Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 114 (2019) 109279

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews

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

Economic potential to develop concentrating solar power in China: A T

provincial assessment
Junping Jia,b,∗,1, Hua Tanga,1, Peng Jina
a
Engineering Laboratory of Data and Modeling for Energy Conservation and Emission Reduction, School of Environment and Energy, Peking University Shenzhen Graduate
School, Shenzhen 518055, China
b
Energy Analysis and Environmental Impacts Division, Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, One Cyclotron Road, MS90R2121, Berkeley, CA 94720, USA

ARTICLE INFO ABSTRACT

Keywords: Concentrating solar power (CSP), a promising renewable energy technology, requires better policy support for its
Concentrating solar power initial implementation, which, in turn, necessitates accurate forecasting of its economic potential. This study
Levelized cost of electricity develops a model based on meteorological data and local policies to calculate the levelized cost of electricity
Learning curve (LCOE) in 31 provincial-level divisions in China. Based on land occupation, concessionary loan, and technology
mode as the independent variables, the LCOE is estimated to be $142/MWh to $781/MWh in sites with direct
normal irradiance above 1,800 kWh/m2/yr under current local policies and conditions (with and without
thermal storage). Thus, this study lays a solid foundation for forecasting power generation and selecting eco-
nomically feasible sites. It analyzes the CSP learning curve with respect to technologically advanced trends and
scale expansion. With the proper optimization of the technology mode, it is reasonable to expect a significant
LCOE reduction and grid parity in certain areas. A comparison of the current policies provides a reference for the
Chinese government to formulate subsidy policies that would make CSP more competitive.

1. Introduction
Energy is a strategic global resource that is fundamental to national
and international security. The last few decades have witnessed a rapid
increase in global energy demand. However, the growth in demand for
electricity has been relatively higher compared to that for total primary
energy from 1974 to 2015. In response to these increasing energy
needs, the global electricity generation capacity has increased by 192%
over this period. In 2015, over three-fifths of electricity and heat were
generated from fossil fuels, mainly coal (39%) and natural gas (23%)
[1]. The factors that influence energy consumption have been ex-
tensively explored; some of these factors include economic status, in-
dustrial structure, demographic change, urbanization, and technolo-
gical progress [2–4].
China, in particular, has seen a manifest increase in electricity demand
over recent decades, compelling it to rapidly develop and expand its
power sector. In 2015 alone, the country's energy production totaled at
3.6 billion tce (tonne of coal equivalent), while its total energy con-
sumption was 4.3 billion tce. Its primary electricity production accounted
for 14.5% of the total energy produced, showing an increasing trend since
2011 [5]. Without decisive action, energy-related CO2 emissions will
more than double by 2050 [6]. In fact, slightly more than 40% of the
global energy-related CO2 emissions can be attributed to emissions from
electricity and heat production, indicating the urgency of non-fossil fuel
electricity generation [7]. Notably, a 1% increase in non-fossil fuel elec-
tricity generation reduces CO2 emissions by 0.82% [8].
Globally, renewables are seen as a reliable means to reduce CO2
emissions, address climate change, and satisfy energy requirements,
supplying 13.7% of the world's total energy. Since the 11th Five-Year
Plan, the Chinese government has implemented a series of measures to
encourage renewable energy development, along with plans for scaling.
By the end of 2017, the installed capacity of renewable power in China
had reached 650 million kW, accounting for 36.6% of total installed
capacity, including 341 million kW of hydropower (including pumped
storage), 164 million kW of wind power, 130 million kW of photo-
voltaic power, and 15 million kW of biomass [9].

∗
Corresponding author. School of Environment and Energy, Peking University Shenzhen Graduate School, Shenzhen 518055, China.
E-mail address: jackyji@pku.edu.cn (J. Ji).
1
These authors contributed equally to this study and share the first authorship.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2019.109279
Received 30 August 2018; Received in revised form 15 July 2019; Accepted 15 July 2019
1364-0321/ © 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
J. Ji, et al. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 114 (2019) 109279

Table 1
Overview of China's renewable energy generation in 2017.
Total Renewable Hydropower Wind power Photovoltaic Biomass

Generation (billion kWh) 1,697.9 1,194.5 305.7 118.0 79.5

Proportion of the total power generation 26.5% 18.6% 4.8% 1.8% 1.2%

Average tariff (US$/MWh) / 38 81 132 106

Note: Data in Table 1 is from National Energy Administration [9].

Due to renewable energy development, concentrating solar plants
can effectively use solar energy to generate solar thermal electricity,
while producing no greenhouse gas emissions; the flexibility of these
plants also enhances energy security [10,11]. These plants, combined
with thermal storage systems, can cope with the diurnal cycle, making
them a cost-effective option of dispatchability. Thus, concentrating
solar power (CSP) could be a vital technology for mitigating climate
change, especially for limiting the global mean temperature increase to
2 °C.
Compared with the solar photovoltaic (PV) market, the CSP market
is far smaller and characterized by far slower growth. Solar PV energy
generation reached 303 GW in 2016, with an annual growth rate of 3%
since 1990, while solar thermal energy generation has had an opera-
tional capacity of 4 GW, with 11.5% growth during the same period
[12,13]. By April 2018, CSP capacity worldwide reached 9.95 GW, with
5.2 GW generation in operation and 3.7 GW generation under con-
struction. In terms of countries, Spain ranked first at 2.3 GW of gen-
eration, followed by the United States at 1.75 GW [14]. In the hi-Ren
Scenario, solar thermal electricity is expected to account for 11% of
global electricity, with a capacity increase of 27 GW per year on
average, peaking at 40 GW per year from 2040 to 2045 [10].
Because they use solar energy, CSP plants can only be installed at
sites with higher local direct normal irradiance (DNI) [6], that is, over
1,800 kWh/m2/yr [15]. Such areas are located in Northwest China
[16], and the published DNI value of deployment plants in China is over
the feasibility line [17]. China's CSP installations ranked third world-
wide in April 2018 [14], a rapid increase from tenth at the end of 2016
[18].
As per its 13th Five-Year Plan, by 2020, China expects to install CSP
plants for 5 GW energy generation, with a solar thermal use area of 800
million m2. In November 2017, China announced a generation capacity
of 1,089 MW in development and another 250 MW under construction
[14]. Its first large-scale commercial CSP with a parabolic trough col-
lector—China General Nuclear Power Corporation (CGN) New Energy
Delingha 50 MW solar thermal project—was successfully connected to the
grid in 2018, making China the eighth country in the world with a
large-scale CSP plant. In the hi-Ren Scenario of the CSP roadmap, China
is expected to generate a capacity of 118 GW in 2050.
Given high regional DNI, cost-effective energy storage, and dis-
patchability as necessary conditions, CSP can become an important
strategy for renewable development in China. As shown above, CSP
could provide China with a promising option to meet its energy de-
mand. However, its commercial deployment has encountered several
barriers, such as cost burden, uncertain cost reduction, competition
with solar PV, and access to credit [19]. Large-scale deployment of CSP
in China requires an assessment of its economic potential in terms of
competition and its evolution in the market. Moreover, regional var-
iations should be considered when examining the differences in the
geographical and economic conditions for the selection of appropriate
sites.
The economic evaluation of new energy technologies includes the
levelized cost of electricity (LCOE), net present value (NPV), and return
on investment (ROI)—with the former two being the most common for
CSP technologies [20]. Among them, the LCOE is often used for the
economic assessment of renewables; it has benefits when formulating
subsidy policies, which require income per unit of energy to offset cost
within a specified period [21–25]. NPV and ROI—covering historical
electricity prices, government subsidies, and meteorological data—are
used to estimate the comprehensive economic potential because they
can capture time-varying value [20]. Such economic assessments focus
on different strategies for operation decisions [26] and supplementary
economic competitiveness from supporting facilities, such as thermal
storage [27,28]. To the best of our knowledge, few studies have em-
phasized regional differences and analyzed relevant policies.
Thus, we estimate the current feasibility and future potential of CSP
in China. The remaining paper is organized as follows. Section 2 de-
scribes the feature and deployment of CSP in China. Section 3 presents
the main assumption and data of select projects. In section 4, we esti-
mate the annual power generation from CSP technology using the da-
tabase of 31 provincial-level divisions in China provided by Solargis.
We then calculate the LCOE of different technology modes to assess the
economic potential at sites with prominent solar energy generation on a
provincial level. The influence of the discount rate, technology ad-
vancements, and scale expansion are analyzed in section 5, while we
discuss the policy implications in section 6.
2. Overview OF CSP technology
CSP plants generate electricity by using mirrors to concentrate solar
rays with tracking devices; turbines are then driven using power-gen-
erating steam in the thermodynamic cycle to generate electricity
[29,30]. In general, CSP is classified into four types based on how the
solar rays are concentrated: parabolic trough collector (PTC), linear
Fresnel collector (LFC), central receiver system (CRS), and parabolic
dish system (PDS) [6,27] (shown in Table 2). The PTC and CRS are
preferred in utility applications, with wide use globally and in China
[14]. Thermal energy storage is an indispensable part of the installation
[30], and all established plants in China have storage capacities [14].
Table 2
Main characteristics of CSP technologies [6,31].
PTC LFC CRS PDS
Tracking One-axis One-axis Two-axis Two-axis
Receiver type Mobile Fixed Fixed Mobile
Focus type Line focus Line focus Point focus Point focus
Transfer fluid Synthetic oil/ Water/synthetic Molten salt
molten salt oil/molten salt
Storage media Molten salt Molten salt/solid Molten salt
concrete
Note: A fixed receiver is independent of the focusing device, reducing the
consumption of heat collected in the power block. As the mobile receiver is
installed with the focusing device, more energy can be collected regardless of
the focus design. Line focus tracks the sun more easily along one axis and
collects the irradiance on a linear receiver, while point focus tracks the sun
along two axes and focuses irradiance at a single point receiver, with a larger
span of temperature for the collector [6].

2
J. Ji, et al.
2.1. Parabolic trough collector (PTC)
The PTC is a one-axis tracking technology. It is comprised of parallel
rows of mirrors curved in one dimension with line focus running along
its focal line [6,32]. It is currently the most developed solar technology
and dominates the global market with a market share of over 80%. PTC
systems are scalable, as their trough mirror elements can be installed
along the common focal line [33,34]. Due to its features, it relies on the
heat transfer fluid (HTF) as media to transfer heat-to-heat exchanges.
As of July 2018, 50-MW CSP systems using the PTC were in operation in
China (CGN New Energy Delingha 50 MW solar thermal project), and 411-
MW systems are under construction [14,31].
2.2. Linear Fresnel collector (LFC)
The LFC has trough mirrors of similar parabolic shape to the PTC
but converted with one-axis tracking to reflect the sun's irradiation onto
a linear and fixed receiver positioned over the rows of mirrors. Several
linear Fresnel reflectors (LFRs) are mounted along with a re-con-
centrator; thus, the system needs less land than parabolic troughs of the
same capacity. LFCs have low LCOE and lower efficiency [35] because
of their lower investment costs, simple design, and facilitation of direct
steam generation. It is more difficult to incorporate storage capacity
into their design [6]. As reported by NEA [31], 200-MW LFCs are under
construction in China, each with a capacity of 50 MW.
2.3. Central receiver system (CRS)
The CRS consists of a series of heliostats (seen as reflectors) that
concentrate solar rays on the central receiver placed on a fixed tower,
known as the solar tower [6]. It can achieve higher efficiency because
the tower allows for higher temperatures and thermal energy storage
(TES) to maximize the value of electricity generation. Some plants use
molten salts as HTF, while other commercial tower plants in operation
have implemented direct steam generation in the receiver. The CRS also
provides flexibility, such as a wide variety of heliostats, receivers,
transfer fluids, power blocks, and even tower quantities. It is the
second-most developed technology following PTC. In China, CSP pro-
jects with the CRS dominate, with demonstration projects of 685 MW
Fig. 1. Scheme of the lifecycle cost.
3
Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 114 (2019) 109279
capacity under construction [14].
2.4. Parabolic dish system (PDS)
The PDS concentrates solar rays on a focal point above the focus of
the reflector. Most dishes mount the independent generator at this point
to reduce thermal loss and eliminate the demand for HTF and cooling
water. PDSs have higher solar-to-electric efficiency and scalability than
other CSP systems due to their modular nature. A large-scale com-
mercial plant combines hundreds (or more) of stand-alone parabolic
dishes limited in capacity—about 3–25 kW—for collocation [6,34].
More importantly, it allows individual deployment for remote use. As of
2018, there are no commercial PDS projects in China.
3. Methodology and data
3.1. Calculation methods
To assess the feasibility of CSP, we calculated the LCOE with the
NPV method. NPV focuses on the present value in the calculation of
both inflows and outflows of generation over a lifespan to assess the
profitability of an investment or a project.
We first consider the weather conditions and technology factors to
calculate the electricity generation of different geographic locations on
the revenue side. Among them, peak solar-to-electric efficiency is in-
fluenced by factors such as the ratio of gross-to-net conversion, cycle
conversion, and system availability. Moreover, efficiency can be af-
fected by intrinsic yearly degradation for a specific plant. The formula
for electricity generation, Eq. (1), is based on Hernández-Moro and
Martínez-Duart's work [21]:
EGn = eff di area (1 )n (1)
where EGn is the electricity generation in year n ; eff is the transfer
efficiency of solar irradiation to electricity; di is the local DNI of the
region i ; area is the aperture area; is the tracking factor; and is the
degradation factor.
When NPV = 0 (break-even point, performing a discount cash
flow), the LCOE is the internal price, equal to the lifecycle cost divided
by lifetime energy generation [22] (shown in Fig. 1).
J. Ji, et al. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 114 (2019) 109279

The lifecycle cost can be classified into initial and annual costs. The Table 3
annual cost consists of operation and maintenance cost, insurance cost, Main cost to obtain land-use rights.
loan interest cost, and tax. We estimate the LCOE based on Hernández- Initial land cost Annual land
Moro and Martínez-Duart's work [21] by combining the loan interest cost
and tax, as shown in Eqs. (2)–(4):
Allocation Land compensation fees and related fees Land use tax
N
initial costs + (Annual costsn (1 + r ) n) Granting Fees based on “minimum price standards for the Land use tax
n=0
LCOE = N
; transfer of land for industrial use”
n= 0
(EGn (1 + r ) n) (2)
Note: Land compensation fees and related fees include land acquisition com-
initial costs = IL + S; (3) pensation, cultivated land occupation tax, and grassland or vegetation com-
annual costsn = O&Mn + In + LIn + Tn; (4) pensation fee levied. The latter two are considered when the land type is cul-
tivated land. The land-use tax is paid annually (calculated in tax expense),
where EGn is the electricity generation in year n in kWh; LCOE is the while the other costs are one-off initial payments. The land acquisition com-
price of electricity at the break-even point; r is the discount factor of pensation varies with the land type and location disclosed by the Natural
year n; initial costs are the costs paid up-front; and Annual costsn are the Resources Agency, shown in Appendix; the average cultivated land occupation
costs paid annually over the lifecycle of a project. The initial costs in- tax varies from $1,915,327/km2 to $6,895,178/km2 regionally [39].
clude the initial land cost (IL ) and system cost (S ). The annual costs
include the operation and maintenance cost (O &Mn ), insurance fees (In ), Allocation is a transfer according to law, where the user pays any
loan interest (LIn ), and tax cost (Tn ) in year n. N is the lifespan of a land compensation and other related fees. Granting is leasing by local
power plant with the unit of year; n is the nth year in the lifecycle of a governments to users. The initial land cost of granting is paid based on
power plant. The discount rate r, usually assumed as the weighted the “minimum price standards for the transfer of land for industrial use”
average cost of capital (WACC), affects the LCOE. Here, the LCOE es- and adjusted by local governments according to national supportive
timates assume a 25-year economic life and a WACC of 10% in China policies. At present, the land-use rights of CSP projects in China are
[21,34,36]. The other main factors are discussed in section 3.2. mainly obtained through allocation, while projects in Yumen, Gansu
We can obtain the relative LCOE (t ) for plants installed in future were granted land priced between $4,412,914/km2 and $4,566,140/
year t by Eqs. (5) and (6) [21,37]: km2.
According to the regulation [40], if unutilized land, such as the Gobi
LCOE (t ) desert and grasslands, is used for PV and wind power generation pro-
IL + S (t ) +
N
((O&Mn (t ) + In (t ) + LIn (t ) + Tn (t ))(1 + r ) n) jects, the portion of unoccupied land that does not change the surface
n=0
= N
; form may be identified in situ. Land can be obtained by granting or
(EGn (1 + r ) n)
n= 0
leasing, in which case, the initial land cost can be exclusive of grassland
(5) compensation and forest vegetation restoration fees.
log(1 LR) For CSP projects in Yumen, the mirror field is generally acquired by
S (t ) = S (0)
C (t ) log(2)
; allocation and land-use tax ($153,226/km2/yr), while the conventional
C (0) (6) and TES fields are transferred with a 30-year land transfer fee of
$4,566,140/km2. In the case above, the mirror field covers 93% of the
where S (t ) is the system cost of a plant installed in future year t ; C (t ) is
area. For CSP plants, the area per MW covers 2.5–4.7 km2 and
the cumulative installed capacity; LR is the learning rate in the given
2.5–6.8 km2 for CRSs and PDSs, respectively, according to the collation
period. When considering the evolution of CSP, we assume that the
[17].
learning rates range between 10% and 20% [21,25,37,38].

3.2. Main factors

3.2.1. Initial costs
The initial costs of CSP plants include system and initial land costs.
Among provinces, the main difference in the initial costs for a specific
technology mode derive from the land cost due to the regulation of land
policy.
3.2.1.1. System cost. Globally, the system cost ranged between $2.6/W
and $11.27/W for PTCs without storage in 2016, and ranged from $7.3/
W to $11.3/W in 2013–2015 for PTCs and CRSs with storage capacities
of more than eight hours [36]. Since more than 90% of devices have
realized localization, the system cost in China ranges from $2.9/W to
$5.8/W [17], mainly due to technology differences. According Beijing
Shouhang Ihw Resources Saving Technology Co Ltd, the system cost
includes construction cost, equipment price, installation cost, reserve,
and other fees, where the former three account for 91.2% of the total
cost of the Dunhuang 100 MW molten-salt CRS plant.
3.2.2. Annual costs
3.2.2.1. Operation and maintenance costs. The operation and
maintenance costs mainly include- the replacement cost of receivers
and mirrors from breakage, the cost of mirror washing, and plant
insurance [29]. The annual operation and maintenance cost is generally
estimated to be 1.5–2% of the initial cost in prior studies [17,29,34].
The tax mainly includes income tax (Tnincome ), land-use tax (Tnland use ),
value-added tax (Tnvalue added ), and additional tax (Tnsurtax ). Tax on land
use varies among regions, ranging from $64,355/km2 to $4,596,785/
km2 depending on the type of site. However, the value-added tax rate is
fixed according to the Tax Law. Based on the expected supporting
incentives [41], the government refunds the value-added tax at a rate of
50%. We thus consider the value-added tax rate halved (t value added ) at
8.5%:
Tn = Tnincome + Tnvalue added
+ Tnsurtax + Tnland use
; (7)

3.2.1.2. Initial land cost. Land in China is under socialist public 0 n = 1,2,3
initial costs
ownership, that is, either owned by the state or considered the LCOE EGn
N
O n = 4,5,6

collective land of peasants [25]. To regulate the land market and &Mn In LIn Tnland use
VAT refund
Tnsurtax + Tn 50% t income
Tnincome = ;
promote rational land use, Land Planning legally obtains land property initial costs
LCOE EGn O n 7
rights to implement preliminary development and for land reserves. N

The government provides land reserves through a land-use right &Mn In LIn Tnland use Tnsurtax + TnVAT refund t income
transaction mechanism to support industrial activities. Allocation and
(8)
grating are the two main ways to obtain land-use rights.

4
J. Ji, et al. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 114 (2019) 109279

0 n = 1,2 Table 4
Tnvalue added
= ; Main technical and economic factors and assumptions of CSP systems.
[(LCOE EGn O&Mn)*t value added 50% n 3
(9) Factor PTC LFC CRS PDSs Factor value

c (MW) 50 10 50 100 OPEX (%) 2

TnVAT refund
= Tnvalue added
; (10) N (year) 25 25 25 25 ic (%) 0.5
area (km2) 0.55 0.09 0.52 0.90 pl (%) 80
Tnsurtax = (Tnvalue added
+ TnVAT refund
) t surtax ; (11) (%) 97.11 97.11 1 1 r (%) 10
eff (%) 10–20 10–18.5 8–24 16–29 (%) 0.2
Tnland use = t land use l; (12) L (km2/MW) 2.66 – 2.44 – ir (%) 4.9
S (with storage, 5,226.36 – 4,233.15 – t income (%) 15
US$/KW)
S (without 3,743.45 – – – t value added (%) 17
3.2.2.2. Loan interest cost. The interest burden cannot be neglected
storage, US
because CSP generation is a capital-intensive industry, and the $/KW)
proportion of required equity is over 20% [17]. Therefore, financial
support is recommended [41]. The interest rate (ir ) herein is a long- Note: The factors and assumptions are derived from the information of the first
term rate of 4.9%. Note that the medium- and long-term loan interest 20 demonstration projects [31] and prior literature [21,27,34,43–45]. The
rate for more than five years fluctuated from 5.9% to 4.9% between middle exchange rate used in the study is 6.5263 CNY/USD.
2010 and 2018; however, it has remained at 4.9% since 2015.
4. Results
LIn = pl ir initial costs (13)
The cost of electricity generated by a power plant constructed in a
year is determined by the initial costs, discount rate, annual costs, level
3.2.3. Electricity generation of solar irradiation, and technology.
3.2.3.1. Solar irradiation. Economic potential generally relies on the Three scenarios covering different geographical locations were
distribution of DNI [30]. Information on spatial distributions of DNI is analyzed. According to the meteorological data, there are obvious re-
normally required to identify an appropriate site. The meteorological gional differences in solar resources and the relative economic potential
data was collected from Solargis (satellite-based model) [16] and of CSP plants. Two types of CSP plants—PTC and CRS—dominate over
extracted using MATLAB. The data revealed that regions with a 90% of the industry, with LFRs contributing only a small percentage to
higher DNI are mainly located in Northwest China and, in each the global capacity [27]. Due to data limitations, we mainly analyze the
region, the DNI difference varies considerably. LCOE of PTCs and CRSs.
Fig. 2 illustrates the national LCOE distribution of the CRS with
3.2.3.2. Technology factor. As shown in equation (1), the important nine-hour storage. Table 4 reports the LCOE generated from the PTC
technical factors include the aperture area, tracking factor, and and CRS plants, with and without thermal storage. The DNI value of the
conversion efficiency. In the existing literature [27,30,34], the annual sites from Table 4 is above 1,500 kWh/m2/yr. We do not include the
solar-to-electric efficiency varies from 10 to 16% and 10–35% for PTCs LCOE of Taiwan, Hong Kong, and Macao due to the lack of land po-
and CRSs, respectively. For projects in China [14,31], the aperture area licies.
is between 10.3 m2/W and 12.4 m2/W, while the conversion efficiency As shown in Table 5, the sensitivity of the LCOE can be partly at-
is from 10.5% to 26.8%, varying with the type of project. We will tributed to technology modes and plant sites with different solar re-
elaborate on the conversion efficiency and technical factors of the sources and local land policies.
demonstration project. The results indicate that the LCOE of the CRS with storage nation-
3.2.4. Discount rate. The discount rate is a ratio used to discount the wide is in the range of $142/MWh to $967/MWh. For the PTC with
cost and benefit. In prior studies [17,34], it varies from 10% to 10.52%. storage, it ranges from $186/MWh to $1221/MWh. Dividing the re-
In the literature on other generation types, the LCOE is compared using gions into three different DNI levels—below 1,800, 1,800–2,000, and
different discount rates: 5%, 8%, and 10%, where the LCOE results above 2,000 kWh/m2/yr—allows us to clearly explore the output and
increase with the discount rate [22]. In this study, we use 10% as the LCOE of local conditions.
discount rate [42]. Table 4 reports the LCOE ranges of two scenarios, with nine-hour
thermal storage and without storage: between $141/MWh (CRS, at the
3.3. Data and assumptions highest DNI) and $436/MWh (CRS, at the lowest DNI), respectively.
Compared with the condition where the DNI is between 1,800 kWh/m2
We used the data on China's long-term yearly average DNI (from and 2,000 kWh/m2 (high irradiation), the LCOE of the CRS is 34%
1999 to 2015 in the west and 2007 to 2015 in the east; see Appendix) to lower. A similar relationship for the DNI is observed for the PTC. Due to
estimate the annual power generation of CSP technology in 31 pro- project differences, the LCOE of PTC plants with thermal storage is
vincial-level divisions. The land policies were obtained from the much higher than that of the CRS plants in Table 4. The latter plants
Ministry of Natural Resources, the provincial and municipal govern- with thermal energy storage generally require a higher initial invest-
ment portal, and the Chinese Land and Resource Statistical Yearbook. ment [36], as shown in Table 3, but they allow higher capacities and
We assume that, for the establishment of a plant, unutilized land is are more schedulable, with a typically lower LCOE, at over 20% of that
preferred. of CRS.
Table 4 shows the main technical and economic factors with their
relative assumptions for different technology modes. As most subjects 5. Discussions
in China use advanced thermal storage media, they involve a two-tank
system with molten salt [14,31]. In the analysis of economic potential, In the early stages of CSP deployment, the initial investment places
the key factors are derived from local plants. a heavy burden on developers. The LCOE of the CSP plants is relatively
Based on the demonstration projects [31] and global data [29], the high compared to that of other renewables, let alone conventional
solar-to-electric efficiency with nine-hour storage is 14.0% and 18.3% electricity generation. The first obstacle to large-scale replacement of
for PTCs and CRSs, respectively, while efficiency without storage is coal-fired plants for solar thermal power is the expenses from CSP in-
10% and 12%, respectively. frastructure and its effect on electricity prices [46].

5
J. Ji, et al. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 114 (2019) 109279

Fig. 2. Localized cost of electricity (LCOE) distribution by region (US$/MWh). Note: The LCOE includes areas with the highest DNI in a specific province and the
average land cost of sub-provincial regions.

Table 5 sites with high solar, land, and water resources to allow deployments to
The LCOE of the PTC and CRS in regions with prominent meteorological con- progress smoothly. In China, the 2016 solar thermal demonstration
ditions (US$/MWh). projects are mainly located in Qinghai, Gansu, Hebei, Xinjiang, and the
Region CRS PTC Inner Mongolia Autonomous Region, where the DNI is above
1,600 kWh/m2/yr [14,31]. While the average irradiation conditions are
Scenario With 9-h With 9-h Without superior to those of other regions, a detailed assessment of the internal
storage storage storage
provinces is imperative. Most adequate plant sites are located at high
Tibet Autonomous Region 142 186 243 latitudes and altitudes, much farther from power grids and water
Xinjiang Uygur Autonomous 167 219 287 sources. This increases the initial investment cost. Due to increased
Region wind power (average wind power density ≥ 150 W/m2) and abundant
Qinghai Province 174 231 299 sand, the projects demand a higher level of wind resistance. In fact, the
Gansu Province 203 266 348
Inner Mongolia Autonomous 217 284 371
average annual temperature in China is relatively low, with regions
Region with higher DNI having temperatures of 10 °C or lower. In winter, in-
Sichuan Province 224 291 383 tense convective heat loss in the plants weakens the power generation
Yunnan Province 225 295 385 efficiency and the total time of power generation, thus increasing the
Jilin Province 235 308 402
absorber's area and investment. These predicaments partially explain
Ningxia Hui Autonomous 251 330 431
Region the higher LCOE of China compared with other countries.
Heilongjiang Province 253 334 435 Furthermore, regional land policies must be thoroughly assessed.
Shanxi Province 255 334 437 Project operators acquire land-use rights from land authorities within
Shaanxi Province 263 342 450 the local government. Thus, land compensation fees and land-use tax
Hebei Province 296 381 505
Liaoning Province 366 467 623
are regulated by the local government under the framework of the state,
Beijing 461 583 781 which affects the initial and annual costs of projects. Such risks cannot
be neglected, especially due to the inconsistent standards of land
Note: The LCOE includes areas with the highest DNI in a specific province and compensation across regions or even within a specific region and the
the average land cost of sub-provincial regions. discretionary powers of the involved departments. When breaking
down the total LCOE of the CRS, we find that land cost accounts for
over 4% of the total. This proportion varies by region, with Shandong
having the highest under the current land policy.
Solar power development has met several other barriers [19]. For
The capacity of local consumer satisfaction and delivery in
example, the PV industry faces property rights issues, lack of uniform
Northwest China is relatively limited, thus requiring this region to
standards, information asymmetry, single-finance channels, and sub-
operate its own delivery lines. In the last three years, the Gansu and
sidy payment difficulties [47]. During CSP promotion, any assessment
Xinjiang provinces rejected more than 20% of photovoltaic power
should include site selection, technological advancements, and capacity
generation, whereas Qinghai Province rejected 8.7% in 2016. While
expansion.
energy storage can be a buffer for solar power stations seeking to sta-
bilize energy generation, “site choice” should integrate the local con-
5.1. Site selection
sumer capacity and delivery capacity of renewable energy. Moreover,
wind and solar curtailment have not been fully solved, while renewable
During the assessment of CSP promotion, developers must select

6
J. Ji, et al. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 114 (2019) 109279

energy subsidies have declined or lagged. Whether these issues will

plague solar thermal power projects in the future is a cause of concern,
especially for loan recovery. Consequently, financial institutions are
becoming more prudent in their lending practices.

5.2. Technology advancements and capacity expansion

As predicted, the technology trend for the storage of variable re-

newable electricity will play a more important role in the future [27]. A
full-scale switch to thermal storage media is expected to process higher
temperatures and cut down the storage volume, thereby reducing the
LCOE [29].
To reduce the initial investment in storage with molten salt, the
Fig. 4. Localized cost of electricity (LCOE) evolution for concentrated solar
developers of solar plants tend to increase the temperature difference of power.
heat storage media, thus sheering the material consumption and cost.
However, there are stringent requirements for material properties, de-
sign, and manufacture when molten salt is at a high temperature.
Particularly, Dead Sea salt, concrete bed, and basalt rocks are more
economical compared to molten salt because they eliminate the extra
cost associated with freeze protection and entail no pressurizing or
corrosion issues [48].
Some LFC plants in China have used solid state-formulated concrete
as storage. The initial investment for concrete per mass is only about
one-twelfth of that for molten salt with respect to the raw materials of
the main body without including an expensive airtight tank. The dif-
ference between the specific heat capacity of the media is not parti-
cularly large, making this type of heat storage with a large capacity
economically feasible. Assuming the trend (the initial investment of
storage reduced by approximately 50%), the recalculation of the
average LCOE in this scenario will decline by 5–7% for the PTC and
3–5% for the CRS based on Table 4. Moreover, the aperture widths of
the trough collectors will increase by 33.33% in the future, which will
decrease the number of collectors, and thus the initial investments.
China's expansion of the CSP industry is in its third phase, making Fig. 5. Sensitivity analysis of discount rate in 2020.
this industry more appealing [38]. Under high-cost pressure and in-
dustry continuity, we assume a learning rate of 12% from 2015 to 2025
and 15% in the following 30 years for the CSP systems at work. Fig. 3
illustrates the trend of the system cost for the CRS with storage in the
future, recalculated using equation (4). Fig. 4 illustrates the relative
LCOE 5.
With the larger-scale deployment, the potential for cost reduction is
evident in Fig. 4. The LCOE of regions with a DNI over 2,000 kWh/m2/
yr ranges between $123/MWh and $199/MWh for the CRS in 2025, and
has the lowest range between $76/MWh and $134/MWh in 2050.

5.3. Sensitivity analysis

The available solar resources and discount rate are the main

Fig. 6. Impact of the loan interest rate on the localized cost of electricity
(LCOE) following an exponential trend at the rates of 10% and −10%.

Fig. 3. Objective and relative system cost.
variables according to the prior literature [17,21]. For the local solar
resources, we conducted a sensitivity analysis for the discount rate and
loan-related factors. We set 10% as the base scenario and discussed the
impact of the discount rate on the LCOE when the discount rate is be-
tween 6% and 14%. Fig. 5 illustrates the LCOE variation with different
discount rates in regions with DNI over 2,000 kWh/m2/yr. In the early
stages, most investors require a high ROI, which requires a high LCOE.
The lifecycle cost structure varies among regions where the pro-
portion of areas with DNI over 1,800 kWh/m2/yr is over 10%. We set

7
J. Ji, et al.
Fig. 7. Impact of the initial land cost on the localized cost of electricity (LCOE)
following an exponential trend at the rates of 10% and −10%.
two regions with the greatest difference—Qinghai Province and
Xinjiang Uygur Autonomous Region—as our sample and discussed the
impact of the loan interest rate on the LCOE. The benchmark interest
rate for long-term loans over five years fluctuated between 4.9% and
7.83% between 2000 and 2018, with a downward trend since 2011.
Fig. 6 illustrates the LCOE variation with the loan interest rate fol-
lowing an exponential trend at the rates of 10% and −10%.
The land compensation varies among regions and is adjusted by the
local government, mainly following an increasing trend. Fig. 7 illus-
trates the LCOE variation with the initial land cost following an ex-
ponential trend at the rates of 10% and −10%. A decrease in initial
land compensation or exemption can improve economic feasibility and
accelerate grid parity, especially in regions with a higher proportion of
the initial land cost.
5.4. Policy implications
During deployment and innovation, policies are crafted to support
the growing renewable power market to prop up the renewables in-
dustry in China [49]. These policy instruments include feed-in-tariffs
(FITs), auctions that reflect the value of the dispatchable CSP, risk
coverage support for innovative designs, and demonstration projects for
regions where CSP has a potentially significant role to play [50].
However, high initial investment is a serious impediment to competi-
tion. Thus, bank loans at lower rates are necessary, such as those for the
CSP projects: preferential loans by the Asian Development Bank for the
Qinghai Delingha CSP project, helped it achieve the lowest electricity
generation costs.
FITs, feed-in-premiums, preferential taxes, preferential loan condi-
tions, market price (quota), and green certificates are applied to the
electricity price and subsidy mechanism to improve the economic ap-
peal of renewable power in China [51]. Renewable electricity support
policies are categorized in Table 6. At the global level, policies of CSP
generation mainly include FIT, a renewable energy quota system, net
metering, and fiscal and tax support policy, among which the FIT and
quota systems are the most widely used [34].
Table 6
Renewable electricity support policies [52,53].
Price Quantity
Investment Investment subsidies Tendering systems for investment grants
Tax credits
Low interest/soft loans
Generation Feed-in-tariff (FIT) Renewable energy portfolio standards
Feed-in-premium (FIP) (i.e., quotas)
Tendering systems for long-term contracts
8
Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 114 (2019) 109279
FIT is primarily used to specify the grid price of all kinds of re-
newable energies according to the standard cost of generation. Spain
was the first country to adopt an FIT subsidy mechanism to promote the
development of the CSP generation industry [54]. Its main feature is
that it can ensure the stable income of renewable energy projects and it
is conducive to drawing different types of social capital into the re-
newable energy industry. However, the FIT should be degressive over
different periods [50]; it must adjust the benefits of healthy market
development so as to activate technological advancements. Thus, FIT is
the main price mechanism in China. The National Development and
Reform Commission (NDRC) announced the FITs of solar thermal
power generation projects with over four hours of storage capacity. The
example of the tariffs determined by the NDRC are the same provin-
cially: 1.15 CNY/kWh ($176/MWh), including tax [55]. The govern-
ment has noted that the first batch of solar thermal power generation
demonstration projects is the first large-scale demonstration program of
CSP projects in China whose construction deadline can be extended to
2020 with an electricity price reduction mechanism. Regarding the
lifespan of CSP projects, the FIT scheme is supposed to be degressive
with a time-of-day bonus regardless of capacity [50].
Most plants in China are still under construction or in development
[14]; developers lack private investment in new technologies with
higher risk [50,56]. Thus, the risk and loan guarantees are vital for
these demonstration subjects.
To promote the healthy development of the solar thermal power
generation industry, China emphasizes supportive policies at the na-
tional, provincial, and municipal levels. Such policies are implemented
by local departments; these instruments include tax relief, financial
subsidies, green credit, and land concessions.
In the earlier promotion period, the tariff covers the LCOE of the
sites in the Tibet Autonomous Region, Xinjiang Uygur Autonomous
Region, and Qinghai Province, where the DNI is over 2,300 kWh/m2/
yr. However, those LCOEs are inferior to the LCOE results calculated
when considering the average DNI in most of the corresponding re-
gions, which is much lower than 2,300 kWh/m2/yr, and the offer price
of subjects [31].
For scaling up in a province where the proportion of areas with DNI
above 1,800 kWh/m2/yr is over 10%, an additional subsidy of up to
$40/MWh will be recommended based on the example tariffs varying
regionally. The LCOE of areas with DNI equal to 1,800 kWh/m2/yr and
local land policies is shown in the baseline of Fig. 8. With relatively
favorable conditions and for the two scenarios considered in the study,
the time when CSP electricity costs will reach grid parity is expected to
be ahead of schedule when considering the CO2 emission transaction. In
the long term, the policy should consider the electricity demand and
pollution treatment cost and pay more attention to the regional dif-
ference.
FITs and loan guarantees, which are assumed in this study, are both
effective ways to promote the development of CSP generation, espe-
cially for deployment and innovation. Such loan guarantees can pro-
mote rapid establishment, while the FIT can guarantee the yield of the
project post-commissioning.
Finally, the bidding price mechanism determines the price. In the
existing bidding mechanism, lower electricity prices compared with
policy expectations are possible, which reduces the total demand for
subsidized funds. This, in turn, allows a balance in demand and supply,
especially for sites where electricity generation is imbalanced.
6. Conclusion
The solution to energy deficits and environmental pollution is re-
newable energy generation. We first estimated the annual electricity
generation of CSP technology based on the data of 31 provincial-level
divisions in China. We then calculated the regional LCOE of CSP pro-
jects based on the PTC and CRS by considering local policies and me-
trological conditions. The results indicate that the CRS with storage is
J. Ji, et al. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 114 (2019) 109279

Fig. 8. Electricity price by region and suggested tariff.

more economically feasible, with the LCOE ranging from $142/MWh to
$967/MWh on the national scale. The LCOE of the PTC with storage
ranges from $186/MWh to $1221/MWh, which is nearly 20% less than
the LCOE without storage. When selecting areas with a DNI above
2,000 kWh/m2/yr, the LCOE is below $200/MWh and $291/MWh for
the CRS and PTC, respectively. During the promotion, criteria such as
resource limit (e.g., minimum DNI) should be set at a reasonable range.
Regarding technological advancements and scale development, the
projects in regions that have more areas with DNI above 1,800 kWh/
m2/yr will be more economically feasible according to the learning
curve analysis, and thus liable in the fiscal scheme.
Furthermore, supportive policies include policy-related loans, land
allocation, tax deductions and exemptions, and direct subsidies. The
initial cost of CSP projects is higher than for conventional energy pro-
jects, even compared with other renewable energy generation projects.
The initial investment of CSP runs to the billions, but it varies due to
different geographic conditions, local land policies, and technology
modes. Moreover, the tariff announced by the NDRC is 1.15 CNY/kWh
($176/MWh), which is equal among provinces, and merely covers the
LCOE of the sites in Tibet Autonomous Region, Xinjiang Uygur
Autonomous Region, and Qinghai Province with DNI over 2,300 kWh/
m2/yr. We must expand the capacity scale through relative methods to
reduce the investment cost and make the LCOE of CSP more competi-
tive. In terms of tax policy, there is a deduction of 50% of the value-
added tax from solar energy projects in China, while the recommended
local subsidy for 2020 is below $40/MWh.
Governments are expected to enable timely and differentiated po-
licies to promote renewable energy generation adapted to local condi-
tions in systematic stages. The long-term developments of the CSP in-
dustry should rely on spontaneous growth rather than government
subsidies. Thus, it is vital to overcome the institutional barriers in order
to build a competitive electricity market.

APPENDIX

Table A1
Main factors by region

DNI Land-use tax Land compensation of unutilized land

($/km2) ($/km2)
Max DNI DNI Area (DNI > 1,800k Wh/m2/ Area
yr)* (> 1,500 kWh/m2/yr)*

Tibet Autonomous Region 3074 2007 70% 80% 153226 183870

Qinghai Province 2326 1711 35% 83% 64355 34169
Inner Mongolia Autonomous Re- 2093 1761 34% 99% 214517 210185
gion
Gansu Province 2192 1475 15% 53% 153226 430080
Xinjiang Uygur Autonomous Re- 2682 1366 12% 31% 76613 1103223
gion
Sichuan Province 2232 988 1% 20% 153226 1925168
Heilongjiang Province 1847 1543 1% 56% 153226 1532262
Jilin Province 1856 1436 1% 30% 91936 638441
Hebei Province 1868 1277 < 1% 26% 91936 3769426
Yunnan Province 1956 1136 < 1% 3% 122581 520239
Ningxia Hui Autonomous Region 1748 1485 < 1% < 1% 153226 278748
Shanxi Province 1731 1344 < 1% < 1% 103428 695219
Liaoning Province 1723 1364 < 1% < 1% 306452 4268422
Shaanxi Province 1670 1052 < 1% < 1% 91936 296493
Beijing 1539 1220 < 1% < 1% 229839 6895143
(continued on next page)

9
J. Ji, et al. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 114 (2019) 109279

Table A1 (continued)

DNI Land-use tax Land compensation of unutilized land

($/km2) ($/km2)
2
Max DNI DNI Area (DNI > 1,800k Wh/m / Area
yr)* (> 1,500 kWh/m2/yr)*

Hainan Province 1301 1005 < 1% < 1% 153226 8017578

Tianjin 1296 1125 < 1% < 1% 91936 6435467
Guizhou Province 1261 556 < 1% < 1% 183871 792252
Henan Province 1188 814 < 1% < 1% 153226 0
Shandong Province 1182 984 < 1% < 1% 612905 9203786
Fujian Province 1122 848 < 1% < 1% 153226 2094974
Guangdong Province 1110 791 < 1% < 1% 153226 2221780
Hubei Province 977 694 < 1% < 1% 306452 1861689
Jiangsu Province 965 831 < 1% < 1% 91936 2643138
Zhejiang Province 965 813 < 1% < 1% 153226 4757649
Shanghai 925 861 < 1% < 1% 229839 9308444
Anhui Province 911 783 < 1% < 1% 91936 4215662
Guangxi Zhuang Autonomous R- 885 620 < 1% < 1% 91936 706176
egion
Jiangxi Province 871 759 < 1% < 1% 91936 1486476
Chongqing 865 503 < 1% < 1% 306452 2758057
Hunan Province 754 596 < 1% < 1% 306452 6879383

NOTE: We exacted the information of DNI by region using MATLAB. The land-use tax is taken at the lowest level in the province because it is disclosed provincially.
The land compensation for unutilized land is the average of the city level within a specific province.

Table A2
Nomenclatures and abbreviations

Nonmature Abbreviations

area Aperture area CRS Central receiver system

C (t ) Total capacity CSP Concentrating solar power
c Capacity DNI Direct normal irradiation
di Local direct normal irradiance of region i FIT Feed-in-Tariff
EGn Electricity generation IEA International Energy Agency
eff Transfer efficiency of solar irradiation to electricity LCOE Levelized cost of electricity
ir Interest rate LFC Linear Fresnel collector
In Insurance cost NDRC National Development and Reform
Commission
ic Insurance cost ratio NPV Net present value
L Total area of plant PDS Parabolic dish system
LIn Loan interest PTC Parabolic trough collector
LR Learning rate PV Photovoltaics
IL Initial land cost ROI Return on investment
N Life span TES Thermal energy storage
r Discount factor WACC Weighted average cost of capital
S System cost
O&Mn Operation and maintenance cost
OPEX Operation and maintenance cost ratio
pl Loan proportion of initial costs
Tn Tax cost
Tnincome Income tax
Tnvalue added Value-added tax
Tnsurtax Additional tax of value-added tax
Tnland use Land-use tax
t income Income tax rate
t value added Value-added tax rate
t surtax Additional tax rate
t land use Land-use tax rate
Degradation factor
Tracking factor

References
[1] IEA. Electricity Information 2017. International Energy Agency, Paris 2017.
[2] Liddle B. Impact of population, age structure, and urbanization on carbon emis-
sions/energy consumption: Evidence from macro-level, cross-country analyses.
Popul Environ 2013;35:286–304.
[3] Sadorsky P. The effect of urbanization and industrialization on energy use in
emerging economies: Implications for sustainable development. Am J Econ Sociol
2014;73:392–409.
[4] Yuan X-C, Sun X, Zhao W, Mi Z, Wang B, Wei Y-M. Forecasting China's regional
energy demand by 2030: A Bayesian approach. Resour Conserv Recycl
2017;127:85–95.
[5] DES. China. Energy Statistical Yearbook 2016. China Statistics Press, Beijing:
National Bureau of Statistics; 2017.
[6] IEA. Technology road map: Concentrating Solar Power. Paris: International Energy
Agency; 2010.
[7] Ang BW, Su B. Carbon emission intensity in electricity production: A global analysis.

10
J. Ji, et al.
Energy Policy 2016;94:56–63.
[8] Liddle B, Sadorsky P. How much does increasing non-fossil fuels in electricity
generation reduce carbon dioxide emissions? Appl Energy 2017;197:212–21.
[9] NEA. the 2017 National Monitoring and Evaluation of Renewable Energy Power
Development. http://zfxxgk.nea.gov.cn/auto87/201805/t20180522_3179.htm.
[10] IEA. Technology Roadmap: Solar Photovoltaic Energy. Paris: International Energy
Agency; 2014.
[11] Sharma C, Sharma AK, Mullick SC, Kandpal TC. Cost reduction potential of para-
bolic trough based concentrating solar power plants in India. Energy Sustain Dev
2018;42:121–8.
[12] IEA. Renewables Information 2018 Overview. International Energy Agency, Paris:
International Energy Agency; 2018.
[13] IEA. Trends in PV Applications 2017 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY. Paris: International
Energy Agency; 2017.
[14] SolarPACES. CSP projects around the world. SolarPACES; 2018https://www.
solarpaces.org/csp-technologies/csp-projects-around-the-world/.
[15] Purohit I, Purohit P, Shekhar S. Evaluating the potential of concentrating solar
power generation in Northwestern India. Energy Policy 2013;62:157–75.
[16] Solargis. Longterm Yearly average of direct normal irradiation - China. https://
solargis.com/maps-and-gis-data/download/china.
[17] Ling-zhi R, xin-gang Z, Xin-xuan Y, Yu-zhuo Z. Cost-benefit evolution for con-
centrated solar power in China. J Clean Prod 2018;190:471–82.
[18] IRENA. Renewable Capacity Statistics 2017. Abu Dhabi: International Renewable
Energy Agency (IRENA); 2017.
[19] del Río P, Peñasco C, Mir-Artigues P. An overview of drivers and barriers to con-
centrated solar power in the European Union. Renew Sustain Energy Rev
2018;81:1019–29.
[20] Dowling AW, Zheng T, Zavala VM. Economic assessment of concentrated solar
power technologies: A review. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2017;72:1019–32.
[21] Hernández-Moro J, Martínez-Duart JM. Analytical model for solar PV and CSP
electricity costs: Present LCOE values and their future evolution. Renew Sustain
Energy Rev 2013;20:119–32.
[22] Ouyang X, Lin B. Levelized cost of electricity (LCOE) of renewable energies and
required subsidies in China. Energy Policy 2014;70:64–73.
[23] Sheu EJ, Mitsos A, Eter AA, Mokheimer EMA, Habib MA, Al-Qutub A. A review of
Hybrid solar–fossil fuel power generation systems and performance metrics. J Sol
Energy Eng 2012;134:041006.
[24] Ia NEA. Projected Costs of Generating Electricity. Paris 2010: International Energy
Agency; 2010.
[25] Shouman ER, Khattab NM. Future economic of concentrating solar power (CSP) for
electricity generation in Egypt. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2015;41:1119–27.
[26] Kost C, Flath CM, Möst D. Concentrating solar power plant investment and opera-
tion decisions under different price and support mechanisms. Energy Policy
2013;61:238–48.
[27] IRENA. Electricity Storage and Renewables: Costs and Markets to 2030.
International Renewable Energy Agency (IRENA). Abu Dhabi: International
Renewable Energy Agency; 2017.
[28] Feldman D, Margolis Robert, Denholm Paul, Stekli Joseph. Exploring the Potential
Competitiveness of Utility-Scale Photovoltaics plus Batteries with Concentrating
Solar Power. 2016. p. 2015–30.
[29] IRENA. The Power to Change: Solar and Wind Cost Reduction Potential to 2025.
International Renewable Energy Agency: International Renewable Energy Agency;
2016.
[30] Islam MT, Huda N, Abdullah AB, Saidur R. A comprehensive review of state-of-the-
art concentrating solar power (CSP) technologies: Current status and research
trends. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2018;91:987–1018.
[31] NEA. Notice of the National energy Administration on the Construction of Solar
Thermal Power Generation Demonstration Projects.http://zfxxgk.nea.gov.cn/
auto87/201609/t20160914_2298.htm.
[32] Baharoon DA, Rahman HA, Omar WZW, Fadhl SO. Historical development of
concentrating solar power technologies to generate clean electricity efficiently – a
review. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2015;41:996–1027.
[33] Tian Y, Zhao CY. A review of solar collectors and thermal energy storage in solar
11
Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 114 (2019) 109279
thermal applications. Appl Energy 2013;104:538–53.
[34] Purohit I, Purohit P. Technical and economic potential of concentrating solar
thermal power generation in India. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2017;78:648–67.
[35] Sait HH, Martinez-Val JM, Abbas R, Munoz-Anton J. Fresnel-based modular solar
fields for performance/cost optimization in solar thermal power plants: A com-
parison with parabolic trough collectors. Appl Energy 2015;141:175–89.
[36] IRENA. Renewable Power Generation Costs in 2017. International Renewable
Energy Agency (IRENA). Abu Dhabi: International Renewable Energy Agency;
2018.
[37] Neij L, et al. Experience curves: A tool for energy policy assessment. Lund
University, Department of Technology and Society. Environmental and Energy
Systems Studies; 2003.
[38] Lilliestam J, Labordena M, Patt A, Pfenninger S. Empirically observed learning rates
for concentrating solar power and their responses to regime change. Nature Energy
2017;2:17094.
[39] STA. Detailed Rules for the Implementation of the Interim Regulation of the
People's Republic of China on Farmland Occupation Tax. http://www.chinatax.gov.
cn/n810341/n810765/n812171/n812720/c1192375/content.html.
[40] MNR. Opinions on Land Use for Supporting the Development of New Industries and
New Business Forms to Promote Public Entrepreneurship and Innovation. http://
www.mnr.gov.cn/gk/zcjd/201509/t20150918_2364874.html.
[41] NEA. Notice on Reducing the Burden on Enterprises in the Renewable Energy
Sector. http://zfxxgk.nea.gov.cn/auto87/201804/t20180426_3156.htm.
[42] The scale development of photothermal power generation has met the require-
ments. China Energy News. vol. 4 ed2017.
[43] Purohit I, Purohit P. Techno-economic evaluation of concentrating solar power
generation in India. Energy Policy 2010;38:3015–29.
[44] González-Roubaud E, Pérez-Osorio D, Prieto C. Review of commercial thermal
energy storage in concentrated solar power plants: Steam vs. molten salts. Renew
Sustain Energy Rev 2017;80:133–48.
[45] NCIPSP. Energy Storage Power Station Based on Heat Storage. http://jmjh.miit.gov.
cn/cpyjsmxWebMessage.action?id=10714031.
[46] Vieira de Souza LE, Gilmanova Cavalcante AM. Concentrated Solar Power deploy-
ment in emerging economies: the cases of China and Brazil. Renew Sustain Energy
Rev 2017;72:1094–103.
[47] Tan Z, Tan Q, Rong M. Analysis on the financing status of PV industry in China and
the ways of improvement. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2018;93:409–20.
[48] Bataineh K, Gharaibeh A. Optimal design for sensible thermal energy storage tank
using natural solid materials for a parabolic trough power plant. Sol Energy
2018;171:519–25.
[49] Qi T, Zhang X, Karplus VJ. The energy and CO2 emissions impact of renewable
energy development in China. Energy Policy 2014;68:60–9.
[50] Lilliestam J, Barradi T, Caldés N, Gomez M, Hanger S, Kern J, et al. Policies to keep
and expand the option of concentrating solar power for dispatchable renewable
electricity. Energy Policy 2018;116:193–7.
[51] Shen J, Luo C. Overall review of renewable energy subsidy policies in China –
contradictions of intentions and effects. Renew Sustain Energy Rev
2015;41:1478–88.
[52] Haas R, Meyer NI, Held A, Finon D, Lorenzoni A, Wiser R, et al. Chapter 12 -
promoting electricity from renewable energy sources – Lessons learned from the EU,
United States, and Japan. In: Sioshansi FP, editor. Competitive electricity markets.
Oxford: Elsevier; 2008. p. 419–68.
[53] Jenner S, Groba F, Indvik J. Assessing the strength and effectiveness of renewable
electricity feed-in tariffs in European Union countries. Energy Policy
2013;52:385–401.
[54] Couture T. and Bechberger M. Pain in Spain: New Retroactive Changes Hinder
Renewable Energy. Renewable Energy World 2013.
[55] NDRC. Notice of the National Development and Reform Commission on the
Benchmark Feed-in Tariff Policy for Solar Thermal Power Generation. http://www.
ndrc.gov.cn/zcfb/zcfbtz/201609/t20160902_817573.html.
[56] Grubb M. Planetary economics: Energy, climate change and the three domains of
sustainable development. Routledge; 2014.