COST-EFFECTIVE AND RELIABLE DESIGN OF A SOLAR THERMAL POWER PLANT
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A design study was conducted to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of solar thermal power generation in a 50 kWe power plant that could be used in a remote location. The system combines a solar collector-thermal storage system utilizing a heat transfer fluid and a simple Rankine cycle power generator utilizing R123 refrigerant. Evacuated tube solar collectors heat mineral oil and supply it to a thermal storage tank. A mineral oil to refrigerant heat exchanger generates superheated refrigerant vapor, which drives a radial turbogenerator. Supplemental natural gas firing maintains a constant thermal storage temperature irregardless of solar conditions enabling the system to produce a constant 50 kWe output. A simulation was carried out to predict the performance of the system in the hottest summer day and the coldest winter day for southern California solar conditions. A rigorous economic analysis was conducted. The system offers advantages over advanced solar thermal power plants by implementing simple fixed evacuated tube collectors, which are less prone to damage in harsh desert environment. Also, backed up by fossil fuel power generation, it is possible to obtain continued operation even during low insolation sky conditions and at night, a feature that stand-alone PV systems do not offer.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".