purpose of the study may be
included inadvertently or inappropriately if this oc-
curs.
Summarily, when writing the methods section, the
author should ask him or herself, “Can the reader
replicate the search that was done based upon what
I have written in the methods section?” If the an-
swer is “Yes” then this section has been adequately
written.
109
Volume 5 • Number 3 • Fall 2006

Discussion new information. Once all of the notes are com-

Synthesis: The part of conducting a narrative over-
view that takes the most mental energy is synthe-
sizing all of the information retrieved in the litera-
ture search into comprehensive paragraphs. Since
this is the primary use of reviews of the literature it
is imperative that this section be written as clearly
and as objectively as possible.18 It is here that read-
ers should find the information that they want in
one location.10
How to structure this section and summarize the
information into a comprehensible synthesis de-
pends on what is being reviewed. If an author is
writing a review pertaining to the current best ap-
proaches in assessing and managing patients with a
particular disorder, it may be a good idea to write
the synthesis in the order that the clinical encounter
normally takes place (eg, history, examination, spe-
cial studies, management). As another example, for
this paper we synthesized the literature in the order
that we felt readers would find it most useful when
they decided to write their own overview. There is
no single way to write this section. Therefore it
requires the author to think clearly about what is
being conveyed according to the objective of the
overview.18
Before attempting to write the synthesis authors
should read through each of the papers that will be
included in the overview and take notes on each
one. Most authors prefer to use a word processing
system for taking notes because it is simple to add
plete, authors can then easily organize common
themes together. Other authors prefer to take notes
on index cards since they can be shuffled around
and notes can be taken regardless of whether or not
the author is near a computer.
It is recommended that notes include the following:
the purpose of the study reviewed, a synopsis of the
content, the research design or methods used in the
study, a brief review of the findings.9,17 If an author
plans to objectively evaluate, or critically appraise,
each article, then it is also a good idea to take notes
for this part as well. Regardless of the technique that
you use it is essential to always write the complete
reference down for each set of information that you
extract from a study. It is horrifying to find out late
in the writing process that a reference for a bunch of
information was lost and have to spend hours trying
to find it.17
Tables of information may make it easier for some
authors to organize their thoughts when construct-
ing the synthesis.17,24 Tables are easy to make and
categorize information by topic. For example, the
references for each paper reviewed can be written
down one side of the paper and categories of infor-
mation extracted from each paper can be written
along the top. This is best done using a computer, as
it allows for easy arrangement or additions of infor-
mation. An example of part of a table is presented in
table 7. If papers under review contain a lot of data
that the author feels would be beneficial to include
in the manuscript, then data can be collected using a
table and easily be placed in the final paper.

Table 7
Example of a Part of an Evidence Table
Reference Sample Test Design Results Comments
Biering-Sorensen, Denmark; 30–60 Sorensen’s Postal survey 12 Prognostic for Some women
1984 yo, 449 men, method months after 1st time LBP in omitted from
479 women exam men; women analysis
had insig.
Opposite trend
Gibbons et al., Finland, 35–63 Modified Compared static Men who Difference in
1997 yo, 43 men who Sorensen’s back reported LBP groups may
had no LBP endurance had slightly suggest either
time between shorter times; a difference in
group with no they did not condition of
LBP to group come close to subjects, or a
with incidence stat. research
of LBP in significance. error
preceding 12 No association
mo. between static
back
endurance and
future LBP

110
 Fall 2006 • Number 3 • Volume 5

When writing the synthesis for the manuscript,
the author integrates the findings elicited from the
note taking or table making process. It is important
for authors to keep the reading audience in mind
when writing this section; the audience is less
familiar with the topic under review, necessi-
tating a clear, clinically relevant and easy to read
synthesis.
Major areas of agreement and disagreement in the
literature should be discussed.10 The discussion
should tie the study into the current body of lit-
erature, provide its clinical significance, and make
logical interpretations from the literature re-
viewed.1,18,24 If there is no discussion of the rel-
evance of the overview to other work in the field, it
may signal that the author has not thoroughly in-
vestigated the topic. Since the synthesis is the crux
of the overview design it is important to insure that
a meaningful integration is accomplished.
The author’s interpretation of the literature should
also be provided;1 it is for this reason that it is
helpful if the author has some content expertise in
the area under study.18 Often times it is appropriate
for the author to offer some critical appraisal of the
papers reviewed in the discussion.9,11,17 As men-
tioned earlier, this is an area of overviews that some
authorities feel may or may not be necessary in an
overview. One of the reasons for this disagreement
is that the appraisal process can be extremely sub-
jective without the use of explicit critical appraisal
criteria. Since the narrative overview already in-
cludes the biases of the author, there is a limit to
how much more bias may actually enhance the
credibility of the overview.13
It is helpful if the author uses check sheets or guides
when critically appraising the articles. These check
sheets are available from a wide variety of sources.
Some of these critical appraisal aids focus on specific
research designs while others are made for assess-
ment of articles in general. In addition to many
worksheets available in the references used for this
paper, a small sample of additional sources for criti-
cal appraisal check sheets are identified in table 8.
When performing critical appraisal, it is best to use a
check sheet that is specific to the research design
being appraised. For example, Appendix A in this
article is a check sheet for a narrative overview of
the literature. A case report or clinical trial should
be reviewed using a completely different check
sheet.
Limitations to the overview: Authors should address
weak points of their own study and mention areas
for improvement.1,3 No paper is perfect. If limita-
tions are not included in an honest fashion, it warns

Table 8
Examples of Critical Appraisal Check Sheets
Reference Topic Internet Address
Centre for Evidence Based Medicine Articles on therapy, systematic http://www.cebm.net/using_ebm.asp
reviews, diagnosis, prognosis,
harm/etiology, economic analysis
Critical Appraisal Skills Programme Randomized controlled trials, http://www.phru.nhs.uk/casp/
economic analyses, qualitative critical_appraisal_tools.htm
research
Greenhalgh T. How to read a paper: Systematic reviews http://www.bmj.com
Papers that summarise other
papers (systematic reviews and
metaanalyses). BMJ 1997;315:672–
675.
Oxman AD. Systematic reviews: Systematic reviews http://www.bmj.com
Checklists for Review Articles.
BMJ 1994:648–651.
Jackson GB. Methods for integrative Integrative reviews of the NA
reviews. Review of Education literature
Research 1980;50:438–460.
Cooper H. Scientific guidelines for Integrative reviews of the NA
conducting integrative research literature
reviews. Review of Education
Research 1982;52:291–302.
Green BN, Johnson CD. Writing Case reports NA
better case reports. J Sports
Chiropr Rehabil 2000;14(3):46–47.

111
Volume 5 • Number 3 • Fall 2006
the reader that the paper may contain more bias
than is acceptable for an overview. The inability to
discuss the merits and demerits of a paper may
demonstrate that the author has strayed from the
focus of their purpose.
Because authors are deeply involved in the creation
of the literature review and the writing process, it is
not always easy to recognize the paper’s limitations.
One method that is helpful in writing this section is
to write it as the study evolves. Every time the
author recognizes an area that could be improved in
the study, he or she can simply write those thoughts
down at the time. If the weakness can be corrected
during the research process then the writing related
to it can be deleted. For limitations that are inherent
to the design of the paper or ones that are not
correctable, then this text can remain for the final
paper.
Another method that most experienced authors use
is to have trusted colleagues review the paper before
it is submitted to a journal. It is important to select
colleagues who have expertise in the topic under
study as well as those who have writing experience.
These peers will usually be able to see areas of
weakness not immediately apparent to the author
and they can provide suggestions for improvement.
These suggestions can then be incorporated into the
paper and help provide comments for the discus-
sion. Be sure to select assistants who will be honest
in their feedback, will provide the comments in a
timely manner, and who will respect the confiden-
tiality of your work. In receiving feedback from
peers, it is important for the author not to take the
criticism personally, but to see it as a method for
improving the paper.
Conclusion
The conclusion should provide a tie in to the pur-
pose, the major conclusions drawn from the over-
view, and directions for future research.
A clear and concise summary of the major findings
of the overview should be provided.10 This is not
merely a rehash of the entire paper, but a statement
about what is now known as a result of the publi-
cation of the overview that was not known or ob-
served before. The conclusion should be drawn from
and supported by the papers reviewed;1,10,14,18 the
absence of systematic methods should temper the
conclusion.3 Specific implications to the practice en-
112
vironment should also be mentioned.3 Authors who
derive conclusions that are irrelevant to the initial
purpose have lost the focus of the review and may
inadvertently infuse bias into the study. If any major
conclusion is not supported by the literature synthe-
sis, then it is a faulty conclusion and your suspicion
about the validity of the paper should be height-
ened. Therefore, conclusions that are made must be
supported by the literature reviewed.
Specific directives for new research initiatives
should be proposed. After reviewing the literature
on a topic the author possesses a vantage point that
may provide valuable guidance for future research
endeavors. Suggestions for new areas of inquiry and
specific study designs are an important outcome of a
thorough review; it is often from these recommen-
dations that researchers begin new studies.
Acknowledgements
It may be appropriate to acknowledge the work of a
colleague who has assisted the author in the prepa-
ration of the manuscript, such as a proofreader or a
person who has provided ideas for the manuscript.
These people can be acknowledged briefly in this
section. People mentioned in this section must give
consent for their name to appear in print, which can
be obtained by asking them to sign a brief statement
that they know that their name will be listed in the
acknowledgements section of the article.28 For more
information on the protocol for writing acknowl-
edgements, see the Uniform Requirements.
References
References are an absolute necessity for any re-
search paper, but especially for a review of the
literature. It is extremely important that authors cite
each of the studies reviewed in order to demon-
strate exactly what research was appraised.11 All of
the papers included in the review should be refer-
enced. Authors should also cite all supporting re-
search used to write the report. References used to
support the work should come from peer-reviewed
journals, texts, government documents or confer-
ence proceedings.17 For the majority of literature
reviews, the use of magazines is not appropriate
because these periodicals are not peer reviewed and
the articles in them are not written with the same
scientific rigor as peer reviewed journal articles.
References should be formatted appropriately. In-
structions for how to write out the references appro-

priately for a given journal are usually found in the
journal’s instructions for authors or in the Uniform
Requirements. Proper formatting of references is es-
sential, as it costs time and money on behalf of
journal staff members to send this information back
to authors for correction.32 All the information
needed to correctly list a reference can usually be
found with the abstract when conducting a litera-
ture search, or on the pages of the actual journal
article.
Tables
Tables are lists of information that aid in visually
presenting information in an appealing manner
rather than listing information as text in a para-
graph. Such a table in an overview may be the
extraction table used during the synthesis. Tables
should be simple and self-contained, needing no
further explanation. If authors wish to use previ-
ously published tables, the publishing company of
the original material must grant permission and it is
the authors’ responsibility to receive this permis-
sion. Appropriate formatting for tables can be found
in the Uniform Requirements.29
Figures
Figures or illustrations are a necessity to make ar-
ticles interesting to read. Since an overview is a
review of text, it is especially useful to use pictures
and tables in order to keep the paper interesting to
read. Most people do not like to read an article that
is nothing but text from the beginning of the title to
the last letter of the references. Pictures can also
help make the paper easier for readers to under-
stand. If authors wish to use previously published
photographs or illustrations, permission must be
granted by the publishing company of the material
and it is the author’s responsibility to receive this
permission.
Complete requirements for preparing illustrations or
photographs for submission are detailed in the Uni-
form Requirements. Captions for each figure used in
the manuscript should be provided. Authors should
not expect that editors will write the figure cap-
tions.29 Some journals accept electronic images. Be
sure to scan images at a sufficient resolution to
enable quality printing in the journal. Find out from
the journal which formats are accepted, such as tiff
or jpg files, and whether the journal accepts PC or
Mac formatting.
Fall 2006 • Number 3 • Volume 5
CONCLUSIONS
Narrative overviews can be a valuable contribution
to the literature if they are prepared properly in an
effort to minimize the author’s biases. Further read-
ing on reviews of the literature is available in a
suggested bibliography located in Appendix B of this
article. Authors wishing to submit narrative over-
views should find this article useful in constructing
such a paper and carrying out the research process.
Given the controversy surrounding the review of
the literature research design, it is our aspiration
that this article will facilitate some scholarly dialog
in the pursuit of creating more valid reviews of the
literature and striking a balance between a the un-
systematic overview and the complex meta-
analysis.
REFERENCES
1. Helewa A, Walker JM. Critical evaluation of research in physical re-
habilitation: toward evidence-based practice. Philadelphia: W.B.
Saunders Co.; 2000. p. 109–124.
2. Day RA. How to write and publish a scientific paper. 5th ed. Phoenix,
AZ: The Oryx Press; 1998. p. 163–167.
3. Crombie IK. The pocket guide to critical appraisal. London: BMJ Pub-
lishing Group; 1999. p. 23–29, 56–62.
4. Gray JAM. Evidence-based health care: how to make health policy and
management decisions. NY: Churchill Livingstone; 1997. p. 72–77.
5. Lang G, Heiss GD. A practical guide to research methods. Lanham, MD:
University Press of America; 1998. p. 17–21.
6. Mendelson T. Keeping up with the medical literature. In: Friedland DJ,
editor. Evidence-based medicine: a framework for clinincal practice.
Stamford, CT: Appleton & Lange; 1998. p. 145–150.
7. Gehlbach SH. Interpreting the medical literature. NY: McGraw-Hill,
Inc.; 1993. p. 243–251.
8. Jadad AR, Cook DJ, Jones A, Klassen TP, Tugwell P, Moher M, et al.
Methodology and reports of systematic reviews and meta-Analyses:
a comparison of Cochrane reviews with articles published in paper-
based journals. JAMA 1998;280:278–80.
9. Portney LG, Watkins MP. Foundations of clinical research: applications
to practice. 2nd ed. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall, Inc; 2000.
p. 127–133.
10. Slavin RE. Best evidence synthesis: an intelligent alternative to meta-
analysis. J Clin Epidemiol 1995;48:9–18.
11. Hutchinson BG. Critical Appraisal of Review Articles. Can Fam Physi-
cian 1993;39:1097–102.
12. Sackett DL. Applying overviews and meta-analyses at the bedside. J
Clin Epidemiol 1995;48:61–6.
13. Oxman AD, Guyatt GH. Guidelines for reading literature reviews. CMA
J 1988;138:697–703.
14. Oxman AD, Guyatt GH. Validation of an index of the quality of review
articles. J Clin Epidemiol 1991;44:1271–8.
15. Dixon RA, Munro JF, Silcocks PB. The evidence based medicine work-
book: critical appraisal for clinical problem solving. Woburn, MA:
Butterworth-Heinemann;1998. p. 148–166.
16. Oxman AD, Cook DJ, Guyatt GH. Users’ guides to the medical litera-
ture, VI. How to use an overview. JAMA 1994;272:1367–71.
17. DePoy E, Gitlin LN. Introduction to research: multiple strategies for
health and human services. St. Louis: Mosby-Year Book, Inc; 1993.
p. 61–76.
18. Oxman AD. Systematic reviews: checklists for review articles. BMJ
1994;309:648–51.
113
Volume 5 • Number 3 • Fall 2006
19. Chalmers I, Altman DG. Systematic reviews. London: BMJ Publishing
Group; 1995.
20. Mulrow CD. The medical review article: state of the science. Ann In-
tern Med 1987;106:485–488.
21. Ball C, Sackett D, Phillips B, Haynes B, Straus S. Levels of Evidence and
Grades of Recommendations. Centre for Evidence Based Medicine
(cited 1999 Nov 18]. Available from: URL: http://cebm.jr2.ox.ac.uk/
docs/levels.html
22. Friedland DJ, et al. Evaluating integrative literature. In: Friedland DJ,
editor. Evidence-based medicine: a framework for clinincal practice.
Stamford, CT: Appleton & Lange; 1998. p. 221–46.
23. Sackett DL, Straus SE, Richardson WS, Rosenberg W, Haynes RB. Evi-
dence-based medicine: how to practice and teach EBM. 2nd ed. Ed-
inburgh: Chuchill Livingstone; 2000. p. 133–8.
24. Polgar S, Thomas SA. Introduction to research in the health sciences,
3rd ed. Melbourne: Churchill Livingstone; 1995. p. 343–55.
114
25. Lau J, Ioannidis JPA, Schmid CH. Summing up evidence: one answer
is not always enough. Lancet 1998;351:123–7.
26. Chalmers I. Applying overviews and meta-analyses at the bedside: dis-
cussion. J Clin Epidemiol 1995;48:67–70.
27. Olkin I. Statistical and theoretical considerations in meta-analysis. J
Clin Epidemiol 1995;48:133–46.
28. Lawrence DJ, Mootz RD. Research Agenda Conference 3: editor’s pre-
sentation: streamlining manuscript submission to scientific journals.
J Neuromusculosket Syst 1998;6:161–7.
29. Green BN, Johnson CD. Writing patient case reports for peer reviewed
journals: secrets of the trade. J Sports Chiropr Rehabil 2000;14:51–9.
30. Sackett DL. How to read clinical journals: I. Why to read them and how
to start reading them critically. CMAJ 1981;124:555–8.
31. Lawrence DJ. Structured abstracts and the JMPT. J Manipulative Phys-
iol Ther 1992;15:77–82.
32. Willis JC. Notes for authors. Chiropr Hist 2000;20:5.
 Fall 2006 • Number 3 • Volume 5

Appendix A
Narrative Overview Rating Scale

Circle the number that you feel is appropriate for the paper that you are reading:
1 = Absent 2 = Present but not complete 3 = Present and complete

Initial Impression

1 2 3 Does the review appear to be relvant to an issue of interest (18, 30)?

Abstract

1 2 3 Is the specific purpose of the review stated (3, 15)?

1 2 3 Is context for the overview provided?
1 2 3 Is the type of research design stated?
1 2 3 Are the search methods clearly summarized?
1 2 3 Are the important findings clearly discussed?
1 2 3 Are the major conclusions and recommendations clearly outlined?

Introduction

1 2 3 Is the specific purpose of the review clearly stated based upon a brief review of the literature
(1, 3, 18, 24)?
1 2 3 Is the need/importance and context of this study established (2, 11, 24)?
1 2 3 Are novel terms defined (10, 29)?

Methods

1 2 3 Were the electronic databases used to conduct the literature searches identified (MEDLINE,
CINAHL, etc.) (3, 13, 17)?
1 2 3 Were the search years stated?
1 2 3 Were the search terms stated (3)?
1 2 3 Were standard terms used as search terms, including Medical Subject Headings (17)?
1 2 3 Were the guidelines for including and excluding articles in the literature review clearly
identified (10, 18, 22)?

Discussion

1 2 3 Were the results summarized in a comprehensible manner (3, 10)?

1 2 3 Was the critical appraisal of each study the same and reproducible (11, 13, 22)?
1 2 3 Was the quality of the included articles assessed objectively (3, 11, 13)?
1 2 3 Was the variation in the findings of the studies critically analyzed (1, 10, 13, 22)?
1 2 3 Were the meaning of the results addressed (3)?
1 2 3 Do the authors tie in the results of the study with previous research in a meaningful manner
(1, 3, 10)?
1 2 3 Were the weak points and untoward events that occurred during the course of the study
addressed by the authors (1, 3)?

Conclusions

1 2 3 Was a clear summary of pertinent findings provided (10)?

1 2 3 Were the authors’ conclusions supported by the evidence provided (1, 3, 13, 18)?
1 2 3 Were specific directives for new research initiatives proposed?
1 2 3 Specific implications to the practice environment are addressed (3).

115
Volume 5 • Number 3 • Fall 2006

References

1 2 3 Are references relevant, current and appropriate in number (11)?

1 2 3 Are all papers reviewed cited in the references (1)?

Overall Impressions

1 2 3 Do the merits of this review of the literature outweigh the flaws?

1 2 3 Were the authors unbiased in their approach to the review (11, 18)?
1 2 3 Will the results of the paper help me in my philosophical or evidence based approach to
patient care (18, 22)?

Comments & Notes:

116

Appendix B
Additional Suggested Readings on
Literature Reviews
Compiled by Alan Adams, DC, MS, MSEd
Books
Chalmers I, Altman DG. Systematic reviews. Lon-
don: BMJ Publishing Group; 1995.
Cooper H, Hedges LV. The handbook of research
synthesis. New York: Russell Sage Foundation;
1994.
Cooper H. Synthesizing research: a guide for litera-
ture reviews. 3rd ed. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publi-
cations; 1998.
Fink A. Conducting research literature reviews:
from paper to the internet. Thousand Oaks: Sage
Publications; 1998.
Garrard J. Health sciences literature review made
easy: the matrix method. Gaithersburg: Aspen
Publications; 1999.
Goodman C. Literature searching and evidence in-
terpretation for assessing healthcare practices.
Stockholm: SBU: The Swedish Council on Tech-
nology Assessment in Healthcare; 1993.
Light RJ, Pillemer DB. Summing up: the science of
reviewing research. Cambridge: Harvard Univer-
sity Press; 1984.
Mulrow C, Cook D. Systematic reviews: synthesis of
best evidence for healthcare decisions. Philadel-
phia: American College of Physicians; 1998.
NHS Center for Reviews and Dissemination. Under-
taking Systematic Reviews of Research on Effec-
tiveness: CRD Guidelines for Those Carrying Out
or Commissioning Reviews. CRD Report 4, NHS
CRD, University of York, York, UK; 1996.
Oxman AD. The Cochrane Collaboration handbook:
preparing and maintaining systematic reviews.
2nd ed. Oxford: Cochrane Collaboration; 1996.
Journal Articles
Abramson JH. Meta-analysis: a review of pros and
cons. Public Health Rev 1990–91;18(1):1–47.
Fall 2006 • Number 3 • Volume 5
Clark MJ, Stewart LA. Obtaining data from ran-
domised controlled trials: how much do we need
for reliable and informative meta-analyses? BMJ
1994;309:1007–1010.
Crombie IK, McQuay H. The systematic review: a
good guide rather than guarantee. Pain 1998; 76:
1–2.
Dickersin K, Berlin JA. Meta-analysis: state of the
science. Epidemiol Rev 1992;14:154–76.
Dickersin K, Scherer R, LeFebvre C. Identifying rel-
evant studies for systematic reviews. BMJ 1994;
309:1286–91.
de Vet HCW. Systematic reviews on the basis of
methodological criteria. Physiotherapy 1997;
83(6):284–289.
Egger M, Smith GD, Phillips AN. Meta-analysis:
principles and procedures. BMJ 1997;315:1533–
1537.
Eysenck HJ. Meta-analysis and its problems. BMJ
1994;309:789–792.
Moher D, Cook DJ, Jadad AR, Tugwell P, Moher M,
Jones A, et al. Assessing the quality of reports of
randomised trials: implications for the conduct of
meta-analyses. Health Technol Assess 1999;3(12):
i-iv, 1–98.
Mosteller F, Colditz GA. Understanding research
synthesis (meta-analysis). Annu Rev Public
Health 1996;17:1–23.
Mulrow CD. Rationale for systematic reviews. BMJ
1994;309: 597–599. Rationale for systematic re-
views. Peto R. Why do we need systematic over-
views of randomized trials? Stat Med 1987;6(3):
233–240.
Thacker SB. Meta-analysis: a quantitative approach
to research integration. JAMA 1988;259: 1685–
1689.
Thompson SG. Why sources of heterogeneity in
meta-analysis should be investigated. BMJ 1994;
309:1351–1355.
Zwarenstein M, Volmink J, Irwig L, Chalmers I.
Systematic review: ‘state of the science’ health-
care decision-making. S Afr Med J 1995;85(12):
1266–1267.
117
 CONTOH

META REVIEW PAPER

Article

Exergy-Based Analysis and Optimization of an

Integrated Solar Combined-Cycle Power Plant
Louay Elmorsy 1, Tatiana Morosuk 2,* and George Tsatsaronis 2
1 Energy Engineering Department, Campus El Gouna, Technische Universität Berlin, Ackerstraße 76, 13355
Berlin, Germany; louay.elmorsy@tu-berlin.de
2 Institute for Energy Engineering, Technische Universität Berlin, Marchstraße 18, 10587 Berlin, Germany;

georgios.tsatsaronis@tu-berlin.de
* Correspondence: tetyana.morozyuk@tu-berlin.de; Tel.: +49-3-0314-24765

Received: 14 May 2020; Accepted: 10 June 2020; Published: 13 June 2020

Abstract: The transition towards higher shares of electricity generation from renewable energy
sources is shown to be significantly slower in developing countries with low-cost fossil fuel
resources. Integrating conventional power plants with concentrated solar power may facilitate the
transition towards a more sustainable power production. In this paper, a novel natural gas-fired
integrated solar combined-cycle power plant was proposed, evaluated, and optimized with exergy-
based methods. The proposed system utilizes the advantages of combined-cycle power plants,
direct steam generation, and linear Fresnel collectors to provide 475 MW baseload power in Aswan,
Egypt. The proposed system is found to reach exergetic efficiencies of 50.7% and 58.1% for day and
night operations, respectively. In economic analysis, a weighted average levelized cost of electricity
of 40.0 $/MWh based on the number of day and night operation hours is identified. In
exergoeconomic analysis, the costs of thermodynamic inefficiencies were identified and compared
to the component cost rates. Different measures for component cost reduction and performance
enhancement were identified and applied. Using iterative exergoeconomic optimization, the
levelized cost of electricity is reduced to a weighted average of 39.2 $/MWh and a specific
investment cost of 1088 $/kW. Finally, the proposed system is found to be competitive with existing
integrated solar combined-cycle plants, while allowing a significantly higher solar share of 17% of
the installed capacity.

Keywords: integrated solar combined-cycle; linear fresnel collectors; direct steam generation;
exergoeconomic optimization

1. Introduction
It is a fact that the global energy sector is in a transitional phase towards a higher share of
renewable energy supply. Many countries, in particular in the Middle East and North Africa (MENA)
region, have decent potential for deploying concentrated solar power (CSP) with a direct normal
irradiance (DNI) of up to 2500 kWh/m2a, but face many challenges in introducing such systems owing
to their high capital investment cost, technological advancement, as well as lack of supporting
regulations and financial incentives. Solar energy technologies without storage cannot compete with
conventional baseload plants owing to their intermittent nature. In many countries in the MENA
region, such as Egypt, the operation policy of the existing thermal power plants is based on
considering natural gas as the primary fuel owing to its evident economic and environmental
advantages, representing more than 80% of the installed capacity in the past years [1].
Thermal energy conversion enables CSP plants the great advantage to offer dispatching power
and increase the system capacity factor when integrated with either thermal energy storage or

Entropy 2020, 22, 655; doi:10.3390/e22060655 www.mdpi.com/journal/entropy

Entropy 2020, 22, 655 2 of 20

conventional fuels [2,3]. To provide reasonable storage durations, the integration of thermal energy
storage (TES) necessitates the oversizing of the solar field, which implies an even bigger capital
investment associated with TES and the solar field. The integration of CSP with fossil fuels paves the
way for development and investment in CSP technology at a moderate marginal cost. This can lead
to cost regression of the technology and expedite the transition towards pure concentrated solar
power plants in the region, for example, through local manufacturing. Both Egypt and Morocco were
identified to offer the highest manufacturing attractiveness for CSP components in the MENA region
[4,5]. In such hybrid plants, solar energy reduces the fossil fuel consumption, until pure CSP becomes
more cost competitive and large storage capacities are well established and their investment costs
decrease. A significant increase in the solar plants’ share in total electricity generation can then take
place.
These hybridized systems can be referred to as integrated solar combined-cycle (ISCC) power
plants. ISCC power plants represent the most efficient integration of fossil and solar resources for
baseload power generation [6]. Natural gas-fired combined-cycle power plants (NG-CCPPs) are
widely known to reach the highest efficiencies of up to 63%, as reported for HL-Class Siemens AG
turbine [7]. Although NG-CCPPs operate by fossil fuel combustion, they are considered as the
cleanest conventional power generation technology. Apart from natural gas, an ISCC plant has a
second source of thermal energy, which is represented by the solar field. ISCC plants have a similar
arrangement of components as regular NG-CCPPs. Yet, the solar field technology and location could
differ, and depend on the assigned purpose: as economizers, evaporators, and/or superheaters of the
steam cycle.
Linear Fresnel collectors (LFCs) are less expensive compared with parabolic trough collectors
(PTCs), and offer maturity especially with direct steam generation (DSG) [8]. DSG is a technology
receiving much attention from the research community [9]. DSG refers to steam generation inside the
solar field, thus avoiding additional heat exchangers between the heat transfer fluid (HTF) and steam
cycle, accordingly reducing the power plant configuration complexity and avoiding additional
irreversibilities. DSG reaches higher temperatures that are difficult to achieve using synthetic oil, thus
the overall plant efficiency can be higher. From the economic viewpoint, beside cost reductions
attributed to using less heat exchangers, it also means further cost reduction by avoiding the use of
expensive HTFs as synthetic oil. Operation and maintenance costs are also lower than those of
synthetic oil-based plants as auxiliary heating systems are not needed. Finally, from the
environmental viewpoint, major environmental hazards such as leakage and fire of HTF are avoided
[9–11].
In particular, LFC technology integration with NG-CCPPs may enable ISCC plants to reach
competitive costs and offer a more environmentally friendly solution as baseload power plants for
developing countries with significant natural gas and solar resources (for example, Egypt).

2. Literature Review
As ISCC power plants use the advantages of both the currently most efficient energy conversion
system and the renewable energy conversion technology with the highest potential capacity factor
(concentrated solar power), the technology is considered to be a cost-effective baseload alternative to
expedite the transition from conventional energy generation to a more sustainable generation. In
recent years, great interest has arisen in quantifying the advantages of ISCC systems.
Alqahtani and Echeverri [12] conducted a study on ISCC technology comparing five different
locations in the USA with different solar irradiance, temperatures, NG prices, capacity factors, tax
incentives, and capital costs. The study showed that integrating CSP with NG-CCPP reduces the
levelized cost of electricity (LCOE) by 35–40% if compared with standalone CSP, also taking
dispatchability into account. The analysis also showed that ISCC has more economic advantages in
harnessing solar energy than standalone CSP with or without thermal energy storage. However, if
ISCC is compared to NG-CCPP under the current NG prices, “carbon prices”, or high subsidies,
CCPP would produce electricity at a lower cost.
Entropy 2020, 22, 655 3 of 20

Achieving higher capacity factors in solar plants or capital investment cost reductions of
concentrated solar power components will favor the ISCC [12]. Nowadays, great attention is paid to
developing NG-fired ISCC plants utilizing DSG technology. This technology is expected to lead not
only to low cost electricity, but also process heating [13]. Nezammahalleh et al. [14] investigated three
different types of CSP plants, including two ISCC plants using DSG and another using an HTF, and
showed that the DSG-ISCC plant produces electricity at a 2.4% lower cost than that of the
HTF-ISCC plant owing to the lower investment cost and higher efficiency. The study also showed
that DSG-ISCC plants consume less fuel than HTF-ISCC plants, consequently saving more money
and producing less CO2 emissions. The study suggests that DSG-ISCC is the best option for arid
countries that are rich in natural gas resources [14].
Rovira et al. [15] presented the research on different configurations of ISCCs. Solar integration
was considered using both HTF and DSG technologies. Each technology comprised four different
arrangements for the solar heat integration in the CCPP—the different arrangements included
utilizing the solar heat for (a) preheating and evaporation; (b) only evaporation; (c) evaporation and
superheating; and lastly (d) preheating, evaporation, and superheating. The authors emphasized the
importance of using the solar field for steam generation. The study concluded that the DSG-ISCC is
the better option and strongly penalized the HTF-ISCC as it required an additional steam generator
[15]. A limitation of the study is the consideration of only the PTCs, without considering other CSP
technologies.
Before the implementation of Kuraymat in 2004—the only ISCC plant in Egypt—Horn et al. [16]
conducted a feasibility study to select the suitable ISCC configuration under given local conditions.
The study compared two arrangements of ISCC, PTC with HTF and solar tower technology with air
as working fluid, with the former having solar input of 90 MWth and the latter 80 MWth. Both plants
were designed having 127 MW capacity. The study concluded that the PTC-ISCC results in similar
LCOE than that of the air solar tower (29–38 $2018/kWh), but produces 200 tons less CO2 per year [16].
The study did not consider other CSP technologies.
A number of utility-scale ISCC projects exist in the world, see Table 1. With exception of the
Dadri project, which utilizes LFC technology, all reviewed ISCC plants (operating and under
construction) use PTCs and HTF.

Table 1. Selected integrated solar combined-cycle (ISCC) power plants. PTC, parabolic trough
collector; LFC, linear Fresnel collector.

Capacity Solar Share

Plant Name Country Technology Starting Date Source
[MW] [MW]
1 Ain Beni Mathar Morocco PTC 470 20 October 2010 [17]
2 Hassi R’mel Algeria PTC 150 20 July 2011 [11]
3 Kuraymat Egypt PTC 140 20 June 2011 [17]
Martin Next Generation
4 USA PTC 3780 75 December 2010 [11]
Solar Energy Center
5 Yazd Iran PTC 467 17 August 2010 [18]
6 Duba 1 Saudi Arabia PTC 550 43 UC 1 [19]
7 Waad Al Shamal Saudi Arabia PTC 1390 50 July 2018 [19,20]
8 Dadri India LFC 1820 14 UC 1 [19,21]
1 Under construction.

A comparative life cycle assessment of the four types of CSP plants was presented by Kuenlin et
al. [22]. The study concluded that the PTC plant is the one with the worst environmental performance
among the considered CSP technologies as a result of using the synthetic oil as the network HTF and
the molten salt storage system. With the aid of direct steam generation, the utilization of a hazardous
HTF can be avoided. One of the most important features of the DSG technology is operating the plant
at a higher temperature and pressure of the fluid inside the collector tubes without the limitations of
using a heat transfer oil [23]. DSG, in the commonly used line-focusing solar collector technology
PTC, was shown to be technically challenging, for example, owing to the constant motion of the
Entropy 2020, 22, 655 4 of 20

whole collector (mirrors and receiver) and the high operating temperatures and pressures, meaning
that the receiver tubes and interconnection between collectors are very critical components that still
require experimental validation [24]. Thanks to its static design, linear Fresnel collector technology is
not only cheaper, less technically challenging, and easier to maintain [25], but also more mature with
DSG. According to a study conducted by the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL), there
is a growing interest in LFC using DSG to. utilities in the united states as a candidate for integration
with CCPP [26]. Moreover, the use of LFC was emphasized to be particularly relevant for ISCC
systems [12,13].
A single-objective exergoeconomic optimization using genetic algorithm applied to an ISCC
(having the same configuration as Yazd power plant in Iran) was presented by Baghernejad and
Yaghoubi [27]. The power plant works with PTC that uses Therminol VP-1 as HTC. The objective
function, which is the cost of product, decreased by 11% from 58.8 to 53.0 $/MWh at the expense of
an increase of 13.3% in the capital investment. The exergetic efficiency also increased from 43.8% to
46.8% [27]. The same authors published another optimization study for the same ISCC power plant
using a multi-objective approach to eliminate the shortcomings of the first study by satisfying both
the exergetic and economic objectives [28]. The findings are as follows: increase in the exergetic
efficiency by 3.2% and decrease in the cost of the product by 3.8% [29].
The reviewed literature confirmed that ISCC merges the advantages offered by both NG-CCPPs
and CSP plants. A number of system configurations, solar collector technologies, working fluids, and
operation ranges were discussed and analyzed. Yet, no optimal system configuration could be
derived from the reviewed literature. Taking into account the identified economic edge of LFC
technology over other CSP technologies, as well as its maturity with DSG, enabling higher efficiencies
and minimizing environmental risks, the presented research aims to identify an optimal ISCC system
configuration. An optimized ISCC configuration making use of the advantages of LFC and DSG
could reach cost competitiveness in the MENA region. In this paper, a special ISCC configuration
utilizing LFC and DSG is presented and analyzed using exergetic, economic, and exergoeconomic
analysis. An optimized system is derived with the help of a single-objective iterative exergoeconomic
optimization.

3. Methodology
In this paper, the design, analysis, and optimization of an integrated solar combined-cycle power
plant is presented. The proposed system design was simulated using software with industrial
application. The results obtained in the simulation were further analyzed using exergy, economic and
exergoeconomic analysis. On the basis of the results, a single-objective iterative and knowledge-based
exergoeconomic optimization was applied, aiming to minimize the ISCC systems LCOE.

3.1. Design and Simulation

The proposed configuration of the base case ISCC system is based on the parallel connection
between the solar field and the gas turbine as shown in Figure 1. The high pressure superheated
steam is partially generated by the high-temperature gas turbine exhaust in the heat recovery steam
generator (HRSG) and partially inside the solar field during day operation. However, during night
operation in the absence of solar radiation, steam is generated as a result of only the gas-turbine
exhaust gases.
The installed capacity (𝑃𝑖𝑛𝑠𝑡 ) of the ISCC plant was selected to be 475 MW based on the gas
turbine SGT5-4000F from Siemens AG [30]. The gas turbine system is the largest source of electricity
in the ISCC. The compression ratio of the gas turbine system is 18.0:1 and 20.1:1 for day and night
operations, respectively. The air to fuel ratio (λ = 2.516) is regulated by a controller to achieve a
constant gas expander outlet temperature of 600 °C during both operations. Consequently, an
adiabatic temperature of the combustion process of 1287 °C and 1334 °C are achieved for both day
and night operations, respectively.
The steam turbine block is the second largest source of electricity production in the ISCC. The
Siemens AG steam turbine SST-3000 is selected, which covers the power output range from 90 to
Entropy 2020, 22, 655 5 of 20

250 MW with steam condition of up to 177 bar and 565 °C and reheat of up to 610 °C [30]. In the
proposed ISCC design, the steam turbine operates with high, intermediate, and low pressure levels,
which operate at 170 bar, 80 bar, and 9.5 bar, respectively, during night operation, and 156.8 bar,
74 bar, and 15 bar, respectively, during day operation.
Direct steam generation was selected as the solar thermal conversion method, using water
(steam) as the working fluid of the power cycle. This selection was based on a number of advantages:
 Achieving higher temperatures and pressures than with common HTF;
 Despite higher thermal losses in the solar field, the lack of a secondary working fluid improves
the efficiency of the power cycle [24,31].

Figure 1. Schematic of the integrated solar combined-cycle (ISCC) using EBSILON® Professional.

The LFC consists of vacuum tube absorbers and is simulated as a once-through system where
the preheated water is economized, evaporated, and superheated inside the collector tubes. The
steam is produced at 50 bar and 500 °C.
For reducing part-load losses that would result in a drop in the efficiency of the high- and
intermediate-pressure (HP and IP) turbines during absence of solar heat, a separate solar steam
turbine was allocated to expand the superheated stream at 50 bar provided by the LFC and bypass
the low-pressure (LP) and IP turbines. The exiting steam to be directly fed at 15 bar to the low-
pressure (LP) turbine. The Siemens AG steam turbine SST-300 size 40 was selected. The solar turbine
is suitably designed for CSP applications allowing short start-up times and quick load changes, and
guaranteeing high efficiency over a wide range of operation modes. The turbine is also suitable for
DSG applications [32]. The solar steam turbine output power is up to 25 MW and the steam inlet
pressure is up to 140 bar [33]. During day operation, the turbine output power is 24 MW as a result
of the steam supplied to it from the solar field. However, the solar share is equivalent to 17% of the
total plant installed capacity (representing 81 MW after accounting for the steam being fed to the LP
turbine) under full-load operation at design point direct normal irradiance (DNI) of 850 W/m2.
The highest performance is reached by ISCCs configurations that reduce the irreversibilities in
the HRSG [15]. Hence, special attention is paid during the design phase for making use of the exergy
Entropy 2020, 22, 655 6 of 20

of the exhaust gases in the HRSG. During both day and night operations, the exhaust gas
temperatures to the environment are 98 °C and 106 °C, respectively.
Critics of solar plants state that the technology is not sustainable as they consume large amounts
of water, although they are installed in desert regions that do not have such resources. Moreover,
wet-cooled plants are more efficient than dry-cooled plants [34]. However, dry cooling of the
condenser can reduce water consumption by up to 95% [35,36]. Depending on the availability of
water at any site, the condenser is either dry or wet cooled.
The proposed plant location is the city of Aswan, Egypt. Although the city is located on the river
Nile, an air-cooled condenser (ACC) was simulated to investigate its performance in the ISCC as
water is highly variable, limited, and becoming a major challenge facing Egypt [37]. The mass flow
rate of the cooling air is regulated by a controller to keep the temperature at the outlet of the
condenser below 40 °C.
To have a constant output power of 475 MW, the fuel consumption reaches 13.7 kg/s during the
day operation and reaches its maximum of 15.8 kg/s during the night operation. The NG lower
heating value (LHV) is assumed as 50,015 kJ/kg. The contribution of the solar thermal energy
(𝑄𝑠𝑜𝑙 = 243 MWth) in the total heating load is measured by its share in the system’s total heat input
(𝑄𝑓 + 𝑄𝑠𝑜𝑙 ) and is calculated as 26%, as defined in Equation (1) [38].
𝑄̇𝑠𝑜𝑙 𝑄̇𝑠𝑜𝑙 (1)
𝑋𝑠𝑜𝑙 = = .
𝑄̇𝑓 + 𝑄̇𝑠𝑜𝑙 𝑚𝑓 . 𝐿𝐻𝑉 + 𝑄̇𝑠𝑜𝑙
The ratio between the effective solar thermal energy that is transferred to the working fluid
( 𝑄𝑒𝑓𝑓 = 205 MWth) and the heat of the gas turbine system (after the combustion process) is
approximately 21%. The ratio between the effective thermal energy from the solar field and the power
plant net electrical output is around 43%.
The ISCC power plant was modelled with the help of the simulation program
EBSILON® Professional version 14.02 [39]. The modelling of the steam cycle is based on the
IAPWS1-IF-97 (International Association for the Properties of Water and Steam) properties, while for
the exhaust gases, the ideal gas properties without real gas corrections are used. The configuration
was simulated in day and night operation modes under steady-state conditions. The night operation
is considered as the reference design case for the simulation as the gas turbine system, which provides
around two-thirds of the total system capacity, is working at its full-load. The day operation is a
sub-profile from the night operation. A relative humidity of 34.8% is used. The main differences
between day and night operations are the contribution of the solar field and the average ambient
temperature of 27.4 °C and 13.0 °C, respectively [40]. The technical data used for simulation are
summarized in Table 2.

Table 2. Technical data for simulation. ACC, air-cooled condenser; DNI, direct normal irradiance;
LHV, lower heating value.

Unit Night Day Unit Night Day

General Solar field
Capacity MW 475 Peak optical efficiency % 68
Humidity % 34.8 Design point DNI W/m2 - 850
Ambient temp. °C 13 27.4 Steam temp. °C - 500
Fuel LHV kJ/kg 50,015 Outlet pressure bar - 50
Fuel flow rate kg/s 15.8 13.7 Collector pressure loss bar - 10
Exhaust gases temp. °C 106 98 Solar share % - 17
Gas turbine system Steam cycle
Exp. isentropic eff. % 92 Turbines isentropic eff. % 88
Comp. isentropic eff. % 90 High pressure bar 170 156.8
Compression ratio - 20.0:1 18.0:1 Intermediate pressure bar 80 74
Air to fuel ratio - 2.516 Low pressure bar 9.5 15
Turbine inlet temp. °C 1334 1287 ACC pressure bar 0.097
Entropy 2020, 22, 655 7 of 20

Turbine outlet temp. °C 600 ACC exhaust temp. °C 40

3.2. Exergy Analysis

In the exergy analysis, the physical and chemical exergies were considered for calculating the
total exergy of streams. The physical exergy (𝑒𝑗𝑃𝐻 ) was calculated according to Equation (2) and the
values are extracted directly from EBSILON® Professional. Here, ℎ, 𝑇, and 𝑠 denote the enthalpy,
temperature, and entropy, respectively. Moreover, the subscripts j and 0 denote a given and reference
state, respectively.
𝑒𝑗𝑃𝐻 = (ℎ𝑗 − ℎ0 ) − 𝑇0 (𝑠𝑗 − 𝑠0 ). (2)

For the calculation of the chemical exergies (𝑒𝑗𝐶𝐻 ), the model of Ahrendts [41] was used. In order
to apply the exergy analysis on components and system level, the exergy of fuel (Ė𝐹 ) and exergy of
product (Ė𝑃 ) approach was applied in accordance with Bejan et al. [42]. An exergy balance could be
seen in Equation (3), which could be applied on both the components and system level, where (Ė𝐷 )
denotes the exergy destruction and the exergy losses (Ė𝐿 ) are only considered for the overall system.
Ė𝐹 = Ė𝑃 + Ė𝐷 + Ė𝐿 . (3)

The exergetic efficiency (ε) is the ratio between Ė𝑃 and Ė𝐹 for either the components or the
whole system, as seen in Equation (4). The exergy of fuel for the proposed ISCC includes both the
exergy supplied by the NG and the exergy of the solar heat. The solar exergy could be calculated
using the simplified Equation (5) presented in [43]. 𝑇𝑠𝑢𝑛 is the surface temperature of the sun
(5679 K).
Ė𝑃 (4)
𝜀= ,
Ė𝐹

4 𝑇0 (5)
Ė𝑠𝑜𝑙 = 𝑄̇𝑠𝑜𝑙 (1 − ),
3 𝑇𝑠𝑢𝑛
The air-cooled condenser (ACC) is considered as a dissipative component as exergy is only destroyed
and transferred to the environment without obtaining a useful exergetic product for the component
itself, but the component is essential for the thermodynamic cycle of the ISCC. Thus, no exergetic
efficiency could be defined for the ACC.
After extracting the steams’ physical properties from EBSILON® Professional, the exergy analysis
was conducted using the Visual Basic for Applications (VBA) tool embedded in Microsoft Excel.
Exergy analysis was applied to the system separately for day and night operations. The analysis
resulted in the overall system and components exergy destruction values and exergetic efficiencies,
as well as other exergetic variables.

3.3. Economic Analysis

An economic analysis was conducted to estimate the total project expenditures. The total
revenue requirement (TRR) method was applied [42]. The cost estimating charts presented in [44]
were used to estimate the purchase costs of ISCC components. The specific investment cost of the
LFC solar field was considered as 152 €/m2 according to [45]. The ACC was estimated with
120,000 $/MWth based on a reference specific investment cost presented by [46].
The fixed capital investment (FCI) was estimated through the total components’ cost, offsite
costs, and contingences. The offsite costs include service facilities as well as civil and architectural
work, and were estimated as 12% of the total components’ cost. Contingencies were estimated as 10%
of the components’ cost. Startup costs and working capital were estimated as 7% and 5% of the FCI,
respectively. Allowance for funds used during construction (AFUDC) were estimated based on three
installments over the period of 3 years—40%, 40%, and 20% of the FCI in addition to their interest.
Summation of the FCI, startup costs, working capital, and AFUDC resulted in the total capital
investment (TCI) of the ISCC.
Entropy 2020, 22, 655 8 of 20

Financing was assumed to be in $US with an inflation rate of 1.56%, which is a 10-year
(2009–2018) average [47]. Moreover, a 10-year average value was used for the exchange rate between
Euro and USD (1.28 €/USD). The interest rate consists of a base interest rate of 2%, which is the $US
LIBOR plus 6% interest rate margin for the lenders, which is a slightly high owing to the use of the
linear Fresnel technology that is considered still to be relatively new, summing up to the total interest
rate of 8%. Other important economic assumptions are the following: natural gas price of 3 $/MMBtu,
which is the current natural gas price in Egypt for electricity production purposes [48]; an average
nominal escalation rate of 3%; plant capacity factor of 80%; and 20 years as the economic lifetime. The
economic analysis resulted in, among others, the TRR, the specific investment cost of the plant, and
the cost rate associated with the investment and the operation and maintenance cost (Ż), which will
be used as input for the exergoeconomic analysis. Ż is either the components’ or total system cost
rate, as shown in Equations (6) and (7). All costs in the economic analysis are in U.S. Dollars and
reflected to the year 2018.
𝐶𝐶𝐿 𝐶𝑀𝑘 𝑂𝑀𝐶𝐿 𝐶𝑀𝑘 (6)
𝑍̇𝑘 = 𝑍̇𝑘𝐶𝐼 + 𝑍̇𝑘𝑂𝑀 = + ,
𝜏 ∑𝑛 𝐶𝑀𝑛 𝜏 ∑𝑛 𝐶𝑀𝑛

𝑍̇𝑡𝑜𝑡 = ∑ 𝑍̇𝑘 , (7)

The levelized total revenue required ( 𝑇𝑅𝑅𝐿 ) was estimated through the levelized carrying
charges (𝐶𝐶𝐿 ), the levelized operation and maintenance costs (𝑂𝑀𝐶𝐿 ), and the levelized fuel costs
(𝐹𝐶𝐿 ); see Equation (8). The 𝐶𝐶𝐿 was estimated through the TCI and the capital recovery factor,
which is calculated through the interest rate and the economic lifetime. The 𝑂𝑀𝐶𝐿 was estimated
based on 5% of the FCI and the general constant escalation levelization factor (CELF), which is
calculated through the inflation rate, the interest rate, and the economic lifetime. The 𝐹𝐶𝐿 was
estimated based on the above mentioned NG price and the fuel CELF, which is calculated with the
same assumption as the general CELF except for the use of the NG escalation rate instead of the
currency inflation rate.
𝑇𝑅𝑅𝐿 = 𝐶𝐶𝐿 + 𝑂𝑀𝐶𝐿 + 𝐹𝐶𝐿 , (8)

For estimating the corresponding LCOE for day and night operations separately, Equation (9)
was used taking into account the percentages of 46% and 54% of the annual full load hours (FLHs),
respectively.
𝑇𝑅𝑅𝐿 (9)
𝐿𝐶𝑂𝐸 = .
𝑃𝑖𝑛𝑠𝑡 ∙ 𝐹𝐿𝐻
A weighted average LCOE between both operations was estimated using both operations’ LCOE
and their corresponding operation shares.

3.4. Exergoeconomic Analysis and Optimization

When exergy and cost are considered for conducting a thermoeconomic analysis, the term
thermoeconomic changes to exergoeconomic [42]. Exergoeconomic analysis was further applied to
the evaluated ISCC design. The exergy costing principle was applied on both the system and
components level, in accordance with [42]. With the help of the fuel and product principal presented
in [49], the auxiliary equations were obtained.
The cost of each stream associated with its exergy rate was calculated according to Equation (10),
where Ċ𝑗 is the cost rate of the j-th stream, Ė𝑗 is the exergy rate of the j-th stream, and c𝑗 is the
specific cost per unit of exergy.
Ċ𝑗 = c𝑗 Ė𝑗 . (10)

Cost balancing equations were defined for all ISCC components as well as the whole system in
accordance with Equation (11), where Ċ𝑃 refers to the cost of the product, Ċ𝐹 is the cost of fuel, and
Entropy 2020, 22, 655 9 of 20

Ċ𝐿 is the cost of losses. Ċ𝐿 is only considered for the complete system and is calculated according to
Equation (12), where c𝐹,𝑡𝑜𝑡 is the specific fuel cost of the ISCC.
Ċ𝑃 = Ċ𝐹 + Ż − Ċ𝐿 , (11)

Ċ𝐿 = c𝐹,𝑡𝑜𝑡 Ė𝐿 . (12)

The cost rate associated with the exergy destruction (ĊD ) for the components and the whole
system was calculated as per Equation (13). Exception was made only for the solar field where the
specific cost of product (c𝑃 ) was used instead of the specific cost of fuel (c𝐹 ).
Ċ𝐷 = c𝐹 Ė𝐷 . (13)

The LCOE was also calculated by means of the exergoeconomic analysis according to Equation
(14). The LCOE resulting from the exergoeconomic analysis must be the same as that resulting from
the economic analysis. The Ċ𝐴𝐶𝐶 is the cost difference of the ACC and should be charged to the LCOE
as no product cost was calculated for such dissipative component, as no exergetic product was
defined. However, the cost associated with the capital investment, operation and maintenance, and
Ė𝐷 of the ACC should be included in the ISCC’s final product cost.
Ċ𝑃 + Ċ𝐿 + Ċ𝐴𝐶𝐶 (14)
𝐿𝐶𝑂𝐸 = .
𝐸̇𝑃
Other important factors such as the exergoeconomic factor (𝑓𝑘 ) and the relative cost difference
(𝑟𝑘 ) were also obtained. The 𝑓𝑘 identify the major cost source, whether it is the cost rate related to the
component investment and operation and maintenance or related to its exergy destruction as seen in
Equation (15). However, the relative cost difference 𝑟𝑘 expresses the relative increase in the average
cost per exergy unit between fuel (𝑐𝐹,𝑘 ) and product (𝑐𝑃,𝑘 ) of any component, as in Equation (16). Both
are useful variables for evaluating and optimizing components in an iterative cost optimization of a
system.
Ż𝑘 (15)
𝑓𝑘 = ,
Ż𝑘 + 𝐸̇𝐷,𝑘

𝑐𝑃,𝑘 − 𝑐𝐹,𝑘
𝑟𝑘 = . (16)
𝑐𝐹,𝑘
The results of the exergoeconomic analysis were used to facilitate optimizing the ISCC. The
exergoeconomic optimization concept was used, which is a “knowledge-based” single-objective
optimization. The aim of the iterative exergoeconomic optimization is to maximize the cost
effectiveness of the ISCC by minimizing the system’s LCOE. Components to be optimized are
prioritized according to their sum of ĊD,k + Ż𝑘 . The corresponding exergoeconomic factor 𝑓𝑘 is an
indication of either low 𝜀𝑘 (high ĖD,k ) or high investment cost, and should be adjusted during the
optimization phase to reach a reduced LCOE.
Before starting the iterative optimization, variables that have significant influence on the system
thermodynamic performance and investment costs should be selected. Such variables are named
decision variables.

4. Results

4.1. Base Case

The exergy analysis results showed that the proposed ISCC base case reaches an exergetic
efficiency of 50.7% during daytime, which increases during night operation to 58.1%. The
components’ cost breakdown is shown in Figure 2. The four largest contributors to the total
components purchased cost are the solar field, ACC, expander, and compressor, representing 44%,
15%, 13%, and 7%, respectively, of a total of approximately $325 million. The economic assessment
Entropy 2020, 22, 655 10 of 20

resulted in a total capital investment of $518.3 million with a specific investment cost of 1091 $/kWex
and a levelized total revenue required of $133 million. The proposed ISCC reached a LCOE of the
base case design amounting to 38.2 $/MWh and 41.5 $/MWh during day and night operations,
respectively, resulting in a weighted average of 40.0 $/MWh based on the number of day and night
operation hours.
In order to optimize the system, the base case design was evaluated and the components were
prioritized according to their cost-importance for optimization. The components are ranked
according to their total cost rates (ĊD,k + Ż𝑘 ). The exergetic efficiencies Ɛ𝑘 , exergoeconomic factors 𝑓𝑘 ,
and component cost rates of the six highest ranked components of the ISCC system are given in Table 3.
On the basis of the necessary reduction in ĊD,k or Ż𝑘 , component parameters that should be changed
were identified. The identified decision variables are listed in Table 4.

LP Steam Turbine 2 HP Evaporator 2% IP Steam Turbine

4% 2% HP Economizer 2
Generator 1%
2% Combustion
Chamber
Compressor
1%
7%
Expander LP Evaporator
13% HP Superheater
1%

Solar Field Steam Turbine

HP Economizer 1 1%

Air Cooled Condenser LP Steam Turbine 1

Steam Turbines Generator
15%
1%
Other 6% HP Steam Turbine

LP Economizer

Reheater
Solar Field
44% Preheater

Pumps, Motors, Deaerator

Solar Field Generator

LP Superheater

Figure 2. Component’s cost breakdown. LP, low-pressure; IP, intermediate-pressure; HP, high-pressure.

Table 3. Components’ ranking according to the highest total cost rates. LP, low-pressure.

Ɛ𝒌 𝒇𝒌 Ċ𝐃,𝐤 + Ż𝒌
Rank Component
[%] [–] [$/h]
1 Solar Field 41.3 0.413 8251
2 Combustion Chamber 71.5 0.030 3530
3 Expander 96.4 0.660 1475
4 Air Cooled Condenser N.A.1 0.808 1414
5 Compressor 95.1 0.601 912
6 LP Steam Turbine 2 88.4 0.329 829
1 Dissipative component.

The solar field (SF) shows an exceptionally low exergetic efficiency of 41.3% and comes on top of
components that should be optimized owing to the very high cost rate value (8251 $/h). The solar
field contributes the highest ĊD as well as Ż𝑘 among all components. Having low 𝑓𝑘 indicates the
higher share of the component’s ĊD , thus an increase in the exergetic efficiency of the solar field is
expected during optimization. Changing the size of the solar field could be the most effective measure
to decrease the total cost rate of the component and increase the cost-effectiveness of the system. Yet,
it was decided to keep the solar field size unchanged and, instead, only operating parameters of the
Entropy 2020, 22, 655 11 of 20

solar field were manipulated in an attempt to increase its exergetic efficiency. The exergetic efficiency
of the solar field improves with increased temperature and pressure of the steam entering the LFC,
see Table 5.
The combustion chamber (CC) has the second highest cost rate among the components (3530 $/h)
with a low exergetic efficiency of 71.5%. The low 𝑓𝑘 indicates the large contribution of the ĊD and
its relatively negligible Ż𝑘 . Although the combustion process efficiency is limited owing large
irreversibilities as a result of chemical reaction, heat transfer, mixing, and friction, a small reduction
in its Ė𝐷 would yield a significant improvement in the system performance, as its Ė𝐷 contributes a
significant share in the total system Ė𝐷 . Hence, an improvement in its exergetic efficiency is
recommended, which may be achieved by increasing both the compressor pressure ratio πCM and
the gas turbine inlet temperature 𝑇𝐼𝑇.
The air-cooled condenser results in high Ż𝑘 compared with its ĊD , resulting in a high 𝑓𝑘 (0.808).
Thus, a reduction in investment cost of the ACC at the expense of a reduced exergetic efficiency
would be accepted to improve the cost-competitiveness of the ISCC system. The Ż𝐴𝐶𝐶 could be
reduced when changes are applied to the steam pressure 𝑝𝑆𝐹 and the condenser pressure 𝑝𝐶𝐷 , see
Table 4 and Table 5.
For the gas turbine expander (GT-EXP) and compressor (COMP), a reduction in the exergetic
efficiency would also be tolerated to reduce the overall components’ cost rate and the LCOE of the
system. Both components are influenced by the compressor pressure ratio πCM (Table 4). Both the
suggestion for the reduction in the πCM and the 𝑇𝐼𝑇 contradict the implications suggested by the
other components for the same parameters, see Table 5.
The low-pressure steam turbine 2 (LP-TUR-2) shows a relatively low 𝑓𝑘 (0.329) compared with the
average typical values of turbomachinery of up to 0.75 [42,50], thus increasing its exergetic efficiency
is an aim of the optimization. The performance of the LP steam turbine 2 is thereby influenced by a
number of decision variables (𝑚̇𝑆𝐹 , 𝑝𝑆𝐹 , 𝑝𝐼𝑃−𝑇 , and 𝑝𝐶𝐷 ).

Table 4. Identification of decision variables.

Component Decision Variables

Solar Field 𝑚̇𝑆𝐹 , 𝑝𝑆𝐹
Combustion Chamber πCM , 𝑇𝐼𝑇
Expander πCM , 𝑇𝐼𝑇
Air Cooled Condenser 𝑝𝑆𝐹 , 𝑝𝐶𝐷
Compressor πCM
LP Steam Turbine 2 𝑚̇𝑆𝐹 , 𝑝𝑆𝐹 , 𝑝𝐼𝑃−𝑇 , 𝑝𝐶𝐷
𝑚̇𝑆𝐹 solar field mass flow rate 𝑝𝑆𝐹 solar field pressure.
πCM compressor pressure ratio 𝑇𝐼𝑇 gas turbine inlet temperature.
𝑝𝐶𝐷 condenser pressure 𝑝𝐼𝑃−𝑇 intermediate-stage steam turbine pressure

4.2. First Iteration

In the first iteration of the ISCC, parametric optimization was performed and no structural
optimization was implemented on the ISCC design. All suggested changes as well as the new
operating parameters of the first iteration are shown in Table 5. The suggested changes are shown
with arrows indicating either an increase (↑) or decrease (↓) of the respective parameter. In the case
of contradicting objectives, the sum of the total cost rates associated with the respective suggestion is
compared. The suggestion with the higher (ĊD,k + Ż𝑘 ) is implemented.
By decreasing the mass flow of the stream entering the LFC by 2.6%, the temperature at the
outlet is elevated to 525 °C. As a result of the elevated pressure (55 bar) and the reduced logarithmic
mean temperature difference (LMTD), the heat transfer is improved and the exergetic efficiency of
the solar field is elevated by 0.5 percentage points to 41.8%.
Entropy 2020, 22, 655 12 of 20

For the combustion chamber, an increase in the compressor pressure ratio πCM to 21.1 as well
as an increase in the 𝑇𝐼𝑇 to 1365 °C led to an increase of its exergetic efficiency to 71.9% and a
decrease of the Ė𝐷 from 233.2 MW to 226.5 MW.
For reducing the Ż𝑘 of the condenser, the condenser pressure 𝑝𝐶𝐷 was reduced to 0.08 bar,
which resulted in a lower steam condensation temperature of 42.5 °C instead of 45.2 °C. The steam
temperature is still higher than that of the average environmental temperature. As 𝑝𝐶𝐷 reduces the
difference between the environmental temperature and the condensation temperature decrease, thus
requiring lower air mass flow for the condensation process to take place (18.7 ton/s instead
of 19.2 ton/s), which results in a smaller equipment size, and consequently lower investment of
$47.4 million.
Aiming for an increase in the exergetic efficiency of the LP steam turbine 2, 𝑝𝐼𝑃−𝑇 was reduced
to 70 bar, as well as the pressure after the LP steam turbine 2 (𝑝𝐶𝐷 ). However, the attempt to increase
the exergetic efficiency was not successful, see Table 6.
Decreasing the 𝑇𝐼𝑇 and the 𝜋𝐶𝑀 would decrease the material costs as well as the gas turbine
output capacity, which would be reflected in a reduction in its investment cost. Nonetheless, both
factors were not taken into consideration as the selected turbine has a particular output capacity and
operating temperature range that could not be modified.
The components’ obtained results of the first iteration are shown in Table 6. After the first
iteration, the cost rate (ĊD,k + Ż𝑘 ) of the solar field, the combustion chamber, and the air-cooled
condenser were successfully reduced compared with the base design. However, the efficiency of the
LP steam turbine 2 decreased by 0.1%, although the objective was to increase it. No possible
investment cost reduction in any of the gas turbine components is feasible, as it is based on standard
commercially available technologies.

Table 5. Suggested changes of the base case system parameters for the first iteration.

Ċ𝐃,𝐤 + Ż𝒌 𝒇 Objective 𝒎̇𝑺𝑭 𝒑𝑺𝑭 𝛑𝐂𝐌 𝑻𝑰𝑻 𝒑𝑰𝑷−𝑻 𝒑𝑪𝑫

Rank Component
[$/h] [–] Ż𝒌 ↑ or Ɛ𝒌 ↓
1 Solar-Field 8251 0.413 Ɛ𝑘 ↑ ↓ ↑ - - - -
2 GT-CC 3530 0.030 Ɛ𝑘 ↑ - - ↑ ↑ - -
3 GT-EXP 1475 0.660 Ż𝑘 ↓ - - ↓ ↓ - -
4 ACC 1414 0.808 Ż𝑘 ↓ - ↑ - - - ↓
5 GT-COMP 912 0.601 Ż𝑘 ↓ - - ↓ - - -
6 LP-TUR-2 829 0.329 Ɛ𝑘 ↑ ↓ ↓ - (↑) ↓ ↓
ĊD,k + Ż𝑘 ↑ 0 9665 3530 3530 0 0
ĊD,k + Ż𝑘 ↓ 9080 829 2387 1475 829 2243
Suggestion ↓ ↑ ↑ ↑ ↓ ↓
Initial Values 77.1 kg/s 50 bar 20.1 1334°C 80 bar 0.097 bar
New Values 75.1 kg/s 55 bar 21.1 1365 °C 70 bar 0.08 bar

Table 6. First iteration obtained results of selected components.

Ɛ𝒌 𝒇𝒌 Ċ𝐃,𝐤 + Ż𝒌
Rank Component
[%] [-] [$/h]
1 Solar Field 41.8 0.418 8167
2 Combustion Chamber 71.9 0.031 3429
3 Expander 96.4 0.667 1459
4 Air Cooled Condenser N.A. 0.837 1343
5 Compressor 95.2 0.612 897
6 LP Steam Turbine 2 88.3 0.331 837

The first iteration resulted in a reduced LCOE of 37.7 $/MWh and 41.1 $/MWh for day and night
operations, respectively, with a weighted average of 39.6 $/MWh. The specific investment cost was
reduced to 1089 $/kWex. The system exergetic efficiency increased during day and night operations
to 51.5% and 59.0%, respectively.
Entropy 2020, 22, 655 13 of 20

4.3. Second Iteration

In the second iteration, parametric optimization was applied as in the previous iteration. The
applied changes according to the results obtained in the first iteration as well as the new operating
parameters of the second iteration are given in Table 7.

Table 7. Second iteration suggested changes.

Ċ𝐃,𝐤 + Ż𝒌 𝒇 Objective 𝒎̇𝑺𝑭 𝒑𝑺𝑭 𝛑𝐂𝐌 𝑻𝑰𝑻 𝒑𝑰𝑷−𝑻 𝒑𝑪𝑫

Rank Component
[$/h] [-] Ż𝒌 ↑ or Ɛ𝒌 ↓
1 Solar-Field 8167 0.418 Ɛ𝑘 ↑ ↓ ↑ - - - -
2 GT-CC 3429 0.031 Ɛ𝑘 ↑ - - ↑ ↑ - -
3 GT-EXP 1459 0.667 Ɛ𝑘 ↑ - - ↓ ↓ - -
4 ACC 1343 0.837 Ż𝑘 ↓ - ↑ - - - ↓
5 GT-COMP 897 0.612 Ɛ𝑘 ↑ - - ↓ - - -
6 LP-TUR-2 837 0.331 Ɛ𝑘 ↑ ↓ ↓ - (↑) ↑ ↓
ĊD,k + Ż𝑘 ↑ 0 9510 3429 3429 837 0
ĊD,k + Ż𝑘 ↓ 9004 837 2356 1459 0 2180
Suggestion ↓ ↑ ↑ ↑ ↑ ↓
Initial Values 75.1 kg/s 55 bar 21.1 1365 °C 70 bar 0.08 bar
New Values 73.1 kg/s 60 bar 22.1 1400 °C 90 bar 0.07 bar

Aiming to reach further reduction in the LCOE, and after positively achieving the objectives of
the solar field, the combustion chamber, and the air-cooled condenser, their operating parameters
were further changed in the same manner as in the first iteration.
The mass flow rate inside the LFC was further reduced to 73.1 kg/s, increasing the steam
temperature to 550 °C, and the pressure was further increased to 60 bar, thus resulting in an exergetic
efficiency of 42.1%.
For the combustion chamber, a further increase in the 𝜋𝑐𝑜𝑚𝑝 to 22.1 and the 𝑇𝐼𝑇 to 1400 °C led
to an increase in the exergetic efficiency to 72.4% and reduction in the Ė𝐷 from 226.3 MW to 219.5 MW.
The further reduction of 𝑝𝐶𝐷 in the second iteration resulted in a lower condensation
temperature of 39 °C, thus decreasing the amount of air needed for condensation to 18.2 ton/s. The
condenser investment cost was reduced from $48.2 million initially to $46.7 million. For achieving an
increased exergetic efficiency of the LP steam turbine 2, unlike the first iteration, the 𝑝𝐼𝑃−𝑇 was
increased to 90 bars instead of decreasing it in the first iteration from 80 bar to 70 bar. However, an
increase in the exergetic efficiency was also not successful.
For the gas turbine expander and compressor, the approach of optimization was changed to an
increase in the exergetic efficiency instead of a reduction in their investment cost. However,
recommendations for achieving such a result through decreasing the 𝜋𝑐𝑜𝑚𝑝 and 𝑇𝐼𝑇 were not
applied owing to their higher influence over the combustion chamber, as can be seen in Table 7.
Table 8 shows the results on component level obtained in the second iteration. After the second
iteration, the cost rate (ĊD,k + Ż𝑘 ) of the solar field and the combustion chamber and the air cooled
condenser was further reduced. Although the pressure of the intermediate-stage turbine was
increased in contrast to the first iteration, the efficiency of the LP steam turbine 2 also decreased by
the same percentage of 0.1%. A slight decrease in the cost rate of the expander and compressor is
indirectly attained through optimizing the parameters of the combustion chamber (𝜋𝑐𝑜𝑚𝑝 , 𝑇𝐼𝑇).
The results of all iterations for both day and night operations on the system level are compared
in Figures 3 and 4. In the second iteration, a further decrease in the LCOE to 37.4 $/MWh and 40.8
$/MWh during day and night operations, respectively, was achieved having a weighted average of
39.2 $/MWh. Moreover, the systems’ exergetic efficiencies were increased during both day and night
operations to 52.2% and 59.8%, respectively. Such modifications reflected a slight decrease in the
specific investment cost per installed capacity to 1088 $/kWex.
Throughout the iterations, the LCOE and exergetic efficiency of the system were improved. The
exergoeconomic optimization resulted in a decrease of 0.8 $/MWh and 0.7 $/MWh for day and night
operations, respectively, as seen in Figure 3. The exergetic efficiency of the ISCC was also improved
throughout the iterations, increasing by 1.5% and 1.7% during day and night operations, respectively
Entropy 2020, 22, 655 14 of 20

(Figure 4). The specific investment cost of the ISCC was slightly affected, which was reduced by
3 $/kWex throughout the iterations.

Table 8. Second iteration obtained results of selected components.

Ɛ𝒌 𝒇𝒌 Ċ𝐃,𝐤 + Ż𝒌
Rank Component
[%] [-] [$/h]
1 Solar Field 42.1 0.421 8096
2 Combustion Chamber 72.4 0.032 3328
3 Expander 96.4 0.673 1445
4 Air Cooled Condenser N.A. 0.854 1297
5 Compressor 95.2 0.621 884
6 LP Steam Turbine 2 88.2 0.330 834

Base Design First Iteration Second Iteration

42 41.5
41.1
41 40.8

40
LCOE, $/MWh

39
38.2
38 37.7
37.4
37
36
35
Day operation Night operation
Figure 3. Levelized cost of electricity (LCOE) comparison between iterations for day and night
operations.
Entropy 2020, 22, 655 15 of 20

Base Design First Iteration Second Iteration

62
59.8
60 59.0
58.1
58
56
εtot, %

54
52.2
51.5
52 50.7
50
48
46
Day operation Night operation
Figure 4. Exergetic efficiency comparison between iterations for day and night operations.

4.4. Discussion and Validation

After the optimization was conducted, the results were verified by comparing them with similar
existing integrated solar combined-cycle and CSP plants. In Table 9, the results for the total capital
investment (TCI) and specific investment cost per kW installed capacity of the proposed ISCC system
after optimization are compared to four ISCC systems that started operation in 2010, 2011, 2011, and
2018 in Morocco, Egypt, Algeria, and Saudi Arabia, respectively.
The installed capacity of the proposed system is most similar to the Ain Beni Mathar project
(470 MW), reaching 21% higher specific investment cost of 1319 $2018/kW, and the Yazd project
(467 MW), reaching 4% lower specific investment cost of 1047 $2018/kW. The relatively close specific
investment cost may be attributed to the similar capacities.
The two ISCC plants, Kuryamat and Hassi R’mel, were reported to have a significantly higher
specific investment cost of 2788–3069 $2018/kW. This may be explained by the smaller scale of the
systems of 140–150 MW, as well as the choice of CSP technology. All of the operating ISCC systems
listed in Table 9 operate with parabolic trough collectors and a secondary heat transfer media (CSP
with HTF), while the proposed design employs linear Fresnel collectors with direct steam generation
(LFC with DSG). The cost data for ISCC plants utilizing LFC and DSG were unfortunately not
available (Dadri project, Table 1).

Table 9. Plant characteristics of the proposed design and three ISCC projects in the MENA region.
DSG, direct steam generation; HTF, heat transfer fluid; TCI, total capital investment.

Proposed Ain Beni Waad Al

Project Yazd Kuryamat Hassi R’mel
Design Mathar Shamal
Technology DSG- LFC HTF-PTC HTF-PTC HTF-PTC HTF-PTC HTF-PTC
Saudi
Country Egypt Morocco Iran Egypt Algeria
Arabia
Investment year
2020 2007 2007 2007 2007 2016
(approx.)
TCI,
517 540 426 340 401 980
Mio $
Spec. Investment,
1088 1319 1047 2788 3069 785
$2018/kW
Entropy 2020, 22, 655 16 of 20

Capacity, MWel 475 470 467 140 150 1390

Solar share, MWel 81 20 17 20 20 50
Solar share, % 17 4 4 14 13 4
Source - [17] [18,51] [17,52] [11,51] [20,53]

The LFC technology coupled with DSG is believed to have economic advantages over PTC with
HTF. For pure CSP systems utilizing parabolic trough collector technology, the total installed plant
costs (without storage) ranged from 2710 to 11,975 $/kW2018 (1984–2016); the majority of projects were
in the range of 6380–9570 $/kW2018 [54]. PTC-based CSP plant costs are significantly higher than the
costs for anticipated LFC projects. Linear Fresnel direct steam systems without storage projected
specific costs are 2940–3675 $/kW2018 [55], based on inputs from the relevant industry. Moreover,
reviewed CSP plants of similar size with start of operation (2013–2014) show a significant difference
in costs between both technologies.
The Dhursar CSP project in India (125 MW), for instance, was reported to have an investment
cost of $400 million [56], while the Shams 1 CSP plant in United Arab Emirates (100 MW) required
an investment of $600 million [57]. The Dhursar plant operating with linear Fresnel collectors with
direct steam generation had a 47% lower specific investment cost (approx. 2930 $2018/kW) than the
Shams 1 plant, which is based on PTC technology with HTF (5094 $2018/kW). This is why, despite the
lower solar share of the ISCC plants shown in Table 9, the utilization of PTC may explain the higher
specific investment costs of operating ISCC plants (1319–3069 $2018/kW) in comparison with the
proposed design. Although the LFC is cheaper than the PTC used in the Yazd project, the slightly
higher cost of the proposed ISCC in comparison with Yazd may be attributed to the increased solar
share (by 13 percentage points).
Waad Al Shamal project is hardly comparable to the proposed design (475 MW) owing to its
significantly larger capacity of 1.39 GW. The low specific investment costs of only 785 $2018/kW can be
justified by the economy of scale, both CCPP and CSP specific component costs decrease with size.
Another reason for the drop in the costs could be the learning rate of the CSP technology. A drop in
CSP costs of 79% is predicted until 2022 with reference to the costs in 2010 [58].
Finally, despite the fact that only a few ISCC plants have been built thus far and cost comparison
is rather difficult, the results obtained in the presented analysis could be justified. Moreover, the
potential for cost reduction through the utilization of LFC and DSG technology, as well as the
suggested system design and parameters identified in the optimization, were shown.

5. Conclusion
In this research, a novel natural gas-fired integrated solar combined-cycle power plant was
proposed and simulated under day and night operation conditions. The plant utilizes linear Fresnel
collectors, which offer a cheaper alternative of collecting solar thermal energy and are a mature
technology for employing direct steam generation. Direct steam generation was shown to reduce the
power plant configuration complexity and to reach higher temperatures that are difficult to achieve
using synthetic oil, achieving higher overall plant efficiency, apart from being more environmentally
friendly.
The power plant was analysed and evaluated with the aid of exergy-based methods. Analysis of
the base case resulted in a weighted average LCOE of 40.0 $/MWh and an exergetic efficiency of 50.7%
and 58.1% for day and night operations, respectively. Applying the exergoeconomic iterative
optimization, the LCOE was successfully reduced to weighted average of 39.2 $/MWh, while
increasing the system exergetic efficiency during both operations to 52.2% and 59.8%, respectively.
The system specific investment cost was slightly affected by the optimization, which was reduced
from 1091 $/kWex to 1088 $/kWex.
The specific investment cost of the proposed plant was verified with and compared to existing
similar plants in the MENA region. For plants with similar capacity, the results obtained were shown
to be relatively comparable. Owing to employing the less costly CSP technology, the proposed system
enables a 13% larger solar share and competitive costs. Consequently, in particular with the proposed
Entropy 2020, 22, 655 17 of 20

technology and configuration, integrated solar combined-cycle plants were proven to facilitate and
ensure the transition towards higher shares of renewable power without large economical burdens
especially for country like Egypt, as a case study for the MENA region, where natural gas resources
already exist.

Author Contributions: Conceptualization and resources, L.E. and T.M.; methodology, G.T.; investigation, data
curation, formal analysis, software, visualization, validation, and writing—original draft preparation, L.E.;
writing—review and editing, T.M.; supervision, T.M. All authors have read and agreed to the published version
of the manuscript.

Funding: This research received no external funding.

Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Abbreviations

ACC Air cooled condenser

AFUDC Allowance for funds used during construction
CC Carrying charges
CCPP Combined-cycle power plant
CELF Constant escalation levelization factor
CI Capital investment
COMP Compressor
COND Condenser
CRF Capital recovery factor
CSP Concentrated solar power
DSG Direct steam generation
EXP Expander
FC Fuel cost
FCI Fixed capital investment
GT Gas turbine
HP High pressure
HRSG Heat recovery steam generation
HTF Heat transfer fluid
IP Intermediate pressure
ISCC Integrated solar combined-cycle
LCOE Levelized cost of electricity
LFC Linear Fresnel collector
LHV Lower heating value
LP Low pressure
NG Natural gas
OM Operation and maintenance
OMC Operation and maintenance cost
PTC Parabolic trough collector
TCI Total capital investment
TIT Turbine inlet temperature
TRR Total revenue required
TUR Turbine
Nomenclature
𝑐 Specific cost per unit exergy
Ċ Cost rate
𝑒 Specific exergy
Ė Exergy rate
𝑓 Exergoeconomic factor
ℎ Specific enthalpy
𝑚̇ Mass flow rate
P Pressure
𝑄 Thermal energy
𝑟 Relative cost difference
𝑠 Entropy
Entropy 2020, 22, 655 18 of 20

𝑇 Temperature
Ż Component cost rate
Greek symbols
λ Air to fuel ratio
𝜏 Operation time
𝜀 Exergetic efficiency
π Compression ratio
subscripts
D Destruction
F, 𝑓 Fuel
𝑗 Stream, state
𝑘 k-th component
𝐿 Levelized, losses
P Product
𝑠𝑜𝑙 Solar
tot Total
0 Reference
superscripts
𝑃𝐻 Physical
𝐶𝐻 Chemical

References
1. EEHC: Egyptian Electricity Holding Company. Annual Report; Ministry of Electricity & Renewable Energy:
Cairo, Egypt, 2017.
2. Kuravi, S.; Trahan, J.; Goswami, D.Y.; Rahman, M.M.; Stefanakos, E.K. Thermal energy storage technologies
and systems for concentrating solar power plants. Prog. Energy Combust. Sci. 2013, 39, 285–319.
3. Teske, S.; Leung, J. Solar Thermal Electricity-Global Outlook 2016; Greenpeace International: Amsterdam, The
Netherlands; Estela: Brussels, The Netherlands; SolarPACES: Tabernas, The Netherlands, 2016.
4. World Bank. Competitiveness Assessment of MENA Countries to Develop a Local Solar Industry; Written for the
World Bank by Accenture and STA (Solar Technology Advisors): Washington, DC., USA, 2012.
5. World Bank. Competitiveness Assessment of MENA Countries to Develop a Local Solar Industry (English); MENA
energy series; World Bank Group: Washington, DC, USA, 2015.
6. Rovira, A.; Barbero, R.; Montes, M. J.; Abbas, R.; Varela, F. Analysis and comparison of Integrated Solar
Combined Cycles using parabolic troughs and linear Fresnel reflectors as concentrating systems. Appl.
Energy 2016, 162, 990–1000.
7. Siemens AG. Siemens HL-Class. 2018. Available online: https://new.siemens.com/ (accessed on 6
November 2019).
8. IRENA. Renewabel Energy Technologies: Cost Analysis Series, Volume 1: Power Sector; International Renewable
Energy Agency: Abu Dhabi, UAE, 2012
9. Islam, T.; Huda, N.; Abdullah, A.; Saidur, R. A comprehensive review of state-of-the-art concentrating solar
power (CSP) technologies: Current status and research trends. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2018, 91, 987–
1018.
10. Günther, M.; Eickhoff, M.; Khalil, T.; Meyer-Grünefeldt, M. Advanced CSP Teaching Materials Chapter 6
Linear Fresnel Technology. Available online:
https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/98d1/fa69638cba7e10f5df48df62d71c36b45178.pdf?_ga=2.248745728.6801
17497.1592023866-333524522.1548576156 (accessed on 12 June 2020).
11. Behar, O.; Khellaf, A.; Mohammedi, K.; Ait-Kaci, S. A review of integrated solar combined cycle system
(ISCCS) with aparabolic trough technology. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2014, 39, 223–250.
12. Alqahtani, B.J.; Patino-Echeverri, D. Integrated Solar Combined Cycle Power Plants: Paving the way for
thermal solar. Appl. Energy 2016, 169, 927–936.
13. Serrano-Aguilera, J.J.; Valenzuela, L.; Parras, L. Thermal 3D model for Direct Solar Steam Generation under
superheated conditions. Appl. Energy 2014, 132, 370–382.
14. Nezammahalleh, H.; Farhadi, F.; Tanhaemami, M. Conceptual design and techno-economic assessment of
integrated solar combined cycle system with DSG technology. Sol. Energy 2010, 84, 1696–1705.
Entropy 2020, 22, 655 19 of 20

15. Rovira, A.; Montes, M.J.; Varela. F.; Gil, M. Comparison of Heat Transfer Fluid and Direct Steam Generation
Technologies for Integrated Solar Combinded Cycles. Appl. Therm. Eng. 2013 52, 264-274.
16. Horn, M.; Führing, H.; Rheinländer, J. Economic analysis of integrated solar combined cycle power A
sample case: The economic feasibility of an ISCCS power. Energy 2004, 29, 935–945.
17. The World Bank. Implementation Completion and Results Report; Sustainable Development department: Fort
Lauderdale, Morocco, 2013.
18. Baghernejad, A.; Yaghoubi, M. Exergy analysis of an integrated solar combined cycle system. Renew. Energy
2010, 35, 2157–2164.
19. NREL. Available online: www.nrel.gov/csp/solarpaces/by_technology.cfm (accessed on 10 July 2018).
20. Gas to Power Journal. 2018. Available online: https://gastopowerjournal.com/projectsafinance/item/8718-
sec-starts-up-1-390-mw-hybrid-power-plant-at-waad-al-shamal (accessed on 6 November 2019).
21. Sourcewatch. sourcewatch.org. October 2016. Available online:
www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/National_Capital_Dadri_Thermal_Power_Plant (accessed on 8 July
2018).
22. Kuenlin, A.; Augsburger, G.; Gerber, L.; Maréchal, F. Life Cycle Assessment and Environomic Optimization
of Concentrating Solar Thermal Power Plants. In Proceedings of the 26th International Conference on
Efficiency, Cost, Optimization, Simulation and Environmental Impact of Energy Systems (ECOS2013),
Guilin, China, 16–19 July 2013.
23. Giglio, A.; Lanzini, A.; Leone, P.; Rodriguez-Garcia, M.M.; Moya, E.Z. Direct steam generation in parabolic-
trough collectors: A review about the technology and a thermo-economic analysis of a hybrid system.
Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2017, 74, 453–473.
24. Alguacil, M.; Prieto, C.; Rodriguez, A.; Lohr, J. Direct Steam Generation in Parabolic Trough Collectors.
Energy Procedia 2014, 49, 21–29.
25. Baharoon, D.A.; Rahman, H.A.; Omar, W.W.; Fadhl, S.O. Historical development of concentrating solar
power technologies to generate clean electricity efficiently–A review. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2015, 41,
996–1027.
26. Wagner, M.J. Results and Comparison from the SAM Linear Fresnel Technology Performance Model; National
Renewable Energy Laboratory: Denver, CO, USA, 2012.
27. Baghernejad, A.; Yaghoubi, M. Exergoeconomic analysis and optimization of an Integrated Solar
Combined Cycle System (ISCCS) using genetic algorithm. Energy Convers. Manag. 2011, 52, 2193–2203.
28. Bahlouli, K. Multi-objective optimization of a combined cycle using exergetic and exergoeconomic
approaches. Energy Convers. Manag. 2018, 171, 1761–1772.
29. Baghernejad, A.; Yaghoubi, M. Multi-objective exergoeconomic optimization of an Intergrated Solar
Combined Cycle System using evolutionary algorithms. Int. J. Energy Res. 2010, 35, 601–615.
30. Siemens AG. Siemens Gas Turbine Portfolio. 2019. Available online: https://new.siemens.com/ (accessed
on 5 January 2019).
31. Feldhoff, J.F.; Benitez, D.; Eck, M.; Riffelmann, K.-J. Economic Potential of Solar Thermal Power Plants With
Direct Steam Generation Compared With HTF Plants. J. Sol. Energy Eng. 2010, 132, 041001.
32. Siemens AG. Steam Turbines for CSP Plants. 2010. Available online: https://new.siemens.com/ (accessed
on 16 May 2017).
33. Siemens AG. Siemens Steam Turbine SST-300. 2018. Available: https://new.siemens.com (accessed on 27
Feberary 2018).
34. Sandia National Laboratories. An Evaluation of Possible Next-Generation High-Temperature Molten-Salt Power
Towers; National Solar Thermal Test Facility (NSTTF): New Mexico, NM, USA, 2011.
35. Electric Power Research Institute. Comparison of Alternate Cooling Technologies for U.S. Power Plants:
Economic, Environmental, and Other Tradeoffs; Electric Power Research Institute: California, CA, USA, 2004.
36. Burkhardt, J.J.; Heath, G.A.; Turchi, C.S. Life Cycle Assessment of a Parabolic Trough Concentrating Solar
Power Plant and the Impacts of Key Design Alternatives. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2011, 45, 2457–2464.
37. Ellah, R.G.A. Water resources in Egypt and their challenges, Lake Nasser case study. Egypt. J. Aquat. Res.
2020, 46, 1–12.
38. Li, Y.; Yang, Y. Thermodynamic analysis of a novel integrated solar combined cycle. Appl. Energy 2014, 122,
133–142.
39. STEAG. Energy Services GmbH. Ebsilon Professional. 2019. Available online: https://www.steag-
systemtechnologies.com/ (accessed on 17 January 2019).
Entropy 2020, 22, 655 20 of 20

40. ClimaTemps. Aswan ClimaTemps. Available online: http://www.aswan.climatemps.com/ (accessed on 20

July 2018).
41. Ahrendts, J. Reference states. Energy 1980, 5, 666–677.
42. Bejan, G. Tsatsaronis and M. Moran, Thermal Design & Optimization; WILEY: New York, NY, USA, 1996.
43. Ahrendts, J. Solarkraftwerke. Forsch. Ingenieurwesen 1988, 54, 130–136.
44. Ulrich, G.D.; Vasudevan, P.T. Chemical Engineering: Process Design and Economics: A Practical Guide; John
Wiley & Sons: New York, NY, USA, 1984.
45. Morin, G.; Dersch, J.; Platzer, W.; Eck, M.; Häberle, A. Comparison of Linear Fresnel and Parabolic Trough
Collector power plants. Sol. Energy 2012, 86, 1–12.
46. Petrakopoulou, F. Comparative Evaluation of Power Plants with CO2 Capture: Thermodynamic, Economic and
Environmental Performance; Technische Universität Berlin: Berlin, Germany, 2010.
47. Inflation Data. Inflationdata. 2019. Available online:
https://inflationdata.com/Inflation/Inflation_Rate/HistoricalInflation.aspx (accessed on 28 August 2019).
48. Ministry of Electricity and Renewable Energy. Electricity Tariff Presentation; Ministry of Electricity &
Renewable Energy: Cairo, Egypt, 2019.
49. Lazzaretto, A.; Tsatsaronis, G. SPECO: A systematic and general methodology for calculating efficiencies
and costs in thermal systems. Energy 2006, 31, 1257–1289.
50. Hamdy, S.; Morosuk, T.; Tsatsaronis, G. Exergoeconomic optimization of an adiabatic cryogenics-based
energy storage system. Energy 2019, 183, 812–824.
51. Okoroigwe, E.; Madhlopa, A. An integrated combined cycle system driven by a solar tower: A review.
Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2016, 57, 337–350.
52. NREA. Annual Report 2012/2013 New and Renewable Energy Energy; New and Renewable Energy Authority:
Cairo, Egypt, 2013.
53. Reuters. UPDATE 1-Saudi Electric signs $980 mln Waad Al Shamal Power Plant Deal. Reuters. 30
December 2015. Available online: https://www.reuters.com/article/saudi-electrcity-powerstation-
idUSL8N14J1WF20151230 (accessed on 20 April 2020).
54. IRENA. Renewable Power Generation Costs in 2017; International Renewable Energy Agency: Abu Dhabi,
UAE, 2018.
55. Zhu, G.; Wendelin, T.; Wagner, M.J.; Kutscher, C. History, current state, and future of linear Fresnel
concentrating solar collectors. Sol. Energy 2014, 103, 639–652.
56. PROTERMOSOLAR. Helioscsp. Artetipo. 17 October 2012. Available online: http://helioscsp.com/reliance-
power-raises-302-million-to-fund-rajasthan-concentrated-solar-power-project/ (accessed on 20 April 2020).
57. NREL. Concentrating Solar Power Projects; National Renewable Energy Laboratory: Golden, Colorado, USA,
2020. Available online: https://solarpaces.nrel.gov/ (accessed on 20 April 2020).
58. Center for Mediterranean Integration (CMI). https://cmimarseille.org/. Center for Mediterranean
Integration (CMI). 9 October 2019. Available online: https://cmimarseille.org/menacspkip/concentrating-
solar-power-costs-are-expected-to-fall-by-79-by-2022/ (accessed on 3 April 2020).

© 2020 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access
article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution
(CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).