InTech uses cookies to offer you the best online experience. By continuing to use our site, you agree to our Privacy Policy.

Engineering » Energy Engineering » "Application of Solar Energy", book edited by Radu Rugescu, ISBN 978-953-51-0969-3, Published: February 6, 2013 under CC BY 3.0 license. © The Author(s).

# Fuel Production Using Concentrated Solar Energy

By Onur Taylan and Halil Berberoglu
DOI: 10.5772/54057

Article top

## Overview

Figure 1. Comparison of different fuels in terms of their energy produced and CO2 emission [1].

Figure 2. Flowchart for thermochemical hydrogen production from zinc-oxide using concentrated solar energy [5].

Figure 3. Solar concentrators, (a) parabolic trough, (b) linear Fresnel, (c) dish collectors, and (d) heliostats with solar tower [34].

Figure 4. Theoretical solar reactor efficiency, η, as a function of receiver temperature, Trec, for different concentrating ratios, C.

Figure 5. Parabolic-trough collectors in Nevada Solar One power plant [41].

Figure 6. Linear Fresnel reflectors in the power plant Thermosolar Power Plant (PE2) in Spain [46].

Figure 7. Parabolic dish collectors in Arizona, USA [49].

Figure 8. PS 10 (back) and PS 20 (front) solar thermal power plants with heliostats with solar towers [55].

Figure 9. Schematic of design of Maag et al. [17].

Figure 10. Schematic of design of Yeheskela and Epstein [58].

Figure 11. Schematic of design of Abanades and Flamant [59].

Figure 12. Schematic of design of Klein et al. [61].

Figure 13. Reactor design of Z’Graggen et al. [62].

Figure 14. Model of Gordillo and Belghit [63].

Figure 15. Experimental setup of Hathaway et al. [65].

Figure 16. Schematic of design of Rodat et al. [66].

Figure 17. Reactor design of Lichty et al. [69].

Figure 18. Design of the German Aerospace Center for natural gas reforming [12].

Figure 19. Schematic of design of Maag et al. [72].

Figure 20. Reactor design of Osinga et al. [73].

Figure 21. Reactor design of Piatkowski et al. [31, 77].

# Fuel Production Using Concentrated Solar Energy

Onur Taylan1 and Halil Berberoglu1

## 1. Introduction

Limited reserves of fossil fuels and their negative environmental effects impose significant problems in our energy security and sustainability. Consequently, researchers are looking for renewable energy sources, for instance solar energy, to meet the energy demands of a growing world population. However, terrestrial solar energy is a dilute resource per footprint area and is intermittent showing substantial variability depending on the season, time of the day, and location.

One strategy to overcome these drawbacks of solar energy is to concentrate and use it for cleaning and upgrading dirty fuels such as coal and other hydrocarbons or converting renewable feedstocks such as biomass into carbon-neutral solar fuels. In this way, the intermittent and dilute solar energy can be concentrated and stored as a chemical fuel which can be easily integrated to our existing energy infrastructure. These advantages of solar fuels produced with concentrated solar radiation make them an attractive solution in our quest for renewable and clean fuels. Figure 1 shows the energy potential and carbon emissions by most commonly used fuels along with solar hydrogen.

Most common and available methods for solar fuel production are thermolysis, cracking, reforming, gasification and through thermochemical cycles. All these methods require high temperatures to produce solar fuel. Therefore, in these methods, there are some qualities of the feedstock or the reactor that need to be satisfied to attain high temperatures and efficient solar fuel production. For instance, the physical size and porosity of the feedstock play an important role. As the surface area-to-volume ratio of the feedstock increases, more reaction sites will be available for the reaction to occur, which increases the process efficiency. The feedstock should also have a narrow bad gap to lower the energy requirement for chemical process. Additionally, the material on the reactor walls should have high optical absorption to increase the temperature of the reactor and withstand high temperatures, and the window material should have high transmissivity to let the solar energy in to the reactor. More detailed property requirements are given by Nowotny et al. [1].

#### Figure 1.

Comparison of different fuels in terms of their energy produced and CO2 emission [1].

This review chapter consists of four sections. Following the introduction, the second section “Concentrated Solar Fuel Production Methods” reviews the different routes of producing solar fuels according to the feedstock material used in the processes. These include (i) thermolysis of water, (ii) thermochemical cycles, (iii) cracking of gaseous hydrocarbons, and (iv) gasification and reforming of coal and biomass. These methods are compared with each other based on their temperature, pressure, thermodynamic efficiencies, and by-products. The third section “Concentrated Solar Reactors” provides a comprehensive review of different concentrated solar reactor designs reported in the literature. This section first reviews the current solar concentration methods and describes in detail the effects of concentrating factors on the heat flux and temperatures that can be achieved. Then, the section describes the design and basic principles of operation of different solar reactors, their applicability for the different methods described in the preceding section, and their temperature and pressure capabilities. Moreover, the section summarizes the reported solar to fuel conversion efficiencies of each design. Finally, the chapter ends with the conclusions and outlook of fuel production with concentrated solar energy outlining the challenges, new research directions and novel applications.

## 2. Concentrated solar fuel production methods

This section describes different methods of producing solar fuels according to the feedstock material used in the respective processes.

### 2.1. Thermolysis of water

The term “thermolysis of water” refers to the thermal decomposition of water molecules into hydrogen and oxygen gases. Historically, due to high availability and simple molecular form of water, researches on solar fuel production started with direct hydrogen production by thermolysis of water using solar energy as,

 H2O→H2+12O2ΔH300K=286 kJmol (1)

The reaction given in Equation (1) is an endothermic process, i.e., it requires energy to break the bonds. However, breaking all the bonds in water molecules requires temperatures as high as 2500 K [2]. At lower temperatures, partial decomposition occurs. Although it is possible to reach 2500 K with concentrated solar energy, the reactor where this process takes place shows material issues related to high temperatures. Additionally, after the dissociation of water molecules, hydrogen and oxygen gases require separation at high temperatures in order to prevent back-bonding, i.e., reproduction of water molecules with an exothermic process. Some solutions include cooling the reactor down by injecting a gas or expanding these gases through nozzle at the end of the reactor [2, 3]. Other solutions include using double or tubular membranes or using multi-stage steam ejectors to lower the exit pressure [4]. However, these solutions further reduce the efficiency of the process, and thus no commercial plant using this technology exists.

### 2.2. Thermochemical cycles

Some metal oxides are reduced using solar energy since metals provide good storage and transport of energy, such as solar energy. Such metal oxides include, but not limited to ZnO, MgO, SnO2, CaO, Al2O3 and Ce2O3. The reduction step of these metal oxides is generally followed by an oxidation step at lower temperatures than reduction step in order to produces solar fuel, mainly hydrogen. The reduced metal oxides generally react with CO2 or steam. If steam is used in oxidation that step is called hydrolysis. The thermochemical cycles of different metal oxides are generally compared based on their temperature requirements for the reduction step, the reaction or dissociation rates and reaction kinetics.

ZnO is one of the most popular oxides mainly due to its abundance and relatively low temperature requirement for complete dissociation when compared to other metal oxides. Additionally, since ZnO is a simple metal oxide, it does not undergo multiple reactions before its full dissociation. The dissociation of ZnO occurs as according to,

 ZnO→Zn+12O2ΔH2000K=546 kJmol (2)

The complete dissociation of ZnO to Zn requires temperatures higher than about 2300 K whereas, for instance, the dissociation of MgO as another simple metal oxide requires about 3700 K at atmospheric pressures [3, 5]. As in water thermolysis, partial dissociations can occur at lower temperatures. Although hydrolysis of zinc is exothermic as given by Equation (3), only 24% of Zn could be oxidized to produce H2 at a reactor temperature of 800 K and an atmospheric pressure [6].

 Zn+H2O→ZnO+H2ΔH300K=-62 kJmol (3)

Figure 2 shows the overall process of hydrogen production from zinc-oxide.

### Figure 2.

Flowchart for thermochemical hydrogen production from zinc-oxide using concentrated solar energy [5].

As an alternative to ZnO reduction, Abanades et al. [7] proposed SnO2 reduction using solar energy. Once the SnO2 is reduced to SnO in gaseous form using solar energy at temperatures nearly 1600oC, hydrolysis of SnO with steam at about 550oC and ambient pressure takes place in another step to form hydrogen gas as,

 SnO2(s)→SnO(g)+12O2ΔH1873K=557 kJmol (4)
 SnO(s)+H2O(g)→SnO2(s)+H2ΔH773K=-49 kJmol (5)

The advantages of SnO2/SnO reduction when compared to ZnO/Zn reduction are that (i) the SnO2-to-SnO conversion can be increased in Equation (4) by decreasing the pressure of the solar reactor which increases the overall conversion efficiency [7] (ii) SnO has higher melting and boiling points when compared to those of Zn, so that quenching rate of SnO is not as important as of Zn [7] (iii) in ZnO/Zn dissociation, Zn needs to be quenched rapidly below its condensation temperature to prevent recombination, while this is not the case with SnO2/SnO system.

There are some other metals that can be reduced with faster reaction kinetics such as Ce2O3. However, the reduction of Ce2O3 to CeO2 starts at temperatures higher than 2300 K [8, 9]. Full dissociation requires higher temperatures. This requirement of high temperatures creates some material limitations on the material of the reactor and increases the cost of the reactor significantly. Although there are some lab-scale prototypes of Ce2O3/CeO2 solar reactor, it is not preferred due to these limitations and high cost.

Another research was also started with producing hydrogen gas from hydrogen sulfide, H2S, as,

 H2S→H2+12S2ΔH300K=91.6 kJmol (6)

Hydrogen sulfide is a toxic by-product gas of sulfur removing process from natural gas, petroleum and coal. Thermal decomposition of hydrogen sulfide requires about 1800 K [10]. It is advantageous over the other metal oxide reduction processes discussed above since this thermochemical process is only a one-step process that does not require additional oxidation step to produce hydrogen. Additionally, the temperature requirement for dissociation is lower than that for the direct water thermolysis. However, the product gases need to be cooled down after the dissociation as in the water thermolysis or other metal oxide reduction processes [11]. Some studies showed that the temperature of reduction could be reduced to about 1500 K, and they showed that the reproduction of hydrogen sulfide is unimportant below 1500 K [3, 12, 13].

In general, the solar chemical process is a clean way to produce hydrogen without any carbon prints. Therefore, the hydrogen as a product of the solar chemical process can be used in fuel cells directly as it is pure. The solar chemical reduction step of the process produce nanoparticles with high surface area to volume ratio, e.g., Zn, SnO which also create additional reaction centers for the hydrolysis to occur [7]. Therefore, the oxidation or hydrolysis occurs fast due to high mass transport of gases in the solid phase [7]. As in the other dissociation processes, the products of the dissociation also need to be cooled in order to prevent re-oxidation. Sandia National Laboratories of US released a comprehensive report on the thermochemical cycle selection with initial selection for further research [14], and Table 1 summarizes the studied thermochemical cycles [15].

### 2.3. Cracking of gaseous hydrocarbons

The term “solar thermal cracking” or “solar cracking” is used for thermal decarbonization of natural gas or other hydrocarbons. As a result of cracking, hydrogen, carbon and other possible products are formed without CO2 emissions. Therefore, this process is another method for clean fuel production. Cracking requires high temperatures of about 1500 K [16] that can be reached using concentrating solar collectors. For example, Maag et al. [17] tested a concentrated solar collector with a concentrating factor of 1720, and obtained a maximum temperature of 1600 K within the solar cavity reactor. In general, the advantages of solar cracking are the increase in value of feedstock using solar energy, pure and uncontaminated products and no CO2 emission [16].

As being the simplest hydrocarbon and the main constituent of natural gas as given in Table 2, methane has been mainly considered for solar cracking. Chemical reaction of evolution of carbon black and methane is given in equation (7) [18, 19]. The kinetic mechanism of methane cracking at 1500 K and atmospheric pressure was proposed as [20, 21],

 ZnO→1600-1800CoZn+12O2ZnO+H2O→400CoZnO+H2 (7)

#### Table 4.

Targets of Department of Energy of US [14] and predictions [78] for cost and efficiency for ZnO/Zn thermochemical cycle.

[i] - gge refers to gallon-of-gas-equivalent.

[ii] - Based on predicted ZnO-to-Zn conversions of 70% in 2015 and 85% in 2025.

In summary, the advantages of solar fuels include:

• Energy content or heating value of feedstock is increased by converting it to another form, solar fuel.

• Producing storable and transportable fuel which is not possible if solar energy is directly used. Thus, eliminates the intermittency problem of solar energy.

• Solar fuels are clean and sustainable. The thermochemical cycles and thermolysis of water that are used to produce solar fuels have no CO or CO2 emissions. However, carbon emission occurs for the gasification or reforming of carbonecous feedstocks. If these feedstocks are biomass cultivated with CO2 from the atmosphere, they are carbon neutral.

On the other hand, these are not mature technologies and still suffer from technical challenges which form the basis for future research including:

• High temperatures needed for solar fuel production processes. High temperatures can be reached with high concentrating ratios. However, high concentrating ratios bring high cost to the system, and high temperatures restrict the material choice.

• Recombination of product gases, especially in thermochemical cycles, is a significant problem. This recombination significantly decreases both the process and overall solar-to-fuel efficiency.

• Quenching is introduced to products in order to reduce the recombination. However, quenching adds additional cost and complexity to the reactor and the process management. For some solar thermochemical processes, membranes are also required to separate product gases.

• Particle accumulation on the window of the reactor is a problem in directly irradiated solar reactors. This problem can be eliminated by introducing an inert gas with high flow rates to the reactor which further complicates the management of reaction in the reactor. Another solution is to heat the reactor indirectly which reduces the solar-to-fuel efficiency.

• Multiple-step chemical reactions are needed to produce hydrogen in most of the thermochemical cycles. More reactions add further components to the system which increase the cost and the management of the overall fuel production process.

• CO and CO2 formation can be noteworthy in case of solar gasification and reforming of carbonecous feedstock, although solar fuels are accepted as clean fuels.

These drawbacks of the solar fuel production prevent the technology to be converted to large scale commercially available power plants. However, solar fuel production processes are thermodynamically efficient, favorable developments to increase the feedstock’s heating values with the unlimited free solar energy. Therefore, in a long-term prospect, solar fuel production is a promising technology that needs significant research efforts for efficiently producing clean and sustainable fuels.

## References

1 - Nowotny J, Sorrell C, Sheppard L, Bak T. Solar-Hydrogen: Environmentally Safe Fuel for the Future. International Journal of Hydrogen Energy. 2005;30(5):521-44.
2 - Steinfeld A, Palumbo R. Solar Thermochemical Process Technology. Encyclopedia of Physical Science and Technology. 2001;15(1):237-56.
3 - Steinfeld A, Meier A. Solar Fuels and Materials. Amsterdam: Elsevier; 2004. p. 623–37.
4 - Baykara S. Experimental Solar Water Thermolysis. International Journal of Hydrogen Energy. 2004;29(14):1459-69.
5 - Steinfeld A. Solar Hydrogen Production via a Two-Step Water-Splitting Thermochemical Cycle Based on Zn/ZnO Redox Reactions. International Journal of Hydrogen Energy. 2002;27(6):611-9.
6 - Funke HH, Diaz H, Liang X, Carney CS, Weimer AW, Li P. Hydrogen Generation by Hydrolysis of Zinc Powder Aerosol. International Journal of Hydrogen Energy. 2008;33(4):1127-34.
7 - Abanades S, Charvin P, Lemont F, Flamant G. Novel Two-Step SnO2/SnO Water-Splitting Cycle for Solar Thermochemical Production of Hydrogen. International Journal of Hydrogen Energy. 2008;33(21):6021-30.
8 - Meier A, Steinfeld A. Solar Thermochemical Production of Fuels. Advances in Science and Technology. 2011;74(1):303-12.
9 - Chueh WC, Haile SM. Ceria as a Thermochemical Reaction Medium for Selectively Generating Syngas or Methane from H2O and CO2. ChemSusChem. 2009;2(8):735-9.
10 - Kappauf T, Fletcher EA. Hydrogen and Sulfur from Hydrogen Sulfide—VI. Solar Thermolysis. Energy. 1989;14(8):443-9.
11 - Zaman J, Chakma A. Production of Hydrogen and Sulfur from Hydrogen Sulfide. Fuel processing technology. 1995;41(2):159-98.
12 - Steinfeld A. Solar Thermochemical Production of Hydrogen - a Review. Solar energy. 2005;78(5):603-15.
13 - Harvey WS, Davidson JH, Fletcher EA. Thermolysis of Hydrogen Sulfide in the Temperature Range 1350-1600 K. Industrial & engineering chemistry research. 1998;37(6):2323-32.
14 - Perret R. Solar Thermochemical Hydrogen Production Research (STCH), Thermochemical Cycle Selection and Investment Priority. Albuquerque, New Mexico and Livermore, California: Sandia National Laboratories 2011. Report No.: SAND2011–3622.
15 - Perkins C, Weimer AW. Solar‐Thermal Production of Renewable Hydrogen. AIChE Journal. 2009;55(2):286-93.
16 - Zedtwitz P, Steinfeld A. The Solar Thermal Gasification of Coal—Energy Conversion Efficiency and CO2 Mitigation Potential. Energy. 2003;28(5):441-56.
17 - Maag G, Zanganeh G, Steinfeld A. Solar Thermal Cracking of Methane in a Particle-Flow Reactor for the Co-Production of Hydrogen and Carbon. International Journal of Hydrogen Energy. 2009;34(18):7676-85.
18 - Hirsch D, Epstein M, Steinfeld A. The Solar Thermal Decarbonization of Natural Gas. International Journal of Hydrogen Energy. 2001;26(10):1023-33.
19 - Ozalp N, Kogan A, Epstein M. Solar Decomposition of Fossil Fuels as an Option for Sustainability. International Journal of Hydrogen Energy. 2009;34(2):710-20.
20 - Rodat S, Abanades S, Coulié J, Flamant G. Kinetic Modelling of Methane Decomposition in a Tubular Solar Reactor. Chemical Engineering Journal. 2009;146(1):120-7.
21 - Abanades S, Flamant G. Hydrogen Production from Solar Thermal Dissociation of Methane in a High-Temperature Fluid-Wall Chemical Reactor. Chemical Engineering and Processing: Process Intensification. 2008;47(3):490-8.
22 - Almodaris M, Khorasani S, Abraham JJ, Ozalp N, editors. Simulation of Solar Thermo-Chemical Hydrogen Production Techniques. ASME/JSME 2011 8th Thermal Engineering Joint Conference; 2011 March 13-17, 2011; Honolulu, Hawaii, USA: ASME.
23 - Rodat S, Abanades S, Flamant G. High-Temperature Solar Methane Dissociation in a Multitubular Cavity-Type Reactor in the Temperature Range 1823 − 2073 K. Energy & fuels. 2009;23(5):2666-74.
24 - Kamka F, Jochmann A, Picard L, editors. Development Status of BGL Gasification. International Freiberg Conference on IGCC & XtL Technologies; 2005; Freiberg, Germany.
25 - Higman C, Burgt Mvd. Gasification. Second ed. Oxford, UK: Gulf Professional Publishing; 2008.
26 - Basu P. Biomass Gasification and Pyrolysis: Practical Design and Theory. Burlington, MA: Academic Press; 2010.
27 - Kodama T, Kondoh Y, Tamagawa T, Funatoh A, Shimizu K, Kitayama Y. Fluidized Bed Coal Gasification with CO2 under Direct Irradiation with Concentrated Visible Light. Energy & fuels. 2002;16(5):1264-70.
28 - Aoki A, Ohtake H, Shimizu T, Kitayama Y, Kodama T. Reactive Metal-Oxide Redox System for a Two-Step Thermochemical Conversion of Coal and Water to CO and H2. Energy. 2000;25(3):201-18.
29 - Flechsenhar M, Sasse C. Solar Gasification of Biomass Using Oil Shale and Coal as Candidate Materials. Energy. 1995;20(8):803-10.
30 - Van Heek K. General Aspects and Engineering Principles for Technical Application of Coal Gasification. In: Figuieiredo JL, Moulijn JA, editors. Carbon and Coal Gasification: Science and Technology. Alvor, Portugal: Springer; 1986. p. 383-402.
31 - Piatkowski N, Wieckert C, Steinfeld A. Experimental Investigation of a Packed-Bed Solar Reactor for the Steam-Gasification of Carbonaceous Feedstocks. Fuel processing technology. 2009;90(3):360-6.
32 - Devi L, Ptasinski KJ, Janssen FJJG. A Review of the Primary Measures for Tar Elimination in Biomass Gasification Processes. Biomass and Bioenergy. 2003;24(2):125-40.
33 - Weimer A, Perkins C, Mejic D, Lichty P, inventors; WO Patent WO/2008/027,980, assignee. Rapid Solar-Thermal Conversion of Biomass to Syngas. United States patent WO2008027980. 2008 06.03.2008.
34 - Quaschning V. Technology Fundamentals. Solar Thermal Power Plants. Renew Energy World. 2003;6(6):109-13.
35 - Fernández-García A, Zarza E, Valenzuela L, Pérez M. Parabolic-Trough Solar Collectors and Their Applications. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews. 2010;14(7):1695-721.
36 - Morrison G, Budihardjo I, Behnia M. Water-in-Glass Evacuated Tube Solar Water Heaters. Solar energy. 2004;76(1):135-40.
37 - Duffie JA, Beckman WA. Solar Engineering of Thermal Processes. 3rd ed. New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons; 2006.
38 - Mills DR, Morrison GL. Compact Linear Fresnel Reflector Solar Thermal Powerplants. Solar energy. 2000;68(3):263-83.
39 - Acciona North America. Nevada Solar One. http://www.acciona-na.com/About-Us/Our-Projects/U-S-/Nevada-Solar-One (accessed September 9, 2012).
40 - California Energy Commission. Large Solar Energy Projects. http://www.energy.ca.gov/siting/solar/ (accessed September 9, 2012).
41 - Wald ML. The New York Times: In the Desert, Harnessing the Power of the Sun by Capturing Heat Instead of Light. http://www.nytimes.com/2007/07/17/business/17thermal.html?_r=1 (accessed September 18, 2012).
42 - Areva. Our Technology and Features. http://www.areva.com/EN/solar-198/arevasolarour-technology.html#tab=tab2 (accessed September 9, 2012).
43 - Abbas R, Montes M, Piera M, Martínez-Val J. Solar Radiation Concentration Features in Linear Fresnel Reflector Arrays. Energy Conversion and Management. 2012;54(1):133-44.
44 - National Renewable Energy Laboratory. Puerto Errado 2 Thermosolar Power Plant. http://www.nrel.gov/csp/solarpaces/project_detail.cfm/projectID=159 (accessed September 9, 2012).
45 - Novatec Solar. Puerto Errado 2 in Spain. http://www.novatecsolar.com/56-1-PE-2.html (accessed September 9, 2012).
46 - Tubosol PE2. Puerto Errado 2 (in German). http://www.puertoerrado2.com/ (accessed September 18, 2012).
47 - Ummadisingu A, Soni M. Concentrating Solar Power–Technology, Potential and Policy in India. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews. 2011;15(9):5169-75.
48 - Kaygusuz K. Prospect of Concentrating Solar Power in Turkey: The Sustainable Future. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews. 2011;15(1):808-14.
49 - SRP. Tessera Solar and Stirling Energy Systems Unveil World’s First Commercial-Scale Suncatcher Plant, Maricopa Solar – Peoria, Arizona. http://energydeals.wordpress.com/2010/06/04/tessera-solar-and-stirling-energy-systems-unveil-worlds-first-commercial-scale-suncatcher-plant-maricopa-solar-with-partner-srp/ (accessed September 18, 2012).
50 - United States Environmental Protection Agency. Final Report: Design and Fabrication of a Reduced Cost Heliostat. http://cfpub.epa.gov/ncer_abstracts/index.cfm/fuseaction/display.abstractDetail/abstract/9033/report/F (accessed September 10, 2012).
51 - Pitz-Paal R, Botero NB, Steinfeld A. Heliostat Field Layout Optimization for High-Temperature Solar Thermochemical Processing. Solar energy. 2011;85(2):334-43.
52 - Jones SA, Lumia R, Davenport R, Thomas RC, Gorman D, Kolb GJ, et al. Heliostat Cost Reduction Study. Albuquerque, New Mexico and Livermore, California.: Sandia National Laboratories 2007. Report No.: SAND2007-3293.
53 - National Renewable Energy Laboratory. Planta Solar 20. http://www.nrel.gov/csp/solarpaces/project_detail.cfm/projectID=39 (accessed September 10, 2012).
54 - Solar Reserve. Crescent Dunes. http://www.solarreserve.com/what-we-do/csp-projects/crescent-dunes/ (accessed September 10, 2012).
55 - Abengoa Solar. PS20, the Largest Solar Power Tower Worldwide. http://www.abengoasolar.com/corp/web/en/nuestras_plantas/plantas_en_operacion/espana/PS20_la_mayor_torre_comercial_del_mundo.html (accessed September 18, 2012).
56 - Ávila-Marín AL. Volumetric Receivers in Solar Thermal Power Plants with Central Receiver System Technology: A Review. Solar energy. 2011;85(5):891-910.
57 - Pavlović TM, Radonjić IS, Milosavljević DD, Pantić LS. A Review of Concentrating Solar Power Plants in the World and Their Potential Use in Serbia. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews. 2012;16(6):3891-902.
58 - Yeheskel J, Epstein M. Thermolysis of Methane in a Solar Reactor for Mass-Production of Hydrogen and Carbon Nano-Materials. Carbon. 2011;49(14):4695-703.
59 - Abanades S, Flamant G. Experimental Study and Modeling of a High-Temperature Solar Chemical Reactor for Hydrogen Production from Methane Cracking. International Journal of Hydrogen Energy. 2007;32(10-11):1508-15.
60 - Abanades S, Flamant G. Production of Hydrogen by Thermal Methane Splitting in a Nozzle-Type Laboratory-Scale Solar Reactor. International Journal of Hydrogen Energy. 2005;30(8):843-53.
61 - Klein HH, Karni J, Rubin R. Dry Methane Reforming without a Metal Catalyst in a Directly Irradiated Solar Particle Reactor. Journal of solar energy engineering. 2009;131(2):021001.
62 - Z’graggen A, Haueter P, Trommer D, Romero M, De Jesus J, Steinfeld A. Hydrogen Production by Steam-Gasification of Petroleum Coke Using Concentrated Solar Power—II Reactor Design, Testing, and Modeling. International Journal of Hydrogen Energy. 2006;31(6):797-811.
63 - Gordillo E, Belghit A. A Bubbling Fluidized Bed Solar Reactor Model of Biomass Char High Temperature Steam-Only Gasification. Fuel processing technology. 2010;92(3):314-21.
64 - Gordillo E, Belghit A. A Downdraft High Temperature Steam-Only Solar Gasifier of Biomass Char: A Modelling Study. Biomass and Bioenergy. 2011;35(5):2034-43.
65 - Hathaway BJ, Davidson JH, Kittelson DB. Solar Gasification of Biomass: Kinetics of Pyrolysis and Steam Gasification in Molten Salt. Journal of solar energy engineering. 2011;133(2):021011.
66 - Rodat S, Abanades S, Flamant G. Co-Production of Hydrogen and Carbon Black from Solar Thermal Methane Splitting in a Tubular Reactor Prototype. Solar energy. 2011;85(4):645-52.
67 - Rodat S, Abanades S, Sans JL, Flamant G. Hydrogen Production from Solar Thermal Dissociation of Natural Gas: Development of a 10 kW Solar Chemical Reactor Prototype. Solar energy. 2009;83(9):1599-610.
68 - Rodat S, Abanades S, Flamant G, editors. Hydrogen Production from Natural Gas Thermal Cracking: Design and Test of a Pilot-Scale Solar Chemical Reactor. 18th World Hydrogen Energy Conference 2010; 2010 May 16-21, 2010; Essen, Germany.
69 - Lichty P, Perkins C, Woodruff B, Bingham C, Weimer A. Rapid High Temperature Solar Thermal Biomass Gasification in a Prototype Cavity Reactor. Journal of solar energy engineering. 2010;132(1):011012.
70 - Wullenkord M, Funken KH, Sattler C, Pitz-Paal R, Stolten D, Grube T, editors. Hydrogen Production by Thermal Cracking of Methane–Investigation of Reaction Conditions. 18th World Hydrogen Energy Conference; 2010; Essen, Germany.
71 - Worner A, Tamme R. CO2 Reforming of Methane in a Solar Driven Volumetric Receiver-Reactor. Catalysis today. 1998;46(2-3):165-74.
72 - Maag G, Rodat S, Flamant G, Steinfeld A. Heat Transfer Model and Scale-up of an Entrained-Flow Solar Reactor for the Thermal Decomposition of Methane. International Journal of Hydrogen Energy. 2010;35(24):13232-41.
73 - Osinga T, Olalde G, Steinfeld A. Solar Carbothermal Reduction of ZnO: Shrinking Packed-Bed Reactor Modeling and Experimental Validation. Industrial & engineering chemistry research. 2004;43(25):7981-8.
74 - Osinga T, Frommherz U, Steinfeld A, Wieckert C. Experimental Investigation of the Solar Carbothermic Reduction of ZnO Using a Two-Cavity Solar Reactor. Journal of solar energy engineering. 2004;126(1):633-7.
75 - Epstein M, Olalde G, Santén S, Steinfeld A, Wieckert C. Towards the Industrial Solar Carbothermal Production of Zinc. Journal of Solar Energy Engineering. 2008;130(1):014505.
76 - Wieckert C, Frommherz U, Kräupl S, Guillot E, Olalde G, Epstein M, et al. A 300 Kw Solar Chemical Pilot Plant for the Carbothermic Production of Zinc. Journal of Solar Energy Engineering. 2007;129(2):190-6.
77 - Piatkowski N, Steinfeld A. Solar-Driven Coal Gasification in a Thermally Irradiated Packed-Bed Reactor. Energy & Fuels. 2008;22(3):2043-52.
78 - Kromer M, Roth K, Takata R, Chin P. Support for Cost Analyses on Solar-Driven High Temperature Thermochemical Water-Splitting Cycles. Lexington, MA: TIAX, LLC2011 February 22, 2011. Report No.: DE-DT0000951.