Which is the most competitive solar power technology for integration into the existing copper mining plants: Photovoltaic (PV), Concentrating Solar Power (CSP), or hybrid PV-CSP?

摘要

Given that most of the mines in Chile are situated in regions with high solar resources, solar power could play a significant role as an alternative solution to satisfy the electricity demand in the mining industry. This paper aims to investigate the feasibility of integrating solar power technology into copper concentrate plants (CCPs). Three commercial technologies (PV, CSP, and hybrid PV-CSP) are considered for integration into four existing CCPs of different sizes and located in different regions. To provide comprehensive analysis, the design, performance and economic assessment of 12 cases are carried and the investment costs are estimated taking into account characteristics of the Chilean market as well as the effect of scale. The performance analysis reveals a strong influence of the degradation rate on the electricity production of solar power plants. The first-year capacity factor of the CSP units is around 68% while it is around 32% for the case of PV units. Due to the degradation in the performance of the components, the lifetime-averaged capacity factor is about 9% lower than that of the first year. The economic assessment indicates that PV is the most suitable technology for integration into the CCPs. The Levelized Cost of Electricity (LCOE) of PV-CCPs ranges from 35.53 to 44.40 USD/MWhe, depending on the size and the location of the plant. The LCOE for the cases of CSP-CCPs and PV-CSP-CCPs ranges from 127.08 to 168.88 USD/MWhe and from 91.89 to 118.91 USD/MWhe, respectively. The modified internal rate of return (MIRR) of the PV-CCPs ranges from 8 to 9%, it discounted pack-back period (DPP) ranges from 5 to 6 years. The DPP PV-CSP-CCPs ranges from and from 15 to 23 years respectively. Overall, the CSP-CCPs are not atractive investments due to high LCOE, longer DPP, and MIRR. However, the sensitivity analysis revealed that its LCOE could be lowered by reducing the investment costs. For instance, a reduction of about 10% in the LCOE is possible if the specific investment costs of the TES is cut to about 10UDS/kWth. (C) 2020 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.