Energy Conversion and Management 182 (2019) 21–33

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Energy Conversion and Management

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

Review

Questions and current understanding about solar chimney power plant: A T

review
⁎
Penghua Guoa, , Tiantian Lia, Ben Xub, Xinhai Xuc, Jingyin Lia
a
School of Energy and Power Engineering, Xi’an Jiaotong University, Xi’an 710049, China
b
Department of Mechanical Engineering, The University of Texas Rio Grande Valley, Edinburg, TX 78539, USA
c
School of Mechanical Engineering and Automation, Harbin Institute of Technology, Shenzhen Graduate School, Shenzhen 518055, China

A R T I C LE I N FO A B S T R A C T

Keywords: Interest in solar chimney power plant (SCPP) has seen resurgence due to the continuously increasing awareness
Solar chimney on environmental concerns, particularly greenhouse gas emissions from fossil fuels, since the 21st century.
Solar updraft tower Although remarkable advances in the understanding of SCPP have been achieved through extensive theoretical,
Turbine experimental, and numerical studies with different focuses on various aspects of the SCPP technology, no in-
Optimal design
dustrial scale SCPP has been built. In response to these new scientific advances and challenges for commer-
Scale analysis
cialization, seven questions, including parameter influences, turbine design, flow and heat transfer character-
istics, similarity analysis, and hybrid systems, are presented in this work. In addition, answers and current
understanding are included to provide succinct links to latest knowledge and identify areas that require further
research.

1. Introduction
Rapid industrial growth has raised concerns about high energy
consumption worldwide, especially with the increasing energy demand
of developing countries, such as China and India. At the same time,
supplying energy becomes increasingly difficult due to environmental
concerns, including pollution and climate change associated with the
use of fossil fuels. The best possible solution to address the challenges of
a sustainable energy supply is to reduce dependence on fossil fuels and
move toward renewable resources. The solar chimney power plant
(SCPP) or solar updraft tower power plant offers promising option for
the large-scale utilization of solar energy by combining relatively
simple and reliable technologies, such as solar thermal collector,
chimney, and turbine (Fig. 1). The solar radiation passes through the
transparent roof of the solar collector and is received by the natural
ground or an additional absorber laid on the ground. The absorber
heats up the ambient cool air that enters the system by the greenhouse
effect. Then, the warm air flows to the collector exit, also the entrance
of the chimney. The density difference between the warm air inside the
chimney and the ambient cool air creates buoyancy that acts as the
driving force. The updraft airflow is then generated in the chimney due
to buoyancy effect and is used to drive the pressure-staged turbine at
the chimney base to generate electricity. Heat is stored in the absorber
when solar radiation is strong during daytime on sunny days and is
released from the heat storage when the solar radiation is weak during
night time or cloudy days.
The SCPP, as an environmentally acceptable energy resource, offers
numerous advantages, such as (1) the use of beam and diffuse solar
radiation, which are crucial for tropical countries, where the sky is
frequently overcast; (2) independent of cooling water during operation,
thereby making its application suitable for regions that suffer from
water shortage; and (3) turbines and power generators are its only
moving parts, thus leading to low operation and maintenance (O&M)
costs, high durability, and long lifecycle. Therefore, many feasibility
studies on SCPP have been reported worldwide due to its considerable
potential applications [1–14], and Fig. 2 marks the geographical loca-
tions (the specific locations are listed in Table 1).
The German government and a Spanish utility company jointly
constructed and successfully operated the first pilot SCPP prototype
(hereinafter called Spanish prototype) in Manzanares, Spain in 1982 to
determine the feasibility and verify the physical principle [33,34]. The
Spanish prototype with a peak power of approximately 50 kW had a
194.6-m high steel chimney, a 122-m radius collector, and a single
vertical axis single-rotor turbine, which was installed 9 m above the
ground level (Fig. 3). From mid-1986 to early 1989, the Spanish pro-
totype ran fully automatically an average of 8.9 h per day. Since then,
various small-scale SCPP experiments were conducted worldwide
[8,16,17,21–25,27–30,35] (Fig. 2). However, none of these

⁎
Corresponding author.
E-mail address: penghuaguo@xjtu.edu.cn (P. Guo).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enconman.2018.12.063
Received 25 October 2018; Accepted 22 December 2018
Available online 02 January 2019
0196-8904/ © 2018 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
P. Guo et al.
Nomenclature
A area (m2)
cp specific heat capacity (J kg−1 K−1)
fopt optimal turbine pressure drop ratio
g gravitational acceleration (m s−2)
H chimney height (m)
I solar radiation (W m−2)
k adiabatic index
ṁ mass flow rate (Kg s−1)
p pressure (Pa)
P power output (kW)
Q heat flux (W m−2)
T temperature (K)
V updraft velocity (m s−1)
Greek symbols
β thermal expansion coefficient (K−1)
experimental setups examined a chimney higher than 100 m. The ex-
perimental data from the Spanish prototype are still used for the vali-
dation of theoretical and numerical models in most of studies
[2,36–44]. No commercial SCPP has been built yet because of low
thermal efficiency, construction difficulty of super tall chimney, and
accompanying substantial capital cost [45]. Hence, the analytical and
numerical methods are generally employed to compute the SCPP
characteristic. The typical analytical method is mainly based on one-
dimensional thermal equilibrium analysis inside the collector. In gen-
eral, one-dimensional mathematical models cannot provide detailed
distributions of the velocity, temperature and pressure inside the whole
system. The computational fluid dynamic (CFD) techniques are in-
creasingly being employed to predict the SCPP performance in recent
years. Compared with the analytical method, fewer assumptions are
used in the CFD method but more detailed descriptions of temperature
and flow field could be obtained. The review by Kasaeian et al. [46]
provided a general vision of the CFD studies of SCPP up to 2015.
The future of SCPP application not only shows remarkable chal-
lenges but also reasons for optimism. Simultaneously, the continuous
development of computer technology and numerical models is bringing
increased precision and reliability of predicting SCPP system perfor-
mance, which can provide comprehensive and deep understanding of
SCPP. In addition, improved construction technology and various in-
novative ideas will allow high solar chimney and cost-efficient SCPP in
the future. Many interesting questions in the field of SCPP, ranging from
design application to detailed fluid flow and heat transfer
Fig. 1. Solar chimney power plant schematic.
22
Energy Conversion and Management 182 (2019) 21–33
γ cycle pressure ratio
ΔP pressure drop (Pa)
ΔT air temperature rise (K)
ζ flow loss coefficient
η efficiency
θ temperature difference (K)
υ kinematic viscosity (m2 s−1)
ρ air density (kg m−3)
τ cycle temperature ratio
Subscripts
a ambient
chim chimney
coll collector
turb turbine
characteristics, are asked. We hope that the questions presented in this
work not only provide updated and comprehensive reference to re-
searchers but also show a roadmap to researchers for future work in this
area.
2. Seven questions about the SCPP system
2.1. Is there an optimal arrangement of geometric parameters for the SCPP?
Research has been particularly concentrated on the effects of var-
ious geometric parameters on the performance of SCPP since the early
1980s [47–53]. The most relevant dimensional parameters that influ-
ence the SCPP performance include chimney height, collector area, and
chimney diameter, which are also the main factors that determine the
construction cost of the SCPP. In early studies on SCPP, the theoretical
power output was reported to be directly proportional to the collector
area and chimney height. However, limitations on the dimensions of
the collector area and chimney height are set for power generation from
practical points. Given that the temperature of updraft inside the
chimney decreases more quickly than that of the ambient air due to
gravitational potential energy and heat losses along the chimney, the
effectiveness of the buoyancy weakens with the increase in chimney
height. Moreover, flow losses in the chimney increase with the chimney
height. The declining buoyancy effect and increasing flow losses with
the chimney height jointly limited the chimney height for power
output. Zhou et al. [54] first proved the existence of maximum chimney
height by using a theoretical model and indicated that the maximum
height increased with the collector radius. In addition, wind and
seismic activities are the main natural hazards to be considered when
constructing a super tall chimney. Similarly, the collector area has a
limitation, above which no obvious profit for power output can be at-
tained due to the heat balance between the heat losses in the collector
and incident solar radiation. Guo et al. [55] reported the value of 380 m
as the maximum collector radius for the Spanish prototype through a
self-developed MATLAB program. The limitations of the chimney
height and collector area were also discussed in an indoor scale ex-
perimental study on the SCPP through the active control of the en-
vironmental parameters, and a similar conclusion was arrived at [27].
The effect of chimney diameter on the system’s performance is more
complicated than those of the chimney height and collector area. The
chimney slenderness ratio, which is the ratio of the chimney height to
its diameter, is generally used to evaluate the effects of chimney dia-
meter. The chimney slenderness ratios used in the literature have been
summarized in Table 2. Kashiwa et al. [56] mentioned that if the
P. Guo et al. Energy Conversion and Management 182 (2019) 21–33

Fig. 2. Locations of the feasibility and experimental studies of SCPP (denoted as red spots and green spots, respectively).

chimney was not sufficiently slender, then the wind variation at the increase only led to minimal changes when it is beyond 100 m, thereby
chimney top could have a strong influence on the updraft of the revealing an optimal chimney slenderness ratio within 6–8. Petrorius
chimney. A slenderness ratio of 12 is considered sufficient to avoid a [57] reported a similar optimal slenderness ratio of 5 or 6 in terms of
strong influence on the updraft due to inevitable winds. Hamdan [9] power production and indicated that small slenderness ratio increased
reported that the chimney diameter had a prominent effect on the the risk for the plant to experience cold air inflow.
harvested power mainly when it was below a critical value. If the Although extensive research has been conducted on the geometric
chimney diameter is larger than the critical diameter value, then the parameters of SCPP, the issue related to the clear optimal design
effect of chimney diameter is minimal. Similar result was found in Ming principle of the SCPP remains unresolved. Researchers attempt to find
et al.’s numerical study on the effects of chimney slenderness ratio on the optimal SCPP configurations by maximizing the power output as an
the performance of a SCPP with 1000-m high chimney [42]. Their objective function [66–70]. However, if the economic factors are ne-
numerical results indicated that the growth of the chimney diameter glected, then optimal dimensions do not exist for a SCPP [71,72]. Thus,
within 100 m greatly enhanced the power production, whereas its the multi-objective optimization approach is helpful and effective for
determining the optimal geometric parameters of the SCPP. Dehghani
Table 1 and Mohammadi [73] performed a multi-objective optimization to se-
Specific locations of the feasibility and experimental studies of SCPP. lect the optimum SCPP configuration by using evolutionary algorithm
techniques. The power output and capital cost were simultaneously
Site Researchers Type
considered as the objective functions. Gholamalizadeh and Kim [74]
Lanzhou, China Cao et al. [1] Feasibility study presented a multi-objective design to simultaneously optimize three
Saudi Arabia Mostafa et al. [2] Feasibility study conflicting objectives, including system efficiency, power output, and
Kyrenia, Northern Cyprus Okoye and Atikol [3] Feasibility study
expenditure, by using genetic algorithms. Their comparison results
Lebanon Bayeh and Moubayed [4] Feasibility study
Iran Sangi [5] Feasibility study between the Spanish prototype and optimal solution were listed in
Dalmatia Nizetic et al. [6] Feasibility study Table 3. The power output, total efficiency and expenditure obtained by
Lanzhou, China Cao et al. [7] Feasibility study the optimal configuration are 3.39, 1.311 and 2.45 times greater than
Egypt Mostafa et al. [8] Feasibility study the values of the Spanish prototype. Notably, a successful optimal SCPP
United Arab Emirates Hamdan [9] Feasibility study
Adrar, Algeria Larbi et al. [10] Feasibility study
design not only depends on the accurate estimation of the power output
Qinghai-Tibet Plateau, China Zhou et al. [11] Feasibility study but also on the reasonable economic analysis. However, the latter has
Ningxia, China Dai et al. [12] Feasibility study received far less attentions than the former. Economic analysis is an
Botswana Ketlogetswe et al. [13] Feasibility study important issue in developing and commercializing the SCPP tech-
Sinkiang, China Guo et al. [14] Feasibility study
nology, but its estimated range of the levelized electricity cost (LCOE)
Izmir, Turkey Kulunk [15] Experimental study
Florida, USA Pasumarthi and Sherif [16] Experimental study varies widely in the literature [61,63,71,75–79]. The estimated LCOEs
Wuhan, China Zhou et al. [17] Experimental study in these studies are remarkably higher than that of the fossil-fueled
Belo Horizonte, Brazil Maia et al. [18] Experimental study power of 0.04–0.06 $/kWh [80]. However, the SCPP is still at the early
Bundoora, Australia Akbarzadeh et al. [19] Experimental study stage of its development, and its cost can still be significantly reduced
Karak, Jordan Al-Dabbas [20] Experimental study
Zanjan, Iran Kasaeian et al. [21] Experimental study
after its broad deployment. This condition has been proven by the case
Damascus, Syria Kalash et al. [22] Experimental study of wind power, which has demonstrated a kind of asymptotic approach
Gaborone, Botswana Motsamai et al. [23] Experimental study to its current level after 400 GW is installed; or the case of solar PV,
Tehran, Iran Ghalamchi et al. [24,25] Experimental study which has experienced rapid cost reduction of one order of magnitude
Texas, USA Raney et al. [26] Experimental study
after 200 GW is installed. With the broad deployment of SCPPs, cost
Xi’an, China Guo et al. [27] Experimental study
Kota, India Lal et al. [28] Experimental study reductions may come from technical improvements, large plant sizes,
Suva, Fiji Ahmed and Patel [29] Experimental study new materials, and on-site assembly activities. Thus, accompanied with
Qinghai, China Guo et al. [30] Experimental study the rapid development of the SCPP technology, its detailed and updated
New Mexico Chi et al. [31] Experimental study economic analyses on the SCPP are needed for its application [81].
Fukuoka, Japan Okada et al. [32] Experimental study

23
P. Guo et al. Energy Conversion and Management 182 (2019) 21–33

Fig. 3. First pilot SCPP prototype at Manzanares, Spain.

Table 2 2.2. What is the effect of climate parameters on the SCPP performance
Chimney slenderness ratios used in the literature.
Researchers Year Power Chimney Chimney Many researchers indicate that the power generation of SCPP, as a
capacity height (m) slenderness ratio solar thermal power technology, is positively affected by the solar ra-
(MW) diation intensity. However, other meteorological parameters, such as
ambient temperature, humidity, and ambient wind also have a complex
Haaf [34]a 1984 0.05 194.6 19.15
Schlaich [58] 1995 100 950 8.26
effect on the SCPP’s performance, and hence, need to be addressed.
Pasumarthi and Sherif 1998 10 1000 15.63 The effects of the ambient temperature on SCPP’s performance can
[59] be analyzed from the buoyancy term of the momentum equation based
Pretorius and Kröger 2006 295b 1500 9.38 on the Boussinesq model:
[60]
Nizetic et al. [6] 2008 8.2b 550 6.71 (ρ − ρa )g ≈ −ρa β (T − Ta) g (1)
Fluri et al. [61] 2009 66b 1000 9.1
Bernardes et al. [62] 2010 124b 1000 4.76 where ρa is the density of ambient air, Ta is the ambient temperature,
Mostafa et al. [8] 2011 200 1000 6.94
and β is the thermal expansion coefficient. The ambient air density and
Cao et al. [63] 2013 100 580 7.44
Okoye and Atikol [3] 2014 28.8b 750 10.71 thermal expansion coefficient decrease as the ambient temperature
Hooi and Thangavelu 2017 0.616b 500 16.67 increase, thereby decreasing buoyancy force. Guo et al. [82] conducted
[64] numerical simulations on this effect and found that the increase of
Zhou et al. [65] 2017 100 1500 7.14 ambient temperature led to a slight increase in air temperature rise but
Cao et al. [1] 2018 8.15b 547 10.13
an evident decrease on the updraft velocity. The power output de-
a
The values were obtained from the Spanish prototype. creases almost linearly with the increase in ambient temperature during
b
The values were the calculated peak power outputs. the common diurnal temperature range. Choi et al. [83] and Kasaeian
et al. [84] also provided similar conclusions in their theoretical studies.
In addition, Zhou et al. [65] reported that the large diurnal ambient
temperature range could increase the daily total power output to a
small extent and notably narrow down the peak valley difference of the

24
P. Guo et al.
Table 3
Comparison between the Spanish prototype and optimal solution.
Parameters Values of Spanish prototype
Collector radius (m) 122
Chimney height (m) 194.6
Chimney diameter (m) 10
Total efficiency 1.165 × 10−3
Power output (kW) 40.44
Expenditure (U)* 1203
* U is the currency unit used in the literature.
power output within a day.
Given that the SCPP is generally suggested to be constructed at arid
and semi-arid areas, the effects of humidity on the system performance
are neglected in the performance prediction of the SCPP due to the low
relative humidity of these areas. As research continues on the appli-
cation of SCPP, especially some extending use for agriculture, desali-
nation and cooling tower, detailed knowledge on the influence of hu-
midity seems to be important. The effect of the humidity on SCPP’s
performance depends on specific conditions, that is, if the humidifica-
tion of air occurs in the solar collector and if the condensation of
moisture occurs in the chimney [85]. If the humidification process of air
occurs in the collector, then the consumption of latent heat of vapor-
ization will evidently reduce power output, as proven in some hybrid
SCPP system for agriculture [57] and desalination [86]. If no moisture
condensation occurs in the chimney, then the increase of relative hu-
midity will slightly decrease the power output of the SCPP due to the
changes of air thermal properties. When the relative humidity reaches a
critical value or the chimney is high enough, moisture condensation
occurs and releases a large amount of latent heat. The input of addi-
tional sensible heat transformed from the latent heat due to the vapor
condensation greatly increases the power generation. Zhou et al. [87]
reported a lifting condensation level of approximately 769 m high for a
SCPP system under the moist climate conditions of Wuhan, China. Ming
et al. [88] proposed an innovative hybrid desalination system by col-
lecting freshwater from the moist air inside the chimney of SCPP above
the lifting condensation level.
The ambient cross wind (ACW) has remarkable influences on the
structural dynamic and reliability aspects of tall chimneys [89–92],
whereas its effects on the heat and flow characteristic inside the SCPP
were often overlooked or at least underestimated. Serag-Eldin [93] first
reported the effects of ACW on the flow patterns inside the collector and
indicated that the ACW will blow the heated air downstream the col-
lector rather than up the chimney stack, thereby declining the system’s
performance. The reduction of the collector’s inlet height may help
decrease the adverse effects of ACW, but lead to high flow losses inside
the collector. Apparently, the optimization of the collector’s inlet height
Fig. 4. Thermal model in the collector with soil heat storage.
25
Energy Conversion and Management 182 (2019) 21–33
Range of design parameters Values of optimal solution
122–200 193.84
194.6–250 247.88
10–15 14.79
– 1.527 × 10−3
– 137.21
– 2953
is critical for this issue. However, the effects of ACW have not been
considered in current studies about the optimal collector roof height
[94–98]. Actually, the flow in the SCPP belongs to the category of
natural ventilation (NV), which occurs when pressure differences are
generated by two driving forces: Wind (wind-driven NV) or buoyancy
(stack-driven NV). The stack-driven NV is usually considered to be a
single driving force in the SCPP, whereas the wind-driven NV is gen-
erally neglected in various studies. Although stack is generally weaker
than wind in the field of NV for residential buildings [99], things will be
different in the application of SCPP due to its huge heat collector and
tall chimney. Actually, the ACW also generates a suction effect at the
chimney outlet and enables wind-driven NV to increase the updraft in
the SCPP. Zhou et al. [100] observed this positive enhancing effect of
ACW on the updraft velocity through a 1D compressible flow model of
SCPP. Pretorius and Kröger [101] used a comprehensive SCPP model to
investigate the effects of ACW on the system performance and found
that prevailing ACW at the reference site reduced the annual power by
approximately 10% compared with the same plant that experiences no-
wind conditions. Given that the ACW leads to an increased convective
heat transfer coefficient, they attributed the power reduction to the
adverse effect of ACW that resulted in a high heat losses from the col-
lector roof to the environment. This adverse effect overshadowed the
positive effect of high suction effects at the chimney outlet caused by
the ACW. Notably, this work was conducted at a wind speed of only
2 m/s at 10 m above ground level, and the positive effect of the wind-
driven NV will be greatly enhanced if the wind speed increases. In
[100,101], the flow pattern distortions under the collector roof men-
tioned in [93] were neglected. Ming et al. [102,103] investigated the
influences of a strong ACW on the system output power through the
collector inlet and chimney outlet using a 3D numerical simulation by
considering the effects of ACW on every aspect: Increasing the con-
vective heat loss of the collector, deteriorating the flow pattern under
the collector, and enhancing the wind-driven NV at the chimney outlet.
The simulation results reveal that comparably weak ACW will dete-
riorate the flow field under the collector and reduce the output power of
the SUPPS, whereas strong enough ACW may increase the mass flow
P. Guo et al.
rate and output power. They indicated that setting a blockage in front of
the collector inlet would greatly overcome the negative influence of
ACW [104].
Although solar radiation is the primary factor that determines the
selection of construction location for SCPP, other meteorological (am-
bient temperature, humidity, ambient wind and sandstorm weather)
and geographic parameters should be considered. Given that the CFD
method has advantages in the fine assessment of wind environment and
a geographic information system (GIS) has excellent performance in
spatial analysis, numerical studies integrating the CFD and GIS may be
needed in the further for the deployment of SCPP.
2.3. What is the role of radiation heat transfer in the thermal process of
SCPP?
The collector essentially functions as a solar air heater, which heats
up the ambient air that enters the collector. Fig. 4 illustrates the heat
transfer scheme in a conventional SCPP collector with soil heat storage.
The incident heat energy is divided into three parts: Heat transferred to
the working air by convection, heat transferred to the underground by
conduction, and heat losses from the collector roof. Radiation heat
transfer mainly occurs between the ground surface and the collector
roof, which is made of different types of semi-transparent materials,
such as glass or plastic. The collector roof is nearly transparent for in-
cident solar radiation but partly opaque for infrared radiation from the
ground surface, thereby leading to a greenhouse effect.
The greenhouse effect inside the SCPP collector differs from the
operation theory of the agricultural greenhouse (also called a glass-
house). Given that the convection inside the SCPP is significantly en-
hanced due to the existence of the tall chimney at the collector central,
the radiation heat transfer become a critical part of the heat transfer
process inside the collector, and thus cannot be neglected.
The radiation heat transfer was neglected by many numerical stu-
dies on the performance prediction of the SCPP. Pastohr et al. [105]
performed a 2D numerical simulation on the SCPP to investigate the
temperature and flow fields in the collector. The energy fluxes from
radiation heat transfer were assumed to be small in comparison to that
from convection and conduction, and were neglected in their simula-
tion. Unreasonably high temperatures at the ground surface were ob-
served in their simulation results and lack of reasonable explanation.
Similar numerical treatment was adopted by some following numerical
(a) Without radiation model
Fig. 5. Comparison of temperature distribution inside the collector with and without radiation model: (a) Without radiation model and (b) with radiation model
(Unit: K).
26
Energy Conversion and Management 182 (2019) 21–33
studies which do not take the collector roof into consideration and
make the ground surface absorbing all the solar radiation [41,103].
Another approach was used to treat the incident solar energy as volume
heat source of air within the working air inside the collector [106].
However, air is a transparent medium and does not participate radia-
tion heat transfer according to heat transfer theory. Such a treatment
might be simple but conceptually incorrect. To identify the effects of
the radiation heat transfer on the temperature field of the SCPP, Guo
et al. compared the numerical results with and without considering the
discrete ordinates (DO) radiation model [82,107]. As shown in Fig. 5, in
the case without a radiation model, the temperature at the ground
surface is too high and even reaches over 400 K at the central area.
Fig. 6 shows the temperature distribution of the collector roof with
and without radiation model, which offers a good explanation of why
radiation plays an important role in the heat transfer process of the
SCPP collector. The roof temperature of the case with radiation is sig-
nificantly higher than that of the case without radiation, due to the
absorbed radiation heat flux from the ground surface. Given that the
heat losses from the external surface of the collector consist of two
parts: heat transfer to ambient air by convection and heat transfer to the
sky by long-wave radiation, a high roof temperature will lead to large
heat losses and low collector efficiency. Following the work of Guo
et al., many researchers [2,64,68,108,109] also adopt DO radiation
model in their numerical study on the SCPP. Furthermore, Huang et al.
combined a self-coded 2D radiation model with FLUENT as UDFs and
obtained results similar to aforementioned studies but with less com-
putational efforts [110]. These numerical studies proved that simu-
lating the greenhouse effect by considering radiation heat transfer has
an important role to accurately predict the flow and heat transfer
characteristics in SCPP.
2.4. How to maximize the power production of the SCPP turbine?
The turbine, as the only moving part of the SCPP, receives lesser
attention than other parts of the system. Many reports on the data of air
velocity, temperature, and ideal output power that neglects the pre-
sence of any turbine are available [64,111–113]. The electric power
extracted from turbine generators under a turbine load condition can be
calculated as follows:
P = ηturb ·Δpturb ·V̇ (2)
(b) With radiation model
P. Guo et al. Energy Conversion and Management 182 (2019) 21–33

(a) Without radiation model (b) With radiation model

Fig. 6. Comparison of temperature distribution of the collector roof with and without radiation model: (a) Without radiation model and (b) with radiation model
(Unit: K).

where Δpturb and V̇ are the pressure drop and volume flow rate across
the turbine, respectively. The efficient conversion of fluid energy into
electric power primarily depends on two factors: High turbine effi-
ciency (related to the aerodynamic design of the turbine) and suitable
turbine pressure drop (turbine pressure drop and volume flow rate are
coupled).
The pressure drop across the turbine corresponding to the maximum
power production should be determined to guide the aerodynamic de-
sign and regulating operation of the turbine. Fig. 7 shows that the
available driving force can be divided into two parts: The turbine
pressure drop Δpturb and flow losses Δploss . Zero power output is ob-
tained under two extreme conditions: Large turbine pressure drop
leading to a zero flow rate or zero turbine pressure drop leading to a
zero useful work. An optimal turbine pressure drop occurs between
these two extreme conditions to maximize power production. Thus, an
important factor in designing and operating to achieve the maximum
power generation is the ratio of the turbine pressure drop to the driving
force, which is defined as the optimal turbine pressure drop ratio fopt .
The concept of fopt was first mentioned by Haaf in his pioneer study
of the Spanish prototype, and a value of 2/3 was assumed to be theo-
retically optimal [34]. However, many analytical studies have indicated
that the assumption of 2/3 is only true when the driving force is con-
stant with various working conditions [114–117]. Although many ef-
forts have been devoted to figure out the value of fopt , no unified ac-
cepted value for the maximum power production is formulated. The
values of fopt suggested in the literature vary in a wide range (Table 4),
in which the values between 0.8 and 0.9 are mostly used. Experimental
and numerical studies on the SCPP turbine might be appropriate to
solve this problem because many simplifications and assumptions were
generally made in analytical studies. However, experimental and nu-
merical studies about the real turbine inside the SCPP system are re-
latively few [107,118–125]. Theory method, numerical simulation, and
experimental data for such low solidity cascades of SCPP turbines are
needed to accurately predict the inside flow and provide reference for
the turbine design and optimization. Knowledge on modern wind and
gas turbines could provide useful reference for the operation and design
of SCPP turbines.
consuming, setting up small-scale experimental models were widely
adopted in the studies of SCPP. These small experimental SCPP setups
have been summarized in some papers [46,81,134]. The chimney
height mentioned in these experimental studies ranges from 1 m to
60 m, and the majority of them are lower than 10 m. These setups were
built to investigate the different aspects of SCPP, such as the validation
of theoretical and numerical models [8,16,28,135,136], climatic effects
on the performance [20,21,24], temperature field in the collector
[17,22,30], heat storage system [29,137,138], and optimization of
geometric parameters [25,35,67,96].
However, the similarity analysis on how the experimental results
from the small-scale model can be scaled up to their corresponding
parameters for the full-scale SCPP has been rarely mentioned in these
experimental studies. The scale-up problem was first mentioned by
Schlaich et al. in 2005 to describe the design of a 200 MW commercial
SCPP, and no detailed similarity analysis was included in this study
[128]. Koonsrisuk and Chitsomboon reported a series of dynamic si-
milarity analyses by using Buckinghan’s Pi theorem and proposed di-
mensionless variables to guide the experimental study of flow in small-
scale setups [106,139–141]. The central relation obtained by their di-
mensionless analysis is presented as follows:
V2 βgHc
ρAchim V = I ·A coll ·
2 Cp (3)
where Achim, Acoll and Hc represent the flow area in the chimney, the

2.5. Can the results from a laboratory scale model be scaled up to a

commercial one?

After the pilot plant in Manzanares, no large SCPP have been built
due to the problems of cost and structural design aspects [133]. Given
that conducting full-scale experiments is generally expensive and time Fig. 7. Variation of the available power for a turbine with volume flow rate.

27
P. Guo et al. Energy Conversion and Management 182 (2019) 21–33

Table 4
Values of the optimal turbine pressure drop ratio cited in the literature.
Researchers Year Value of fopt

Haaf [34] 1984 2/3

Schlaich [58] 1995 0.82
Pasumarthi and Sherif [126] 1998 16/27
Bernardes et al. [127] 2003 0.97
Pastohr et al. [105] 2004 16/27
Schlaich et al. [128] 2005 0.8
von Backström and Fluri [114] 2006 0.9
Nizetic and Klarin [115] 2010 0.8–0.9
Zhou et al. [11] 2010 0.9
Sangi et al. [37] 2011 16/27
Ming et al. [129] 2013 0.85
Gholamalizadeh and Kim [108] 2014 0.8
Okoye and Atikol [3] 2014 0.84
Guo et al. [14] 2014 0.85
Lupi et al. [130] 2015 2/3
Guo et al. [131] 2016 0.9–0.94
Das and Chandramohan [132] 2018 2/3
Fig. 8. Temperature–entropy diagram for idealized Brayton cycle.

[134]. However, none of these proposals ever made it into operation.

collector area, and the chimney height, respectively. The entire buoyant The high cost, difficulty and possible dangers of constructing such a
energy that resulted from the absorbed solar radiation (right side of Eq. super tall building seem to be the main factors that precludes SCPP
(3)) is converted into kinetic energy of the flow (left side of Eq. (3)). from commercialization. The deeper reason behind these factors lies in
Actually, the buoyant energy in the right side is just the product of the the thermodynamic cycle of the SCPP. The ideal air standard cycle of
absorbed solar radiation I ·Acoll and the chimney efficiency βgHc . The the SCPP is the Brayton cycle [36,144], which is used to describe the
Cp
authors conducted CFD studies for several cases with different scales operation of a constant-pressure heat engine, as illustrated in Fig. 8.
and claimed that the simulation results could support their di- During isobaric processes 2–3, the heat gain of the air in the col-
mensionless analysis well. However, the agreement between their di- lector is,
mensionless analysis and numerical simulation is due to the same as- ̇ p (T3 − T2)
Qcoll = mc (6)
sumption adopted in their study, that is, the heat transfer process in the
collector was neglected. Generally, geometric, kinematic, and thermal The power from expansions 3–4 can be divided into two parts,
similarities should be achieved for the scaled model to the full-scale namely, turbine output and lifting the air up the chimney outlet, when
SCPP. A simple analysis may be started from the dimensional analysis of various losses is neglected in the ideal cycle:
the simplified Navier-Stokes equation for natural convection problem: ̇ p (T3 − T3∗)
Pturb = mc (7)
∂u ∂ 2u
u = gθβ + ν 2 ̇ p (T2 − T1) = mC
mc ̇ p (T3∗ − T4 ) = mg
̇ Δz (8)
∂x ∂x (4)
The thermal efficiency of the cycle can be written as follows:
where θ is the temperature difference from the reference temperature.
Substituting the dimensionless factors x ∗ = x / L , u∗ = u/ u 0 , and Pturb
ηchim =
θ∗ = θ /ΔT into Eq. (4): Qcoll (9)
∂u∗ g ΔTβL ∗ v ∂2u∗ By considering the characteristic of the Brayton cycle,
u∗ = θ +
∂x ∗ u02 Lu 0 ∂x ∗2 (5) T2 p k−1 p k−1 T
= ( 2) k = ( 3) k = 3
v 1 g ΔTβL T1 p1 p4 T4 (10)
where Lu0
= Re
, and u02
= Ri . The Reynolds number Re and the Ri-
chardson number Ri in the experimental model and prototype should the ideal thermal efficiency is written as,
take the same value (provided that in the case the experimental model T1 1
is geometrically similar to the prototype) to satisfy similarity theory. ηchim = 1 − = 1 − k−1
T2 γ k (11)
Studies on the NV of buildings may provide inspiration and reference
p p
for further investigation on the similarity analysis of SCPP given that where γ = p2 = p3 is the cycle pressure ratio, and k is the adiabatic
1 4
the flow in the SCPP in essence belongs to the NV category [142,143]. index. When the adiabatic lapse rate is considered, the thermal effi-
Thus, the generally used dimensionless numbers in these aspects, such ciency can be written as,
as Archimedes number, Reynolds number, and Richardson number,
g Δz
might be considered in the SCPP. Given that CFD simulation is a cost- ηchim =
effective and reliable way to investigate the performance of the SCPP, it Cp T2 (12)
is suitable for use in the similarity analysis between a reduced-scale The ideal thermal efficiency of the SCPP is determined by the
model and full-scale prototype. The relations between the reduced scale chimney height. Take the Spanish prototype for example. The chimney
of the geometry and those of the key parameters (temperature, velocity, height of the Spanish prototype is 194.6 m, which corresponds to a very
and pressure) can be obtained by considering the kinematic and small cycle pressure ratio of 1.023 and leads to a low efficiency of
thermal similarities. 0.65%. Notably, this efficiency is estimated for an idealized Brayton
cycle without including any losses. In real SCPP, losses will occur in
2.6. Why is no large-scale SCPP built after the Spanish prototype? each of the components [144], as shown in Fig. 9, thereby leading to a
much lower system efficiency than that of the idealized Brayton cycle.
In spite of its numerous advantages, SCPP is still far from applica- The losses in the turbine and collector can be considered by the
tion. After the success of the pilot prototype in Spain, many ambitious turbine efficiency ηturb and collector efficiency ηcoll , respectively. The
plans with a chimney height of 1 km were proposed in some countries aerodynamic and exit kinetic energy losses are usually proportional to

28
P. Guo et al. Energy Conversion and Management 182 (2019) 21–33

⎡ ⎤
1 ζV 2
η = ηturb ·ηcoll ⎢1 − k − 1 − τ
⎥
⎢ γ k Cp ( k − 1 − 1) T2 ⎥
⎢
⎣ γ k ⎥
⎦ (16)
For the Spanish prototype, the collector and turbine efficiency (at
design point) are approximately 32% and 83%, respectively [33]. When
various aerodynamic and exit kinetic energy losses are considered, the
overall efficiency of the Spanish prototype during a typical day is not
more than 0.1% as shown in Fig. 10, which is far lower than the
aforementioned efficiency of the ideal Brayton cycle (0.65%). SCPP
belongs to the category of low-temperature solar thermal energy utili-
zation, and its pressure ratio in the thermal cycle is mainly generated by
air gravity, which is strongly related to the air temperature rise and
chimney height. The contradiction between the need for a super tall
chimney to improve its efficiency and the difficulties of constructing
such a super tall building hinder the application of SCPP.
Fig. 9. Temperature–entropy diagram for Brayton cycle with system losses.
2.7. What are the current innovations of the SCPP?

As stated in previous sections, the difficulty of constructing super

tall chimney, the extremely low thermal efficiency, the huge demand
for land area and the intermittence of power generation are the main
disadvantages of the conventional SCPP. To overcome one or several of
these disadvantages, a number of innovative hybrid systems becomes a
new competitive option, most of which fall into one of the three cate-
gories: combination of SCPP and wind capture device, combination of
SCPP and additional external heat source, and combined system for
power generation and other purposes.
High altitude winds are attractive potential source of power due to
their high density and persistence. The tall chimney of the SCPP facil-
itates the installation of wind capture device to harvest wind energy at
high elevation. Li et al. [145] reported a novel solar and wind energy
extraction system, which was a combination of SCPP and tornado-type
wind tower. As the air enters the tornado-type wind tower with a
tangential velocity, a vortex can be generated and lead to a low-pres-
sure region at the base. The tornado-type wind tower was installed at
Fig. 10. Overall efficiency of the Spanish prototype.
the exit of the chimney and the generated pressure deficit will sig-
nificantly enhance the updraft in the chimney. Zhou et al. [146] pro-
the square of the velocity and can be expressed as ζV 2 . Then, the turbine posed the installation of a wind channel with a constricted section at
output can be written as: the chimney outlet to enhance the ventilation effect through venturi
effect. Zuo et al. [147] reported a wind supercharged SCPP system, in
Pturb = ηturb ṁ [cp (T3 − T4 ) − cp (T2 − T1) − ζV 2] (13)
which a wind pressure ventilator was installed at the chimney exit to
utilize high-altitude wind energy. The ventilator blades were rigidly
As the heat loss in the collector is considered by ηcoll , the total input
connected to an H-type vertical axis wind wheel to generate negative
solar energy is
pressure at the chimney outlet and enhance the updraft subsequently.
T3 − T2 Obviously, the use of high-altitude wind energy to generate negative
̇ p
Qsolar = mC
ηcoll (14) pressure at the chimney exit and enhance the updraft is the main
starting point of the aforementioned hybrid systems.
The overall efficiency of the SCPP can be estimated as Several proposals that combine external heat sources have been
reported in the literature to reduce the occupied land area and the
Pturb (T − T4 ) − (T2 − T1 ) ζV 2 construction cost of the collector. Zandian and Ashjaee [148] proposed
η= = ηturb ·ηcoll ⎡ 3 − ⎤
Q solar ⎢ (T − T ) − (T − T ) C (T − T ) ⎥ a hybrid cooling tower-solar chimney system, in which the collector
⎣ 3 1 2 1 p 3 2 ⎦ (15)
area was reduced and the additional necessary heat was obtained from
Substituting the cycle pressure ratio γ and cycle temperature ratio the radiators of the cooling tower. Their simulation results indicated
T3
τ= T
into Eq. (15), the following can be obtained. that the combination of a dry cooling tower with an SCPP will not only
1

Table 5
Main characteristics of each development phase of SCPP.
Year Main activities Target

2019–2023 1. Key technical development: new materials, chimney construction, and turbnine design Proving technical feasibility
2. Experimental construction of 10–100 kW SCPP
3. Research on innovative hybrid SCPP systems
2024–2028 1. Demonstration of 1–10 MW SCPP systems Large-scale demonstration
2. Experiments of innovative hybrid SCPP systems
2029–2033 1. Construction and operation of 10–100 MW commercial SCPP systems Commerical application

29
P. Guo et al.
enhance the Rankine cycle efficiency of the thermal power plant but
also make the conventional SCPP efficient and economic by boosting
their power generation. Zou and He [149] conducted numerical simu-
lations on a similar hybrid system and further proved the viability of
this hybrid concept. Actually, such a hybrid concept can also be applied
to power plants, including coal-fired [150], geothermal [151], nuclear
[152], biomass [153], and other types of solar power plant
[19,154–156] or industrial process with waste heat [157–161].
Considering the low efficiency and discontinuous power output of
SCPP, several creative combined systems that are expected to produce
electric power and other products were proposed in recent years.
Among these novel concepts using SCPP to drive both power generation
and seawater desalination system have received considerable attention
due to global energy crisis and freshwater shortage [162]. These hybrid
systems can be characterized into three categories according to the
contact between airflow and seawater. Wang et al. [163] proposed a
power generation-seawater desalination coupling scheme suitably at a
site adjacent to the sea, in which the seawater was exposed to air in the
SCPP collector as heat storage. The dry ambient air becomes warm and
saturated as it flows through the seawater surface and the vapor con-
tained in the air is condensed at the chimney top by a condenser to
obtain freshwater. Zhou et al. [86] further compared the performance
of this hybrid system with the conventional SCPP through a 1D com-
pressible flow model. The results indicated that the power output of the
hybrid system is less than that of the conventional SCPP because a large
amount of heat is used as latent heat for water evaporation and released
to the ambient at the chimney top. Zuo et al. [59,164] proposed another
type of combined system by integrating insulated solar distillation
ponds inside the SCPP collector. The desalination ponds are sealed
tightly with a glass cover to prevent the evaporated vapor from leaking
into the airflow in the SCPP collector. The vapor is condensed at the
glass cover of the desalination ponds and the released latent heat is
absorbed by air flow through the glass cover’s outer surface. Numerical
and experimental studies were conducted by this group to demonstrate
the feasibility of such concept. Later, Asayesh et al. [165] performed an
optimization of such a combined system by using the particle swarm
optimization algorithm and indicated that its optimal configurations
depend on the local costs of construction, electricity and freshwater.
Different from the aforementioned hybrid systems, Ming et al. [88]
introduced a modified SCPP for power and freshwater production by
installing a warm water shower at the chimney base to enhance the
water evaporating process and humidify the airflow. The moist air cools
down along the chimney and condenses above the lifting condensation
level to acquire freshwater. Theoretical and numerical studies have
been conducted by this group to evaluate the overall performance of the
system [166,167].
The aforementioned hybrid systems are all expected to overcome
the disadvantages of the SCPP, and thus improve its cost effectiveness.
Therefore, these innovative approaches that expand the use of SCPP
may be suggested for future road maps, and additional works are re-
quired in this field.
3. Suggestions for future work
Although remarkable advances in the understanding of SCPP have
been achieved through extensive experimental, theoretical, and nu-
merical studies, there are still, however many stages from these studies
to the commercialization of SCPP. The following suggestions are pro-
posed for future studies:
(1) In contrast with previous numerical studies that focus on flow and
heat transfer inside the SCPP, comprehensive numerical models
considering various geographic and meteorological conditions are
needed in terms of prediction accuracy and computing efficiencies.
The advantages of CFD and GIS can be integrated to provide re-
ference for the planning and construction of SCPP. In addition,
30
Energy Conversion and Management 182 (2019) 21–33
unsteady simulations that consider the variation of meteorological
parameters and heat storage characteristics are needed for the an-
nual performance prediction.
(2) Due to the rapid development of construction and material tech-
nology, more detailed and updated cost analyses applied for dif-
ferent scales of SCPPs are needed, especially for the plant with
super high chimney. The design expenditures, financing costs, tax
credits, and land costs should be considered in the techno-economic
analysis. Significant cost reductions are required to secure market
acceptance and attract investors’ attention. With the broad de-
ployment of SCPPs, cost reductions may come from technical im-
provements, large plant sizes, new materials, on-site assembly ac-
tivities, and especially the innovative hybrid system for multiple
purposes.
(3) No industrial scale SCPP is constructed nearly three decades apart
after constructing the Spanish prototype. Lacking of reliable ex-
perimental results from large-scale SCPP stands as a major obstacle
to the development of the SCPP. In addition, reliable similarity
analysis on scaled experimental data from small-scale model up to
the corresponding results for commercial one is limited. Thus,
building large and updated SCPPs are highly suggested to provide
exhaustive data for deeper understanding of the numerical simu-
lations, cost analysis and system optimization.
(4) The SCPP is at the early stage of development and need significant
improvement. There are many stages from feasibility studies to the
commercialization of SCPP. A possible roadmap for the SCPP de-
velopment with the main characteristics of each phase in 5-year
intervals is listed in Table 5.
4. Summary and conclusions
The SCPP is an eco-friendly renewable energy technology, whose
feasibility has already been demonstrated. In the present study, an
updated and comprehensive literature review on the SCPP is conducted
on the basis of over 160 studies in the past 30 years. Although the SCPP
technology has many advantages and extensive work has been per-
formed, there remains significant challenges before its commercializa-
tion. Further efforts should be devoted in developing full chain projects
from cost analysis, performance prediction, optimal design, small-scale
pilot plant, scale analysis, and commercial application. With the re-
search and development of construction technology, new materials, and
novel concepts, the SCPP will possibly play an important role in in-
creasing energy supplies, improving the energy mix, and alleviating
environmental concerns.
Acknowledgment
This work was supported by National Natural Science Foundation of
China under Contract (Nos.: 51776145, 51406155)
Declaration of interests
The authors declare that they have no known competing financial
interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influ-
ence the work reported in this paper.
The authors declare the following financial interests/personal re-
lationships which may be considered as potential competing interests.
References
[1] Cao F, Liu QJ, Yang T, Zhu TY, Bai JB, Zhao L. Full-year simulation of solar
chimney power plants in Northwest China. Renewable Energy 2018;119:421–8.
[2] Abdelmohimen MAH, Algarni SA. Numerical investigation of solar chimney power
plants performance for Saudi Arabia weather conditions. Sustain Cities Soc
2018;38:1–8.
[3] Okoye CO, Atikol U. A parametric study on the feasibility of solar chimney power
plants in North Cyprus conditions. Energy Convers Manage 2014;80:178–87.
P. Guo et al.
[4] Bayeh CZ, Moubayed N. Comparison between PV farm, solar chimney and CSP
tower in Lebanon: Economical study for 100 MW power plant. Int Conf Renew
Energ Developing Countries 2015:205–10.
[5] Sangi R. Performance evaluation of solar chimney power plants in Iran. Renew.
Sust. Energ. Rev. 2012;16(1):704–10.
[6] Nizetic S, Ninic N, Klarin B. Analysis and feasibility of implementing solar chimney
power plants in the Mediterranean region. Energy 2008;33(11):1680–90.
[7] Cao F, Zhao L, Guo LJ. Simulation of a sloped solar chimney power plant in
Lanzhou. Energy Convers Manage 2011;52(6):2360–6.
[8] Mostafa AA, Sedrak MF, Dayem AMA. Performance of a solar chimney under
egypatian weather conditions: numerical simulation and experimental validation.
Energy Sci Technol 2011;1(1):49–63.
[9] Hamdan MO. Analysis of a solar chimney power plant in the Arabian Gulf region.
Renewable Energy 2011;36(10):2593–8.
[10] Larbi S, Bouhdjar A, Chergui T. Performance analysis of a solar chimney power
plant in the southwestern region of Algeria. Renew Sust Energ Rev
2010;14(1):470–7.
[11] Zhou XP, Wang F, Fan JA, Ochieng RM. Performance of solar chimney power plant
in Qinghai-Tibet Plateau. Renew Sust Energ Rev 2010;14(8):2249–55.
[12] Dai YJ, Huang HB, Wang RZ. Case study of solar chimney power plants in
Northwestern regions of China. Renewable Energy 2003;28(8):1295–304.
[13] Ketlogetswe C, Fiszdon JK, Seabe OO. Solar chimney power generation project -
The case for Botswana. Renew Sust Energ Rev 2008;12(7):2005–12.
[14] Guo PH, Li JY, Wang Y. Annual performance analysis of the solar chimney power
plant in Sinkiang, China. Energy Convers Manage 2014;87:392–9.
[15] Kulunk, H. A prototype solar convection chimney operated under Izmit condition,
In: Proceedings of the 7th Miami International Conference on Alternative Energy
Source, Veiroglu TN (ed, 1985.
[16] Pasumarthi N, Sherif SA. Experimental and theoretical performance of a demon-
stration solar chimney model - Part II: Experimental and theoretical results and
economic analysis. Int J Energy Res 1998;22(5):443–61.
[17] Zhou XP, Yang JK, Xiao B, Hou GX. Experimental study of temperature field in a
solar chimney power setup. Appl Therm Eng 2007;27(11–12):2044–50.
[18] Maia CB, Ferreira AG, Valle RM, Cortez MFB. Analysis of the airflow in a prototype
of a solar chimney dryer. Heat Transfer Eng 2009;30(5):393–9.
[19] Akbarzadeh A, Johnson P, Singh R. Examining potential benefits of combining a
chimney with a salinity gradient solar pond for production of power in salt affected
areas. Sol Energy 2009;83(8):1345–59.
[20] Al-Dabbas MA. The first pilot demonstration: solar updraft tower power plant in
Jordan. Int J Sustain Energ 2012;31(6):399–410.
[21] Kasaeian AB, Heidari E, Vatan SN. Experimental investigation of climatic effects on
the efficiency of a solar chimney pilot power plant. Renew Sust Energ Rev
2011;15(9):5202–6.
[22] Kalash, S., Naimeh, W., Ajib, S. Experimental investigation of a solar collector
temperature field of a sloped solar updraft power plant prototype, In: 3rd
International Conference on Solar Updraft Tower Power Technology, Wuhan,
2012, pp. 128-137.
[23] Motsamai O, Bafetanye L, Mashaba K, Kgaswane O. Experimental investigation of
solar chimney power plant. J. Energy Power Eng 2013;7:1980–4.
[24] Ghalamchi M, Kasaeian A, Ghalamchi M. Experimental study of geometrical and
climate effects on the performance of a small solar chimney. Renew Sustain Energy
Rev 2015;43:425–31.
[25] Ghalamchi M, Kasaeian A, Ghalamchi M, Mirzahosseini AH. An experimental
study on the thermal performance of a solar chimney with different dimensional
parameters. Renewable Energy 2016;91:477–83.
[26] Raney, S.M., Brooks, J.R., Schaffer, J.P., French, J.J. Experimental validation of
solar chimney performance models and operational characteristics for small scale
remote applications, In: ASME 2012 6th International Conference on Energy
Sustainability, San Diego, California, USA, 2012, pp. 27-32.
[27] Guo PH, Wang Y, Meng QL, Li JY. Experimental study on an indoor scale solar
chimney setup in an artificial environment simulation laboratory. Appl Therm Eng
2016;107:818–26.
[28] Lal S, Kaushik SC, Hans R. Experimental investigation and CFD simulation studies
of a laboratory scale solar chimney for power generation. Sustain Energy Technol
Assess 2016;13:13–22.
[29] Ahmed MR, Patel SK. Computational and experimental studies on solar chimney
power plants for power generation in Pacific Island countries. Energy Convers
Manage 2017;149:61–78.
[30] Guo, Y.Q., Xue, X.D., Li, Q.S., Li, Z.A., Si, Y., Li, K., Mei, S.W. Experimental study of
solar chimney power plant system, 2017 Chinese Automation Congress Jinan,
China, 2017, pp. 7069-7073.
[31] Chi M, Gay-Balmaz F, Putkaradze V, Vorobieff P. Dynamics and optimal control of
flexible solar updraft towers. Proceed Royal Soc A Math Phys Eng Sci
2014;471:20140539.
[32] Okada S, Uchida T, Karasudani T, Ohya Y. Improvement in solar chimney power
generation by using a diffuser tower. J Sol Energy Eng 2015;137(3):031009.
[33] Haaf W, Friedrich K, Mayr G, Schlaich J. Solar chimneys part I: principle and
construction of the pilot plant in manzanares. Int J Solar Energy 1983;2(1):3–20.
[34] Haaf W. Solar chimneys part ii: preliminary test results from the manzanares pilot
plant. Int J Solar Energy 1984;2(2):141–61.
[35] Ayadi A, Driss Z, Bouabidi A, Nasraoui H, Bsisa M, Abid MS. A computational and
an experimental study on the effect of the chimney height on the thermal char-
acteristics of a solar chimney power plant. Proceed Instit Mech Eng, Part E: J
Process Mech Eng 2018;232(4):503–16.
[36] Ming TZ, Zheng Y, Liu C, Liu W, Pan Y. Simple analysis on thermal performance of
solar chimney power generation systems. J Energy Inst 2010;83(1):6–11.
31
Energy Conversion and Management 182 (2019) 21–33
[37] Sangi R, Amidpour M, Hosseinizadeh B. Modeling and numerical simulation of
solar chimney power plants. Sol Energy 2011;85(5):829–38.
[38] Najmi M, Nazari A, Mansouri H, Zahedi G. Feasibility study on optimization of a
typical solar chimney power plant. Heat Mass Transf 2012;48(3):475–85.
[39] Fasel HF, Meng FL, Shams E, Gross A. CFD analysis for solar chimney power plants.
Sol Energy 2013;98:12–22.
[40] Al-Dabbas MA. A performance analysis of solar chimney thermal power systems.
Thermal Science 2011;15(3):619–42.
[41] Xu GL, Ming TZ, Pan Y, Meng FL, Zhou C. Numerical analysis on the performance
of solar chimney power plant system. Energy Convers Manage 2011;52(2):876–83.
[42] Ming TZ, de_Richter RK, Meng FL, Pan Y, Liu W. Chimney shape numerical study
for solar chimney power generating systems. Int J Energy Res 2011;37:310–22.
[43] Xu YY, Zhou XP. Performance of divergent-chimney solar power plants. Sol Energy
2018;170:379–87.
[44] Rabehi R, Chaker A, Ming TZ, Gong TR. Numerical simulation of solar chimney
power plant adopting the fan model. Renewable Energy 2018;126:1093–101.
[45] Kalash S, Naimeh W, Ajib S. A review of sloped solar updraft power technology.
Energy Procedia 2014;50:222–8.
[46] Kasaeian AB, Molana S, Rahmani K, Wen D. A review on solar chimney systems.
Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2017;67:951–87.
[47] Pretorius JP, Kröger DG. Sensitivity analysis of the operating and technical spe-
cifications of a solar chimney power plant. J Sol Energy Eng 2017;129(2):171–8.
[48] Ming TZ, Liu W, Xu GL. Analytical and numerical investigation of the solar
chimney power plant systems. Int J Energy Res 2006;30(11):861–73.
[49] Shirvan KM, Mirzakhanlari S, Mamourian M, Abu-Hamdeh N. Numerical in-
vestigation and sensitivity analysis of effective parameters to obtain potential
maximum power output: a case study on Zanjan prototype solar chimney power
plant. Energy Convers Manage 2017;136:350–60.
[50] Mehla N, Makade R, Thakur NS. Experimental analysis of a velocity field using
variable chimney diameter for solar updraft tower. Int J Eng Sci Technol
2011;3(4):3167–71.
[51] Bugutekin A. Effect of the collector diameter on solar chimney power plants.
Energy Edu Sci Technol Part A-Energy Sci Res 2011;27(1):155–68.
[52] Koonsrisuk A, Chitsomboon T. Effects of flow area changes on the potential of solar
chimney power plants. Energy 2013;51:400–6.
[53] Arefian A, Abbassi A, Hosseini R. Exergy analysis and optimization of collector
dimensions in a solar chimney power plant using entropy generation minimization
method. Int J Exergy 2014;15(3):328–43.
[54] Zhou XP, Yang JK, Xiao B, Hou GX, Xing F. Analysis of chimney height for solar
chimney power plant. Appl Therm Eng 2009;29(1):178–85.
[55] Li JY, Guo PH, Wang Y. Effects of collector radius and chimney height on power
output of a solar chimney power plant with turbines. Renewable Energy
2012;47:21–8.
[56] Kashiwa BA, Kashiwa CB. The solar cyclone: a solar chimney for harvesting at-
mospheric water. Energy 2008;33(2):331–9.
[57] Pretorius JP. Optimization and control of a large-scale solar chimney power plant.
University of Stellenbosch; 2007.
[58] Schlaich J. The solar chimney – electricity from the sun. Stuttgart: Axel Menges;
1995.
[59] Zuo L, Yuan Y, Li ZJ, Zheng Y. Experimental research on solar chimneys integrated
with seawater desalination under practical weather condition. Desalination
2012;298:22–33.
[60] Pretorius JP, Kröger DG. Critical evaluation of solar chimney power plant per-
formance. Sol Energy 2006;80(5):535–44.
[61] Fluri TP, Pretorius JP, Van Dyk C, von Backström TW, Kroger DG, Van Zijl GPAG.
Cost analysis of solar chimney power plants. Sol Energy 2009;83(2):246–56.
[62] Bernardes MAd, von Backström TW. Evaluation of operational control strategies
applicable to solar chimney power plants. Solar Energy 2010;84(2):277–88.
[63] Cao F, Li HS, Zhao L, Guo LJ. Economic analysis of solar chimney power plants in
Northwest China. J. Renew. Sustain. Energy 2013;5(2):021406.
[64] Hooi LB, Thangavelu SK. A parametric simulation of solar chimney power plant.
Mater Sci Eng 2018;297:012057.
[65] Zhou XP, Xu YY, Zhang F. Evaluation of effect of diurnal ambient temperature
range on solar chimney power plant performance. Int J Heat Mass Transf
2017;115:398–405.
[66] Shirvan KM, Mirzakhanlari S, Mamourian M, Kalogirou SA. Optimization of ef-
fective parameters on solar updraft tower to achieve potential maximum power
output: a sensitivity analysis and numerical simulation. Appl Energy
2017;195:725–37.
[67] Kasaeian A, Ghalamchi M, Ghalamchi M. Simulation and optimization of geo-
metric parameters of a solar chimney in Tehran. Energy Convers Manage
2014;83:28–34.
[68] Najm OA, Shaaban S. Numerical investigation and optimization of the solar
chimney collector performance and power density. Energy Convers Manage
2018;168:150–61.
[69] Khelifi C, Ferroudji F, Ouali M. Analytical modeling and optimization of a solar
chimney power plant. Int J Eng Res Afr 2016;25:78–90.
[70] Sciuto, G.L., Cammarata, G., Capizzi, G., Petrone, G. Design optimization of solar
chimney power plant by finite elements based numerical model and cascade neural
networks. In: International Symposium on Power Electronics, Electrical Drives,
Automation and Motion, Anacapri, Italy, 2016, pp. 1016-1022.
[71] Ali B. Techno-economic optimization for the design of solar chimney power plants.
Energy Convers Manage 2017;138:461–73.
[72] Pretorius JP, Kröger DG. Thermoeconomic optimization of a solar chimney power
plant. J Sol Energy Eng 2008;130(2):021015.
[73] Dehghani S, Mohammadi AH. Optimum dimension of geometric parameters of
P. Guo et al.
solar chimney power plans-A multi-objective optimization approach. Sol Energy
2014;105:603–12.
[74] Gholamalizadeh E, Kim MH. Multi-objective optimization of a solar chimney
power plant with inclined collector roof using genetic algorithm. Energies
2016;9(11):971.
[75] Okoye CO, Solyalı O, Taylan O. A new economic feasibility approach for solar
chimney power plant design. Energy Convers Manage 2016;126:1013–27.
[76] Li W, Wei P, Zhou X. A cost-benefit analysis of power generation from commercial
reinforced concrete solar chimney power plant. Energy Convers Manage
2014;79:104–13.
[77] Guo PH, Zhai YX, Xu XH, Li JY. Assessment of levelized cost of electricity for a 10-
MW solar chimney power plant in Yinchuan China. Energy Convers Manage
2017;152:176–85.
[78] Lodhi MAK. Application of helio-aero-gravity concept in producing energy and
suppressing pollution. Energy Convers Manage 1999;40(4):407–21.
[79] Zhou XP, Yang JK, Wang F, Xiao B. Economic analysis of power generation from
floating solar chimney power plant. Renew Sustain Energy Rev
2009;13(4):736–49.
[80] Wang ZF. Prospectives for China's solar thermal power technology development.
Energy 2010;35(11):4417–20.
[81] Zhou XP, Xu YY. Solar updraft tower power generation. Sol Energy
2016;128:95–125.
[82] Guo PH, Li JY, Wang Y. Numerical simulations of solar chimney power plant with
radiation model. Renewable Energy 2014;62:24–30.
[83] Choi YJ, Kam DH, Park YW, Jeong YH. Development of analytical model for solar
chimney power plant with and without water storage system. Energy
2016;112:200–7.
[84] Kasaeian AB, Amirifard M, Ahmadi MH, Fasaeian K. Investigation of the effects of
ambient temperature and dimensional parameters on the performance of solar
chimney power plants. Int J Low-Carbon Technol 2017;12:335–48.
[85] Ninic N. Available energy of the air in solar chimneys and the possibility of its
ground-level concentration. Sol Energy 2006;80:804–11.
[86] Zhou XP, Xiao B, Liu WC, Guo XJ, Yang JK, Fan J. Comparison of classical solar
chimney power system and combined solar chimney system for power generation
and seawater desalination. Desalination 2010;250:249–56.
[87] Xu YY, Zhou XP, Cheng Q. Performance of a large-scale solar updraft power plant
in a moist climate. Int J Heat Mass Transf 2015;91:619–29.
[88] Ming TZ, Gong TR, Richter RKD, Liu W, Koonsrisuk A. Freshwater generation from
a solar chimney power plant. Energy Convers Manage 2016;113:189–200.
[89] Niemann, H.J., Lupi, F., Hoeffer, R. The solar updraft power plant: design and
optimization of the tower for wind effects. In: Proceedings of the 5th European and
African Conference on Wind Engineering, Florence, Italy, 2009, pp. 19-23.
[90] Borri, C., Lupi, F., Niemann, H. Innovative modelling of dynamic wind action on
Solar Updraft Towers at large heights, 8th International Conference on Structural
Dynamics, Leuven, Belgium, 2011, pp. 4-6.
[91] Harte R. G.P.A.G.van Zijl, Structural stability of concrete wind turbines and solar
chimney towers exposed to dynamic wind action. J Wind Eng Ind Aerodyn
2007;95:1079–96.
[92] Zhou XP, Yuan S. Wind effects on a solar updraft power plant. J Wind Eng Ind
Aerodyn 2017;170:294–305.
[93] Serag-Eldin, M.A. Computing flow in a solar chimney plant subject to atmospheric
winds, ASME 2004 Heat Transfer/Fluids Engineering Summer Conference,
Charlotte, North Carolina USA, 2004, pp. 1153-1162.
[94] Ayadi A, Bouabidi A, Driss Z, Abid MS. Experimental and numerical analysis of the
collector roof height effect on the solar chimney performance. Renewable Energy
2018;115:649–62.
[95] Pretorius JP, Kröger DG. Sensitivity analysis of the operating and technical spe-
cifications of a solar chimney power plant. J Sol Energy Eng 2007;129(2):171–8.
[96] Ayadi A, Driss Z, Bouabidi A, Abid MS. Experimental and numerical study of the
impact of the collector roof inclination on the performance of a solar chimney
power plant. Energy Build 2017;139:263–76.
[97] Hassan A, Ali M, Waqas A. Numerical investigation on performance of solar
chimney power plant by varying collector slope and chimney diverging angle.
Energy 2018;142:411–25.
[98] Semai H, Bouhdjar A, Larbi S. Canopy slope effect on the performance of the solar
chimney power plant. Int J Green Energy 2017;14(3):229–38.
[99] da Graça GC, Linden P. Ten questions about natural ventilation of non-domestic
buildings. Build Environ 2016;107:263–73.
[100] Zhou XP, Bernardes MAdS, Ochieng RM. Influence of atmospheric cross flow on
solar updraft tower inflow. Energy 2012;42:393–400.
[101] Pretorius JP, Kröger DG. The influence of environment on solar chimney power
plant performance. R & D J South African Instit Mech Eng 2009;25:1–9.
[102] Ming TZ, Wang XJ, Richter RKd, Liu W, Wu TH, Pan Y. Numerical analysis on the
influence of ambient crosswind on the performance of solar updraft power plant
system. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2012;16:5567–83.
[103] Shen WQ, Ming TZ, Ding Y, Wu YJ, de_Richter RK. Numerical analysis on an in-
dustrial-scaled solar updraft power plant system with ambient crosswind.
Renewable Energy 2014;68:662–76.
[104] Ming TZ, Gui JL, Richter RKD, Pan Y, Xu GL. Numerical analysis on the solar
updraft power plant system with a blockage. Sol Energy 2013;98:58–69.
[105] Pastohr H, Kornadt O, Gurlebeck K. Numerical and analytical calculations of the
temperature and flow field in the upwind power plant. Int J Energy Res
2004;28(6):495–510.
[106] Koonsrisuk A, Chitsomboon T. Dynamic similarity in solar chimney modeling. Sol
Energy 2007;81(12):1439–46.
[107] Guo PH, Li JY, Wang YF, Wang Y. Numerical study on the performance of a solar
32
Energy Conversion and Management 182 (2019) 21–33
chimney power plant. Energy Convers Manage 2015;105:197–205.
[108] Gholamalizadeh E, Kim M-H. Three-dimensional CFD analysis for simulating the
greenhouse effect in solar chimney power plants using a two-band radiation
model. Renewable Energy 2014;63:498–506.
[109] Wang QH, Zhu JL, Lu XL. Numerical simulation of heat transfer process in solar
enhanced natural draft dry cooling tower with radiation model. Appl Therm Eng
2017;114:977–83.
[110] Huang MH, Chen L, He YL, Cao JJ, Tao WQ. A two-dimensional simulation method
of the solar chimney power plant with a new radiation model for the collector. Int
Commun Heat Mass Transf 2017;85:100–6.
[111] patel SK, Prasad D, Ahmed MR. Computational studies on the effect of geometric
parameters on the performance of a solar chimney power plant. Energy Convers
Manage 2014;77:424–31.
[112] Zhou XP, Yang JK, Xiao B, Long F. Numerical study of solar chimney thermal
power system using turbulence model. J Energy Inst 2008;81(2):86–91.
[113] Ming TZ, Liu W, Pan Y, Xu GL. Numerical analysis of flow and heat transfer
characteristics in solar chimney power plants with energy storage layer. Energy
Convers Manage 2008;49(10):2872–9.
[114] von Backström TW, Fluri TP. Maximum fluid power condition in solar chimney
power plants – An analytical approach. Sol Energy 2006;80(11):1417–23.
[115] Nizetic S, Klarin B. A simplified analytical approach for evaluation of the optimal
ratio of pressure drop across the turbine in solar chimney power plants. Appl
Energy 2010;87(2):587–91.
[116] Koonsrisuk, A., Chitsomboon, T. Theoretical turbine power yield in solar chimney
power plants, In: 3rd International Conference on Thermal Issues in Emerging
Technologies Theory and Applications (ThETA) Cairo, 2010, pp. 339 - 346.
[117] Guo PH, Li JY, Wang Y, Liu YW. Numerical analysis of the optimal turbine pres-
sure drop ratio in a solar chimney power plant. Sol Energy 2013;98:42–8.
[118] Gannon AJ, von Backström TW. Solar chimney turbine performance. J Sol Energy
Eng 2003;125(1):101–6.
[119] Ming TZ, Liu W, Xu GL, Xiong YB, Guan XH, Pan Y. Numerical simulation of the
solar chimney power plant systems coupled with turbine. Renewable Energy
2008;33(5):897–905.
[120] Gholamalizadeh E, Chung JD. Analysis of fluid flow and heat transfer on a solar
updraft tower power plant coupled with a wind turbine using computational fluid
dynamics. Appl Therm Eng 2017;126:548–58.
[121] Gholamalizadeh E, Chung JD. A comparative study of CFD models of a real wind
turbine in solar chimney power plants. Energies 2017;10(10):1674.
[122] Ayadi A, Driss Z, Bouabidi A, Abid MS. Effect of the turbine diameter on the
generated power of a solar chimney power plant. Energy Environ
2018;29(5):822–36.
[123] Ayadi A, Driss Z, Bouabidi A, Abid MS. Effect of the number of turbine blades on
the air flow within a solar chimney power plant. Proceed Instit Mech Eng, Part A: J
Power Energy 2018;232(4). 0957650917733128.
[124] Fluri, T.P. Turbine Layout for and Optimization of Solar Chimney Power
Conversion Units, Department of Mechanical and Mechatronic Engineering,
University of Stellenbosch, South Africa, 2008.
[125] Ayadi A, Nasraoui H, Driss Z, Bouabidi A, Abid MS. Unsteady state of a solar
chimney power plant accoupled with a turbine: case study. J Eng, Des Technol
2018;16(2):244–55.
[126] Pasumarthi N, Sherif SA. Experimental and theoretical performance of a demon-
stration solar chimney model - Part I: Mathematical model development. Int J
Energy Res 1998;22(3):277–88.
[127] Bernardes MAd, Voß A, Weinrebe G. Thermal and technical analyses of solar
chimneys. Sol Energy 2003;75(6):511–24.
[128] Schlaich J, Bergermann R, Schiel W, Weinrebe G. Design of commercial solar
updraft tower systems - Utilization of solar induced convective flows for power
generation. J Solar Energy Eng-Trans ASME 2005;127(1):117–24.
[129] Ming TZ, Meng FL, Liu W, Pan Y, Richter RKD. Analysis of output power
smoothing method of the solar chimney power generating system. Int J Energy Res
2013;37:1657–68.
[130] Lupi F, Borri C, Harte R, Kratzig WB, Niemann HJ. Facing technological challenges
of solar updraft power plants. J Sound Vib 2015;334:57–84.
[131] Guo PH, Li JY, Wang YF, Wang Y. Evaluation of the optimal turbine pressure drop
ratio for a solar chimney power plant. Energy Convers Manage 2016;108:14–22.
[132] Das P, Chandramohan VP. CFD analysis on flow and performance parameters
estimation of solar updraft tower (SUT) plant varying its geometrical configura-
tions. Energy Sources Part A 2018;40(12):1532–46.
[133] Ming TZ, Wu YJ, de Richter RK, Liu W, Sherif SA. Solar updraft power plant
system: a brief review and a case study on a new system with radial partition walls
in its collector. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2017;69:472–87.
[134] Zhou XP, Wang F, Ochieng RM. A review of solar chimney power technology.
Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2010;14(8):2315–38.
[135] Hamdan, M.O., Rabbata, O. Experimental solar chimney data with analytical
model prediction, World Renewable Energy Forum 2012, Denver, USA 2012.
[136] Mekhail T, Rekaby A, Fathy M, Bassily M, Harte R. Experimental and theoretical
performance of mini solar chimney power plant. J Clean Energy Technol
2017;5(4):294–8.
[137] Al-Azawie, S.S., Hassan, S., Zammeri, M.F. Experimental And Numerical Study On
Ground Material Absorptivity For Solar Chimney Power Applications, In: 5th
International Conference on Energy and Sustainability, Putrajaya, Malaysia, 2014,
p. 12.
[138] AL-Azawiey SS, Hassan SB. Heat absorption properties of ground material for solar
chimney power plants. Int J. Energy Prod Manage 2016;1(4):403–18.
[139] Koonsrisuk A, Chitsomboon T. Partial geometric similarity for solar chimney
power plant modeling. Sol Energy 2009;83(9):1611–8.
P. Guo et al.
[140] Koonsrisuk A, Chitsomboon T. A single dimensionless variable for solar chimney
power plant modeling. Sol Energy 2009;83(12):2136–43.
[141] Koonsrisuk A, Chitsomboon T. Mathematical modeling of solar chimney power
plants. Energy 2013;51:314–22.
[142] Walker C, Tan G, Glicksman L. Reduced-scale building model and numerical in-
vestigations to buoyancy-driven natural ventilation. Energy Build
2011;43(9):2404–13.
[143] Guo PH, Wang S, Xu B, Meng QL, Wang Y. Reduced-scale experimental model and
numerical investigations to buoyance-driven natural ventilation in a large space
building. Build Environ 2018;145:24–32.
[144] Gannon AJ, von Backström TW. Solar chimney cycle analysis with system loss and
solar collector performance. J Solar Energy Eng-Trans ASME 2000;122(3):133–7.
[145] Li JY, Guo PH, Wang Y. Preliminary investigation of a novel solar and wind energy
extraction system. Proc Inst Mech Eng Part A-J. Power Energy
2012;226(A1):73–85.
[146] Zhou, X.P., Qin, P., Liu, C., Qian, C.Q. Wind channel installed at the chimney
outlet for enhancing ventilation effect, Chinese, 2012.
[147] Zuo L, Ding L, Chen JJ, Zhou XT, Xu BF, Liu ZH. Comprehensive study of wind
supercharged solar chimney power plant combined with seawater desalination.
Sol Energy 2018;166:59–70.
[148] Zandian A, Ashjaee M. The thermal efficiency improvement of a steam Rankine
cycle by innovative design of a hybrid cooling tower and a solar chimney concept.
Renewable Energy 2013;51:465–73.
[149] Zou Z, He S. Modeling and characteristics analysis of hybrid cooling-tower-solar-
chimney system. Energy Convers Manage 2015;95:59–68.
[150] Ghorbani B, Ghashami M, Ashjaee M, Hosseinzadegan H. Electricity production
with low grade heat in thermal power plants by design improvement of a hybrid
dry cooling tower and a solar chimney concept. Energy Convers Manage
2015;94:1–11.
[151] Cao F, Li H, Ma Q, Zhao L. Design and simulation of a geothermal–solar combined
chimney power plant. Energy Convers Manage 2014;84:186–95.
[152] Fathi N, McDaniel P, Aleyasin SS, Robinson M, Vorobieff P, Rodriguez S, et al.
Efficiency enhancement of solar chimney power plant by use of waste heat from
nuclear power plant. J Cleaner Prod 2018;180:407–16.
[153] Habibollahzade A, Houshfar E, Ashjaee M, Behzadi A, Gholamian E, Mehdizadeh
H. Enhanced power generation through integrated renewable energy plants: Solar
33
Energy Conversion and Management 182 (2019) 21–33
chimney and waste-to-energy. Energy Convers Manage 2018;166:48–63.
[154] Eryener D, Kuscu H. Hybrid transpired solar collector updraft tower. Sol Energy
2018;159:561–71.
[155] Ahmed, O.K., Hussei, A.S. New design of solar chimney (case study), Case Studies
in Thermal Engineering 11 (2018) 105-112.
[156] Liu QJ, Cao F, Liu YH, Zhu TY, Liu DY. Design and simulation of a solar chimney
PV/T power plant in Northwest China. Int J Photoenergy 2018;2018:1478695.
[157] Islamuddin A, Al-Kayiem HH, Gilani SI. Simulation of solar chimney power plant
with an external heat source. IOP Conf Series: Earth Environm Sci
2013;16(1):012080.
[158] Djimli S, Chaker A, Ajib S, Habka M. Studying the possibility of a combined hybrid
solar chimney power plant with a gas turbine. Environ Prog Sustain Energy
2018;37(3):1160–8.
[159] Anderson KR, Shafahi M, McNamara C. Thermal-fluids analysis of a hybrid solar/
compost waste heat updraft tower. J Clean Energy Technologies
2016;4(3):213–20.
[160] Chen K, Wang JF, Dai YP, Liu YQ. Thermodynamic analysis of a low-temperature
waste heat recovery system based on the concept of solar chimney. Energy
Convers Manage 2014;80:78–86.
[161] Hu SY, Leung DYC. Numerical modelling of the compressible airflow in a solar-
waste-heat chimney power plant. Energy Procedia 2017;142:642–7.
[162] Kiwan S, Al-Nimr M, Salam QIA. Solar chimney power-water distillation plant
(SCPWDP). Desalination 2018;445:105–14.
[163] Wang YP, Fang ZL, Zhu L, Yang ZY, Wang JH, Han LJ. Study on the integrated
utilization of seawater by solar chimney. Acta Energiae Solaris Sinica
2006;27:382–7.
[164] Zuo L, Zheng Y, Li ZJ, Sha YJ. Solar chimneys integrated with sea water desali-
nation. Desalination 2011;276:207–13.
[165] Asayesh M, Kasaeian A, Ataei A. Optimization of a combined solar chimney for
desalination and power generation. Energy Convers Manage 2017;150:72–80.
[166] Ming TZ, Gong TR, Richter RKd, Wu YJ, Liu W. A moist air condensing device for
sustainable energy production and water generation. Energy Convers Manage
2017;138:638–50.
[167] Ming TZ, Gong TR, Richte RKd, Cai GJ, Sherif SA. Numerical analysis of seawater
desalination based on a solar chimney power plant. Appl Energy
2017;208:1258–73.