Cleaner and Circular Bioeconomy 2 (2022) 100022

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Cleaner and Circular Bioeconomy

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

A cleaner and ecological rosewater production technology based on solar

energy for rural livelihood
Vikrant P. Katekar∗, Anand B. Rao, Vishal R. Sardeshpande
Centre for Technology Alternatives for Rural Areas, Indian Institute of Technology Bombay, Mumbai, India

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Keywords: The present work demonstrates the production of rosewater using solar still and investigates its efficacy for
Economic analysis farmers’ alternate income generation. The present investigation reveals that rosewater production using solar
Rose farming still is practically possible for farmers. Clear and fragrant rosewater and dark pink-fragrant rose syrup have been
Rosewater
easily produced using solar still. At average solar irradiation of 631 W/m2 per day and an average atmospheric
Rosa indica
temperature of 38°C, the theoretical and experimental rosewater yield was 0.89 kg/m2 per day and 0.48 kg/m2
Solar still
Techno-economic examination per day, respectively. The average theoretical and experimental thermal efficiency was 47% and 25.9 ± 2.9%,
respectively. The average exergy efficiency was estimated to be 2.36% (theoretical) and 0.86% (experimental).
Also, the produced rosewater has a low TDS (13 ppm) compared with commercially available rosewater (ranging
from 16 to 426 ppm), indicating that the produced rosewater is of the best quality. The economic analysis states
that, for 10 years of lifespan, at an interest rate of 15%, the cost of rosewater per kg was estimated to be Rs.
16 with a payback period of 116 days. Experiment findings and mathematical calculations reveal that producing
rosewater using solar energy is a feasible option that is also a clean and sustainable solution for small business
owners. The sophisticated design is also recommended to increase system performance in the future scope of
work.

1. Introduction
The Indian fragrant rose (Rosa indica) is a prevalent rose species in
India. It belongs to the ’Rosaceae’ rose family (Rasheed et al., 2015).
It is a tall shrub with flowers that appear singly or in clusters (Fig. 1).
Flowers are short in size, fragrant and found in red to white on long
smooth flower stems (Fig. 2). Sepals (The flower’s tiny, leaf-shaped,
green-coloured outermost portion) have a long thread-like tip rising af-
ter blooming. Leaves are evergreen, with 3 to 5 leaflets, bright green
and shiny above, lighter underneath. Smooth, oval to pear-shaped fruits
can be observed on the plant before flowering. Natural compounds
with positive biological characteristics abound in Indian rose blossoms,
highly valued and utilised in the food sector, fragrance, and cosmet-
ics (Mileva et al., 2021). Does rose farming a profitable business for a
farmer? When is it worthwhile? And in which circumstances it is uneco-
nomic? The answers to these questions have been investigated in the
forthcoming section using an economic analysis of rose farming.
1.1. Economic analysis of rose farming
The Indian fragrant rose is prized for its gentle odour and numer-
ous applications. In the Indian market, the cost of the one-kilogram rose
flowers varies from Rs. 5 to as high as Rs. 300, depending upon the qual-
ity of flowers, season of religious festivals, marriages and other events.
Table 1 illustrates the economic analysis of rose farming. The necessary
information for this investigation has been taken from the rose farm-
ers in village Hingna (21.07°N, 78.96°E), Nagpur district, Maharashtra
state, India.
Table 1 demonstrates that the net present value (NPV) for the pre-
sented economic analysis is positive. It proves that rose farming is prof-
itable for the farmers (Juhasz, 2011). But unfortunately, the selling price
of flowers is not steady throughout the year. With variation in selling
price, the profit also fluctuates.
The economic analysis specified in Table 1 demonstrates that up to
Rs. 35/- per kg selling price, there is no profit. However, a significant
gain can be obtained when flowers are sold at the expense of Rs. 50/- per
kg and above. Then the question arises of what to do with the flowers
when the selling price goes below Rs. 50/- per kg? During the COVID-
19 pandemic, the flower market was shut down; consequently, farmers’
flowers were wasted. Even today (August 2021), the Nagpur flower mar-
ket is lower, and farmers sell rose flowers at Rs. 30 to 35/- per kg. The
existing flower demand is low because religious places are not open to
the public, and festivals, birthdays, and marriages are celebrated with
few people. In this scenario, where farmers can use their flowers? What

∗
Corresponding author.
E-mail address: 204358001@iitb.ac.in (V.P. Katekar).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clcb.2022.100022
Received 20 May 2022; Received in revised form 1 July 2022; Accepted 14 July 2022
2772-8013/© 2022 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/)
V.P. Katekar, A.B. Rao and V.R. Sardeshpande Cleaner and Circular Bioeconomy 2 (2022) 100022

Nomenclature 𝜂 (%) energy efficiency

𝜃 (Degree) zenith angle
a error in measurement 𝛽 (Degree) glass inclination
A (m2 ) absorber plate area 𝛽 (K−1 ) cubical expansion coefficient
A (Rs) yearly cost 𝜌 (kg/m3 ) density
AMC (Rs) yearly maintenance cost 𝜏b beam radiation transmission coefficient
ASV (Rs) salvage cost 𝜏d diffuse radiation transmission coefficient
C (J/kg°C) heat capacity 𝜀eff water-glass surface emissivity
CRF capital recovery factor ΔT (°C) temperature difference
Ex (W) exergy 𝜃z (Degree) the angle of solar irradiation
FAC (Rs) first yearly cost μ (N-s/m2 ) fluid viscosity
g (m/s2 ) gravitational acceleration
Gr dimensionless grashof number
h (W/m2o C) overall convection coefficient to do with flowers when the price goes below Rs. 50/- (say it is its throw-
h1 (W/m2o C) convection coefficient among absorber and water away price)? Fig. 3 shows various possible uses of rose flowers other
h2 (W/m2o C) convection coefficient among the water and the than selling them directly to customers (Mahboubi, 2016).
glass cover The processing of rose petals to produce different products, as men-
hfg (J/kg) latent heat tioned in Fig. 3 and selling them to the local market would be an alter-
i interest rate nate income source for farmers. These products also have great demand
I(t) (W/m2 ) incident solar radiation in national and international markets and are sold at a high price; for
Ion (W/m2 ) solar irradiation on a surface perpendicular to the example, rose oil is sold at Rs. 3500 to 4000/- per kg in the Indian mar-
sun’s path. ket.
Ir (W) irreversibility
k (W/m°C) heat conductance 1.2. Motivation and objectives
m (kg) mass
m (kg/min) flow rate 1.2.1. Motivation behind the work
mew (kg/m2 h) rosewater productivity per hour From the economic analysis of rose farming, it is observed that rose
n working days per year/number of experiments per farming is a profitable business only if flowers are sold at Rs. 50/- per
day kg and above. In this scenario, flowers can be processed for different ap-
n (year) life plications by the farmers, as described in Fig. 3. Rose flowers processing
P (Pa) partial pressure and manufacturing other valuable products and selling them in the lo-
P(Rs) capital cost cal market will save substantial financial loss for farmers. Considering
Pr prandtl number this view, the authors have selected rosewater production using rose
S salvage value petals as substitute work. The reason behind this is a massive demand
SFF sinking fund factor for rosewater within and outside India. The worldwide rosewater mar-
t (h) time ket is expected to increase at a compound annual growth rate (CAGR)
T (°C) temperature of 6.9% from USD 319.1 million in 2018 to USD 510 million by 2025,
U (W/m2o C) overall energy loss coefficient representing a compound annual growth rate of 6.9% (Ministry of Food
V (m/s) wind speed Processing Industries, 2020). Also, rosewater has been exported from
India to more than 110 countries. India’s exported rosewater was worth
Subscripts $0.79 million in 2020–2021 (April-November), with the total amount of
a ambient exports being approximately 5,67,380 (Connect2India, 2021). The fore-
b black, beam, bottom most factors driving the rosewater market are its capacity to smooth
c convection damaged skin; its inflammatory characteristics enable it to function as
des destruction an antibacterial, maintain skin hydration, alleviate a sore throat, rest
e evaporation weary eyes and have many other benefits over costly chemical-based
g glass cosmetic products and medicines (Swetha et al., 2019).
l liquid Now questions arise, what are the available technologies for rose-
in inlet water production? Are they suitable to use and maintain by farmers
ins insulation even though they are unskilled? Are these technologies environmentally
loss loss friendly? Answers to these questions are investigated in the upcoming
out outlet section.
p absorber plate
r radiation 1.2.2. Specific objectives of the work
s solid, sky Does solar still suitable for rosewater production? Does sufficient
t top water evaporation possible inside the solar still to produce rosewater?
th thermal What is the rosewater yield from a solar still? What is the quality of rose-
v humid air water produced by solar still? Does the rosewater production by using
w water solar still helpful for farmers for their supplementary income genera-
tion? The present work deals with such questions. Many research papers
Greeks are available in the literature that discusses the use of solar still to con-
𝛼 absorption coefficient vert saline water into potable (Arunkumar et al., 2019; Aybar, 2007;
𝜌 reflection coefficient Bait and Si-Ameur, 2018; Durkaieswaran and Murugavel, 2015;
𝜎 (W/M2 k4 ) Stefan-Boltzmann constant Edalatpour et al., 2016; Elango et al., 2015; Kabeel and El-Agouz, 2011;
Lal et al., 2017; Mevada et al., 2020; Muthu Manokar et al., 2014;

2
V.P. Katekar, A.B. Rao and V.R. Sardeshpande
Table 1
Economic analysis of rose farming.
Assumptions
• Farm size- 1 Acre (4047 m )2
• Number of rose plants- 3000
• Initial blooming time- 2 months
• Plant life- 5 years
• Daily output- 35 to 40 kg of flowers
• Daily wastage- 15% of daily output
• Selling price- Rs. 100/- per kg
• The purchase cost of the plant is Rs. 18/- per plant
• Fertiliser cost- Rs. 2000/- per month
• Cost of chemicals- Rs. 1000/- (4 times a year)
• Flower picking cost- Rs. 48,000/- per year
• Transportation cost- Rs. 36,000/- per year
• Brokerage- Rs. 10 per 100 kg
• Plant cutting cost per year- Rs. 5000/-
Fig. 1. Rose flowers farm (Authors source).
Fig. 2. . Closer view of Indian fragrant rose (Authors source) (For interpretation
of the references to color in this figure, the reader is referred to the web version
of this article.).
Fig. 3. . Various applications of rose flowers.
Prakash and Velmurugan, 2015; Sarkar et al., 2017; Sathyamurthy et al.,
2017; Sharshir et al., 2019, 2017; Sivakumar and Ganapathy Sun-
daram, 2013; Vishwanath Kumar et al., 2015; Yadav and Kumar, 2016).
However, no investigation is cited for generating rosewater from rose
petals using solar still; henceforth, this work is undertaken.
The novelty of the present work is that it demonstrates the novel use
of solar still for the production of rosewater. The specific objectives of
this work are as follows:
3
Cleaner and Circular Bioeconomy 2 (2022) 100022
Essential parameter Estimated value (Rs.)
• Net Present Value (NPV) 32,73,677
• The total average investment 1,83,000
per year per acre
• The total average income per 8,64,200
year per acre
• Total profit per year per acre 6,81,200
• Loss due to wastage per year 1,84,800
per acre
• To investigate the feasibility of solar still for rosewater production.
• To check the techno-economic performance of solar still for rosewa-
ter production.
• To compare the chemical properties of generated rosewater using
solar still with the rosewater available in the market to investigate
its efficacy.
2. Materials and methods
2.1. Technologies for rosewater extraction
Ideally, rosewater is the hydrosol part of the distillate of rose petals,
which we call rosewater (Moein et al., 2014). It is generated using hy-
drodistillation or steam distillation of rose petals (Shendre et al., 2020).
The essential oil content of the Indian rose flower varies from 0.03% to
0.05%. Fig. 4 shows a block diagrammatic representation of the rose-
water production process.
As revealed in Fig. 4, the distillation system consists of a boiler drum
wherein hygienic rose petals are kept on a grate (the metal frame that
holds the rose petals in a fireplace). The lower portion of the boiler
drum is filled with clean and purified water. Heat is supplied to water by
burning fuel in the combustion chamber below the water reservoir. The
steam thus formed passes over the rose petals that extract the rose oil.
Steam and evaporated rose oil are passed through a water-cooled steam
condenser. After cooling down, the evaporated mixture is expelled as
hot water from the opposite end of the condenser. The mixture is then
collected, stored and allowed to settle. The extracted rose oil molecules
rise to the top during the settling phase in the storage tank; they are
separated by filtering. The remaining water (known as hydrosol or rose-
water) is removed from the lower portion of the storage tank. Fig. 5
shows the industry-scaled steam distillation unit used for rosewater ex-
traction. It processes 500 kg of rose petals per batch (Gelle, 2010). But,
the processing scale of this device is enormous, which may not be suit-
able for marginal farmers (Kovatcheva et al., 2011). The device also
consumes ample fuel and is challenging to operate and maintain.
In India, the Central Institute of Medicinal and Aromatic Plants
(CIMAP) has developed a compact portable micro distillation machine
called ’Asvika’ for small-scale businesses, farmers, and research institu-
tions. Specifically, the device is intended to produce high-quality natural
rose water. Its volumetric capacity is 60 L with a rose handling capacity
of 12–15 kg rose petals per batch. Calandria-type flue gas pipes are used
to heat the water. It works on biomass, LPG, or kerosene. Fig. 6 illus-
trates a photograph of a developed distillation unit (Research, 2021).
The system developed by CIMAP is still far away from farmers’ reach
since it costs 6–8 lakh as per the equipment’s processing capacity and
materials used for fabrication. On the other hand, conventional fuels
are unsuitable for boiling water since they are expensive and harmful
to the environment. To process 100 kg of rose petals per hour, almost
260 MJ/hr of heat is required. With a calorific value of 18 MJ/kg for
V.P. Katekar, A.B. Rao and V.R. Sardeshpande
Fig. 5. Distillation equipment photograph for rosewater extraction
(Gelle, 2010).
Fig. 6. Distillation unit for rosewater manufacturing developed by CIMAP
(Research, 2021).
wood/biomass and 60% combustion efficiency, 24 kg of wood is needed
to burn per hour to release this heat, causing a visible carbon foot-
print (specific carbon-di-oxide emissions, 1096 kg of CO2 /GJ for wood)
(Pandey et al., 2011).
In this regard, renewable energy is a viable solution over fossil fuel
to some extent. India is fortunate in that it has an abundance of re-
newable solar energy. In many places in India, adequate solar energy is
available to operate solar devices for more than 300 days per year. Solar
systems are gaining more popularity due to their cleanliness, mobility,
and compact installation. They are valid for domestic and industrial pur-
poses. These systems are almost maintenance-free (Zhang et al., 2018).
The solar distillation system may also use rose petals for rosewater pro-
duction. Like nature’s hydrological cycle, the solar distillation system
operates. A water bowl, a dark absorber plate for solar radiation, a sup-
port structure, a glass cover for vapour condensation, and insulation are
4
Cleaner and Circular Bioeconomy 2 (2022) 100022
Fig. 4. Fundamental components of the rose-
water production system.
Fig. 7. Conventional single basin solar still (Porta-Gándara et al., 2020).
included. Fig. 7 illustrates conventional solar still, also known as single-
slope, single-basin solar still (Porta-Gándara et al., 2020).
Solar radiation enters the solar still via the glass and is absorbed by
a metal absorber plate. It warms the water and turns it into vapour, like
natural clouds. These vapours flow towards the glass-like clouds in the
sky, rejecting heat and condensing like rain. In addition to providing
free distil water, solar stills have widespread use. It is an eco-friendly,
vibration-free gadget. It does not run on electricity or fossil fuels. It
can also clean up polluted water in rural regions (Hanson et al., 2004).
Solar still distilled water is used for drinking, medicinal, aesthetic, and
aquarium applications. A semi-skilled local person can quickly build and
run a solar still of any size at a bit of cost (Dsilva Winfred Rufuss et al.,
2016; Khatod et al., 2022).
Single basin solar still is the most popular design of solar still;
however, it has poor energy efficiency and low distillate yield. Hence-
forth, several researchers have used various innovative methods to
improve the thermal performance of solar still such as energy stor-
age (Mevada et al., 2022; Zayed et al., 2020), wick and reflectors
(AbuShanab et al., 2022; Ghandourah et al., 2022) fins and corruga-
tion on absorber plate (Hammad et al., 2022), use of nanoparticles
(Abdelgaied et al., 2022) etc.
The following section of the manuscript comprehensively describes
the steps to complete the experimental work.
2.2. Preparation of rose petals
The authenticate Indian rose flowers (Fig. 8) were procured from
Nagpur flower market, Maharashtra, India (21.14° N, 79.08° E). Fresh,
air-dried 200 gm rose petals were taken and mixed with 2 kg of clean
and purified water (Fig. 9). The rose petals and water mixture was kept
in the single-basin, single-slope solar still, as shown in Fig. 10.
V.P. Katekar, A.B. Rao and V.R. Sardeshpande Cleaner and Circular Bioeconomy 2 (2022) 100022

Fig. 11. Rose petals inside the solar still (closer view).

Table 2
The list of constants that are used in theoretical and experimental computations.
Fig. 8. Procured Indian rose flowers.
Component Parameter Value
2
Glass cover Surface area (m ) 0.34
Absorptivity 0.05
Mass (kg) 2.2
Heat capacity (J/kg-°C) 840
Reflectivity 0.05
Transmissivity 0.90
Emissivity 0.94
Mass density (kg/m3 ) 2,500
Thickness (m) 0.004
Thermal conductivity (W/m k) 1.03
Absorber plate Surface area (m2 ) 0.27
Mass (kg) 5.67
Heat capacity (J/kg k) 386
Absorptivity 0.90
Mass density (kg/m3 ) 7,800
Thermal conductivity (W/m k) 386
Fig. 9. Weighted rose petals for experiments. Thickness (m) 0.001
Water Surface area (m2 ) 0.27
Reflectivity 0.05
Absorptivity 0.05
Heat capacity (J/kg-°C) 4,180
Mass density (kg/m3 ) 1,027
Thermal conductivity (W/m k) 0.61
Emissivity 0.95
Transmissivity 0.90
Depth (m) 0.02

At the climatic conditions of Nagpur city, the experimental setup

Fig. 10. Single-basin single-slope solar still.
was tested over many days. The steps needed to analyse the still are as
follows:

2.3. The experimental setup
The experimental arrangement produced 1.5 kg of rosewater each
day. Eight hours of sunshine each day was assumed. The latent heat of
evaporation (2257 kJ/kg) was used to determine the amount of heat
required for heating and evaporation. The daily average solar energy
incident in Nagpur was taken 470 W/m2 . The absorber plate surface
area was calculated as 0.27 m2 . A single-basin, single-slope solar still
was constructed with these dimensions. Fig. 10 shows a photograph of
an experimental configuration. An energy absorption plate was created
using a 1mm thick copper sheet, then covered in a dull black paint.
The transparent glass cover, 4 mm thick, was installed at a 22˚ angle
to the horizontal. The water bowl was 520 mm by 520 mm and had a
height of 320 mm. The outer shell of the solar still was made of 8 mm
thick water-resistant plywood. The condensate was collected in a trough
attached to the bottom sidewall. Flexible plastic tubing connected the
trough’s outflow to the storage container. The temperatures of the glass
surface, saline water, absorber plate and bottom surface were monitored
using thermocouples, as illustrated in Fig. 10. Fig. 11 shows a close-up
of a solar still filled with rose petals. There are condensation droplets
and pinkish rose petals visible.
Table 2 lists all of the constants utilised in theoretical and experimen-
tal studies. These values were used for theoretical temperature estimate,
thermodynamic, thermoeconomic, and economic analysis of solar still.
(a) Daily sun irradiance, ambient temperature and wind velocity data
were collected using suitable measurement instruments.
(b) Fixed parameters for various components were specified (e.g., mass,
area absorptivity, transmissivity, reflectivity) (Table 2).
(c) Initial temperature input values for theoretical calculations were ob-
tained from the experimental configuration.
(d) Mathematical model estimated internal, external, and conductive
heat transfer coefficients.
(e) The formula for basin water temperature is used to compute its the-
oretical value.
(f) The glass cover and absorber plate temperatures were determined
using mathematical formulae.
(g) The experimental temperatures were compared to mathematically
predicted temperatures.
(h) The performance of solar still was studied using the proposed ther-
mal energy and exergy model.
(i) Finally, economic and environmental analyses were performed to
assess the proposed system’s commercial viability.
2.4. Chemical analysis
The rosewater samples’ gas chromatography (GC) analysis was done
using an Agilent technology 8890-GC system fitted with a DB-5 MS
column. The injector volume was 1 ml. The concentration of sample

5
V.P. Katekar, A.B. Rao and V.R. Sardeshpande
Table 3
Procured rose water samples for chemical
analysis.
S.N. Make Picture
1 Sample-Ap
2 Sample-Db
3 Sample-Lo
4 Sample-Kh
used (volume) was 1 ppm. The injection inlet temperature and column
temperature were 280°C. Mass spectrograph (MS) entry temperature
was 150°C, and run time during the measurement was 40 min. Using
a computer-controlled oven, the temperature was programmed to rise
from 90˚ Celsius (2 min) to 280˚ Celsius (7˚ Celsius per min.); the carrier
gas was Helium (He), which was used at a rate of 3 ml per min.; the in-
jection size was 0.2 ml, and the detector temperature was 280˚ Celsius
with a chart speed of 1 cm/s. Identifying the chemicals in samples was
possible by comparing the peaks’ retention duration and reference sam-
ples performed under identical operating circumstances. The literature
on mono- and sesquiterpene mass spectrum databases was identified via
library searches.
Some commercially available rosewater samples (100 ml in quan-
tity, illustrated in Table 3) were purchased from the market to compare
chemical compounds and to investigate the efficacy of produced rose-
water using solar still. These samples were also tested using GC/MS, and
obtained results were compared with the rosewater produced during the
experiment.
3. Thermodynamic analysis of solar distiller
Thermal analysis was used to determine the temperatures of different
components of a solar still, including the condenser glass, basin water,
and an absorber plate. The following postulates were used in the for-
mulation of the energy balance equation (Asbik et al., 2016; Hedayati-
Mehdiabadi, 2017; Johnson et al., 2019; Sarhaddi et al., 2017):
(a) The research is carried out in a steady-state environment.
(b) There is no vapour leakage from the still.
6
Cleaner and Circular Bioeconomy 2 (2022) 100022
Fig. 12. Energy distribution within the solar still.
(c) The amount of energy that escapes through the still’s sidewalls is
insignificant.
(d) Consistency of saline water temperature and temperature uniformity
of the condenser glass cover
(e) There is no consideration for ground-reflected radiations.
(f) The thickness of the absorber plate is insignificant.
A part of the solar radiation that strikes the condenser glass is re-
flected into space, leaving a proportion of the energy to enter the solar
still. The same amount of energy is absorbed by the glass cover, with
the remaining portion reaching the water surface of the basin below.
Water’s top surface scatters a small amount of energy, but an absorber
plate absorbs most of it at the bottom of the water column. Part of the
radiation is absorbed by the absorber plate, while the absorber plate
reflects some. The energy transfer from the absorber plate to the water
causes heating and evaporation. Conduction through the bottom of the
solar still causes a tiny amount of heat to escape the environment, but
this is negligible. Fig. 12 depicts the distribution of energy inside the
solar still.
The thermal resistance network for a solar still is shown in Fig. 13.
It is an electrical analogy used to determine the rate at which heat is
transferred across the different components of a solar thermal system.
The following are the energy balances for the various components of
the solar still system that is based on the assumption mentioned earlier
(Asbik et al., 2016; Hedayati-Mehdiabadi, 2017; Johnson et al., 2019;
Sarhaddi et al., 2017):
3.1. Glass cover
The glass cover receives the energy from solar radiation and the
condensing vapour from the water in the basin via convection, evap-
oration, and radiation, respectively (Fig. 14). Convection and radiation
contribute to the loss of energy from the glass cover to the surrounding
environment. The following is how the energy balance for a glass cover
is expressed:
( ) ( )
𝛼𝑔 𝐼 (𝑡)𝐴𝑔 + ℎ2 𝐴𝑤 𝑇𝑤 − 𝑇𝑔 = ℎ𝑐,𝑔−𝑎 𝐴𝑔 𝑇𝑔 − 𝑇𝑎
( )
( ) ( ) 𝑑 𝑇𝑔
+ℎ𝑟,𝑔−𝑠 𝐴𝑔 𝑇𝑔 − 𝑇𝑠𝑘𝑦 + 𝑚𝑔 𝐶𝑔 (1)
𝑑𝑡
The heat transfer coefficient h2 is a summation of the heat transfer
coefficients for convection, radiation, and evaporation between water
and the inner surface of the condenser glass cover. It is calculated as
ℎ2 = ℎ𝑟𝑤 + ℎ𝑐𝑤 + ℎ𝑒𝑤 (2)
It is possible to calculate the convective heat transfer coefficient
(hcw) between a glass cover and water using an empirical relationship
V.P. Katekar, A.B. Rao and V.R. Sardeshpande Cleaner and Circular Bioeconomy 2 (2022) 100022

Fig. 14. Energy balance equation for condenser cover.

Fig. 15. Energy balance for brackish water.

A solar irradiation calculation may be made by using the following

equation:
( )
(1 + cos 𝛽) ( ) (1 − cos 𝛽)
𝐼(𝑡) = 𝐼𝑜𝑛 𝜏𝑏 cos 𝜃 + 𝜏𝑑 cos 𝜃𝑧 + 0.2 𝜏𝑏 + 𝜏𝑑 cos 𝜃𝑧
2 2
(7)

3.2. Basin water

Basin water is heated by solar energy transferred via the condenser

glass cover and the absorber plate to the water in the basin. Water evap-
oration consumes a small quantity of energy, yet it is not insignificant
(Fig. 15). The following is an estimate of the energy balance for saline
water:
( )
( ) ( ) ( ) 𝑑 𝑇𝑤
𝜏𝑔 𝛼𝑤 𝐼 (𝑡)𝐴𝑤 + ℎ1 𝐴𝑝 𝑇𝑝 − 𝑇𝑤 = ℎ2 𝐴𝑤 𝑇𝑤 − 𝑇𝑔 + 𝑚𝑤 𝐶𝑤 (8)
𝑑𝑡
To determine the convective heat transfer coefficient (h1 ) between
the absorber plate and the water, the following formula is used:
( )
𝑘 ( )0.25
ℎ1 = 0.54 𝑤 𝐺𝑟Pr 𝑤 (9)
𝑥𝑤
The following is how to express a non-dimensional Grashof number:

Fig. 13. A network of thermal resistance for solar-powered still.

𝛽𝑔 𝑑 3 𝜌2𝑣 Δ𝑇
𝐺𝑟 = (10)
𝜇𝑣2

provided by Dunkle. The effective temperature differential between water and the glass
[ ( )( ) ]1∕3 cover may be calculated using the following formula:
( ) 𝑃𝑤 − 𝑃𝑔 𝑇𝑤 + 273 ( ) ( )( )
ℎ𝑐𝑤 = 0.884 𝑇𝑤 − 𝑇𝑔 + ( ) (3) 𝑇𝑤 − 𝑇𝑔 + 𝑃𝑤 − 𝑃𝑔 𝑇𝑤 + 273
268.9 × 103 − 𝑃𝑤 Δ𝑇 = ( ) (11)
268.9 × 103 − 𝑃𝑤
The coefficient of evaporative heat transfer between water and the
The following is how the non-dimensional Prandtl number is ex-
inner side of the condenser glass cover is calculated as follows:
( ) ( ) ( ) pressed:
ℎ𝑒𝑤 = 16.28𝑥10−3 ℎ𝑐𝑤 𝑃𝑤 − 𝑃𝑔 ∕ 𝑇𝑤 − 𝑇𝑔 (4) 𝜇𝑣 𝐶 𝑣
Pr = (12)
The radiative heat transfer coefficient between water and the inner 𝑘𝑣
side of the condenser glass cover may be calculated using the following The following formula is used to calculate the mass of water:
equation:
[( 𝜌𝑤 𝑥 𝑤 𝐴 𝑤
)4 ( )4 ] ( ) 𝑚 𝑤 = 𝜌𝑤 𝑉 𝑤 𝐴 𝑤 = (13)
ℎ𝑟𝑤 = 𝜀𝑒𝑓 𝑓 𝜎 𝑇𝑤 + 273 − 𝑇𝑔 + 273 ∕ 𝑇𝑤 − 𝑇𝑔 (5) 𝑡
The following equation gives the mean film temperature of vapour
Effective emissivity can be stated as:
[ ]−1 on the water surface:
𝜀𝑒𝑓 𝑓 =
1
+
1
−1 (6) 𝑇𝑤 + 𝑇𝑔
𝜀𝑤 𝜀𝑔 𝑇𝑖 = (14)
2

7
V.P. Katekar, A.B. Rao and V.R. Sardeshpande Cleaner and Circular Bioeconomy 2 (2022) 100022

Fig. 17. Energy balance for the bottom surface.

Fig. 16. Energy balance for absorber plate. 3.5. Energy efficiency

When it comes to solar stills, the thermal or energy efficiency has

The specific heat of vapour may be calculated using the following been defined as the ratio of evaporative heat transfer to sun irradiation
formula: on the absorber plate, which may be calculated as follows:
𝐶𝑣 = 999.2 + 0.1434𝑇𝑖 + 1.0101 × 10−4 𝑇𝑖2 − 6.7581 × 10−8 𝑇𝑖3 (15) ∑
𝑚𝑒𝑤 ℎ𝑓 𝑔
𝜂𝑡ℎ = ∑ (25)
The density of vapour may be estimated using the following formula: 3600𝐴𝑝 𝐼 (𝑡)
353.44 Where the latent heat of vaporisation (hfg ) of water can be estimated as:
𝜌𝑣 = (16)
𝑇𝑖 + 273 ( )
The following equations are used to calculate the thermal conduc- ℎ𝑓 𝑔 = 3.1615 106 − 761.6𝑇𝑖 𝑓 𝑜𝑟𝑇𝑖 > 70◦ C (26)
tivity of vapour:
𝑘𝑣 = 0.0244 + 0.7673 × 10−4 𝑇𝑖 (17) ( )
ℎ𝑓 𝑔 = 2.4935 106 − 947.79𝑇𝑖 + 0.13132𝑇𝑖2 − 0.0047974𝑇𝑖3 𝑓 𝑜𝑟 𝑇𝑖 < 70◦ C
The following equations are used to calculate the dynamic viscosity
(27)
of vapour:
The freshwater productivity (mew ) is calculated by using:
𝜇𝑣 = 1.718 × 10−5 + 4.62 × 10−8 𝑇𝑖 (18) ( )
The pressure of vapour that corresponds to the mean film temper- ℎ𝑒𝑤 𝐴𝑤 𝑇𝑤 − 𝑇𝑔 3600
𝑚𝑒𝑤 = (28)
ature of the vapour may be calculated using the following equation: ℎ𝑓 𝑔
( )
5144 3.6. Top loss coefficient
𝑃𝑖 = exp 25.317 − (19)
𝑇𝑖 + 273
The pressure of vapour related to the temperature of mean saline This equation may calculate the radiative and convective heat loss
water is provided as follows: from the condenser glass cover to the surrounding environment to de-
( )
5144 termine the minimal thickness of glass needed.
𝑃𝑤 = exp 25.317 − (20)
𝑇𝑤 + 273 The following is the total heat loss from the glass cover to the atmo-
The pressure of vapour associated with the mean glass temperature sphere:
may be calculated as follows: 𝑞𝑡𝑔𝑎 = 𝑞𝑟𝑔𝑎 + 𝑞𝑐𝑔𝑎 (29)
( )
5144 The following equations describe the radiative heat transmission
𝑃𝑔 = exp 25.317 − (21)
𝑇𝑔 + 273 from a glass cover to the surrounding environment:
This equation may be used to determine the coefficient of cubical ( )
𝑞𝑟𝑔𝑎 = ℎ𝑟𝑔𝑎 𝑇𝑔 − 𝑇𝑠𝑘𝑦 (30)
expansion of vapour.
1 [( )4 ( )4 ]
𝛽= (22) 𝑞𝑟𝑔𝑎 = 𝜀𝑔 𝜎 𝑇𝑔 + 273 − 𝑇𝑠𝑘𝑦 + 273 (31)
𝑇𝑖 + 273
The radiative heat transfer coefficient may be calculated as follows:
3.3. Absorber plate
[( )4 ( )4 ] ( )
ℎ𝑟𝑔𝑎 = 𝜀𝑔 𝜎 𝑇𝑔 + 273 − 𝑇𝑠𝑘𝑦 + 273 ∕ 𝑇𝑔 − 𝑇𝑠𝑘𝑦 (32)
The sun irradiation strikes the absorber plate, which absorbs the en-
ergy. A portion of the liquid is transported to the bottom surface. The The temperature of the sky is calculated using the following formula:
remainder of the water is used to evaporate the leftover water (Fig. 16).
The following is how the energy balance for the absorber plate is ex- 𝑇𝑠𝑘𝑦 = 0.0552 × 𝑇𝑎1.5 (33)
pressed:
The following equations describe convective heat transmission from
( ) ( )
( ) 𝑘𝑏 ( ) ( ) 𝑑 𝑇𝑝 a glass cover to the surrounding atmosphere:
𝛼𝑝 𝜏𝑔 𝜏𝑤 𝐼 (𝑡)𝐴𝑝 = ℎ1 𝐴𝑝 𝑇𝑝 − 𝑇𝑤 + 𝐴𝑝 𝑇𝑝 − 𝑇𝑏 + 𝑚𝑝 𝐶𝑝 ( )
𝑥𝑏 𝑑𝑡 𝑞𝑐𝑔𝑎 = ℎ𝑐𝑔𝑎 𝑇𝑔 − −𝑇𝑎 (34)
(23)
The convective heat transfer coefficient between the glass cover and
the surrounding environment is expressed as:
3.4. Bottom surfaces
ℎ𝑐𝑔𝑎 = 2.8 + 3.0𝑉𝑤 𝑖𝑓 𝑉𝑤 ≤ 5𝑚∕𝑠 (35)
The bottom surface receives energy from the absorber plate. Some
amount is stored in the bottom surface, and the remaining amount is lost ℎ𝑐𝑔𝑎 = 5.7 + 3.8𝑉𝑤 𝑖𝑓 𝑉𝑤 > 5𝑚∕𝑠 (36)
in the atmosphere by conduction and convection, as shown in Fig. 17.
The energy balance for the bottom surface is expressed as follows: The total heat loss coefficient from the glass cover to the atmosphere
( ) ( ) is given as:
𝑘𝑏 ( ) ( ) 𝑑 𝑇𝑏
𝛼𝑝 𝜏𝑔 𝜏𝑤 𝐼 (𝑡)𝐴𝑝 = 𝐴𝑝 𝑇𝑏 − 𝑇𝑎 + 𝑚𝑏 𝐶𝑏 (24) ℎ𝑡𝑔𝑎 = ℎ𝑟𝑔𝑎 + ℎ𝑐𝑔𝑎
𝑥𝑏 𝑑𝑡 (37)

8
V.P. Katekar, A.B. Rao and V.R. Sardeshpande Cleaner and Circular Bioeconomy 2 (2022) 100022

3.7. Bottom and side loss coefficient 4.3. Absorber plate

Conduction, convection, and radiation are the methods through The following is an example of how to write the energy balance for
which energy is lost from the bottom and side surfaces to the atmo- the absorber plate:
sphere. The following is the heat loss equation for the bottom of the 𝑑 𝐸 𝑥𝑝
still: 𝐼 𝑟𝑝 = 𝐸 𝑥𝑑𝑒𝑠,𝑝 = 𝛼𝑝 𝜏𝑔 𝜏𝑤 𝐸 𝑥𝑠𝑢𝑛 − 𝐸 𝑥𝑝−𝑤 − 𝐸 𝑥𝑝−𝑏 − (50)
( ) 𝑑𝑡
𝑞𝑡𝑏𝑎 = ℎ𝑡𝑏𝑎 𝑇𝑏 − 𝑇𝑎 (38) The rate at which exergy is transmitted from the bottom plate to the
Conduction, convection, and radiation are the mechanisms by which surrounding environment is as follows:
energy is transferred from the bottom and side surfaces to the atmo- ( ) ( )
𝑘𝑏 ( ) 𝑇 + 273
sphere. The following is the equation for heat loss from the bottom sur- 𝐸 𝑥𝑝−𝑏 = 𝐴𝑝 𝑇𝑏 − 𝑇𝑎 1 − 𝑎 (51)
𝑥𝑏 𝑇𝑏 + 273
face of the still:
[( ) ( )]−1
ℎ𝑡𝑏𝑎 = 𝑥𝑏 ∕𝐾𝑏 + 1∕ℎ𝑏𝑎 (39) 4.4. Exergy efficiency

ℎ𝑡𝑏𝑎 = ℎ𝑟𝑏𝑎 + ℎ𝑐𝑏𝑎 (40) The solar still’s exergy efficiency is defined as the ratio of evaporative
The following is the calculation for the heat loss via the side walls: exergy to the net input sun exergy. It’s possible to write:
( ) Exout Exew
ℎ𝑠𝑎 = ℎ𝑡𝑏𝑎 𝐴𝑠 ∕𝐴𝑏 (41) ηex = = (52)
Exin Exsun
The next section of the article presents mathematical modelling of
solar still for thermoeconomic or exergy-based analysis.
5. Uncertainty and error analysis
4. Thermoeconomic analysis of solar distiller
5.1. Uncertainty analysis
The exergy balance equations for various components of solar stills
are developed to estimate the system’s irreversibility rates. The follow- To better understand the findings, it is necessary to keep track of the
ing is an estimate of irreversibility: experiment’s circumstances (De Keizer et al., 2011). Different instru-
∑ ∑ ments were used to measure various parameters. Glass inner and outer
Ir = Exloss + Exdes (42)
surface temperatures, water, distillate vapour, and absorber plate tem-
Exergy balance for the different components of the solar still is as peratures were measured using thermocouples. Using a graded flask,
follows: the rosewater production was also monitored hourly. In addition, an
anemometer and pyranometer were used to record additional meteo-
4.1. Glass cover
rological factors such as wind velocity and solar radiation. Other mea-
suring equipments are also used to inspect the quality of the generated
Exergy balance for glass cover is expressed as:
rosewater. The pH metre to determine the alkalinity and acidity of the
𝑑 𝐸 𝑥𝑔𝑎 rosewater product. The TDS metre to determine the minerals and salts
𝐼 𝑟𝑔 = 𝐸 𝑥𝑔−𝑎 + 𝐸 𝑥𝑑𝑒𝑠,𝑔 = 𝛼𝑔 𝐸 𝑥𝑠𝑢𝑛 + 𝐸 𝑥𝑒𝑤 + 𝐸 𝑥𝑟𝑤 − (43)
𝑑𝑡 dissolved in the rosewater. Table 10 shows the significant characteris-
The following equation is used to calculate the rate of exergy loss tics and uncertainties of the measurement equipment used throughout
from the glass cover to the surrounding environment: the experiment. It demonstrates that all uncertainties are within a rea-
( )
𝑇 + 273 sonable range.
𝐸 𝑥𝑔−𝑎 = ℎ𝑡,𝑔−𝑎 𝐴𝑔 (𝑇𝑔 − 𝑇𝑎 ) 1 − 𝑎 (44)
𝑇𝑔 + 273
5.2. Error analysis
The evaporative exergy rate of saline water may be computed using
the following formula:
( ) The primary goal of error analysis is to see whether an experiment’s
( ) 𝑇 + 273
𝐸 𝑥𝑒𝑤 = ℎ𝑒𝑤 𝐴𝑤 𝑇𝑤 − 𝑇𝑔 1 − 𝑎 (45) outcome matches a theoretical prediction or findings from previous ex-
𝑇𝑤 + 273 periments. Generally, if a theoretical prediction is within the range of ex-
The radiative exergy rate of saline water may be computed using the perimental uncertainty, a measured result agrees with it. Table 11 shows
following formula: the assumptions used for error analysis, and Table 12 describes the er-
[ ( )4 ( )] ror analysis results concisely. Percentage error is within the acceptable
( ) 1 𝑇𝑎 + 273 4 𝑇𝑎 + 273
𝐸 𝑥𝑟𝑤 = ℎ𝑟𝑤 𝐴𝑤 𝑇𝑤 − 𝑇𝑔 1 + − (46) limit (Khattak et al., 2018; Sardeshpande et al., 2011).
3 𝑇𝑤 + 273 3 𝑇𝑤 + 273
The exergy rate of the sun is computed using the following formula: 6. Results and discussion
[ ( )4 ( )]
1 𝑇𝑎 + 273 4 𝑇𝑎 + 273 This section of the article discusses solar still’s experimental results
𝐸 𝑥𝑠𝑢𝑛 = 𝐴𝑔 𝐼 (𝑡) 1 + − (47)
3 6000 3 6000 and their inferences. Sample experimental results on a particular day are
discussed graphically to understand the thermodynamic and thermoeco-
4.2. Basin water nomic performance of solar still for rosewater production. In addition,
chemical analysis of produced and procured rosewater is also addressed
The following equation may be used to calculate the exergy balance concisely.
for Basin water:
𝑑 𝐸 𝑥𝑤 6.1. Experimental results of solar still
𝐼 𝑟𝑤 = 𝐸 𝑥𝑑𝑒𝑠,𝑤 = 𝛼𝑤 𝜏𝑔 𝐸 𝑥𝑠𝑢𝑛 + 𝐸 𝑥𝑝−𝑤 − 𝐸 𝑥𝑒𝑤 − (48)
𝑑𝑡
The rate at which exergy is transmitted from the absorber plate to A mixture of rose petals and clean-purified water (RO water) in a
the saline water is: specified quantity was kept in a solar still. Distillate yield, the temper-
( ) ature of the bottom surface, absorber plate, water and glass cover were
( ) 𝑇 + 273
𝐸 𝑥𝑝−𝑤 = ℎ1 𝐴𝑝 𝑇𝑝 − 𝑇𝑤 1 − 𝑎 (49) measured at an interval of 1 hour. In the evening, distillate (Fig. 18(a)),
𝑇𝑝 + 273
Rose syrup left in the basin (Fig. 18 (b)) and rose petals (Fig. 18(c))

9
V.P. Katekar, A.B. Rao and V.R. Sardeshpande
Fig. 19. Variation in solar irradiation and atmospheric temperature.
were collected. Clear and fragrant condensate (distillate) was collected,
which was identified as rosewater, as shown in Fig. 18(a). The residue in
the basin was dark pink; it also had a strong odour called rose syrup. The
residual rose petals in the basin were whitish pink. The collected rose-
water, rose syrup, and a few commercially available rosewater samples
were sent to the laboratory for GC/MS testing. Rose syrup would be used
as a fragrance, and the rose petals could be used as a scrub after drying.
Rose petals (Fig. 18(c)) can also be used as an ingredient for manufactur-
ing scented sticks. The forthcoming text discusses the techno-economic
performance of solar still and the chemical analysis of rosewater samples
and rose syrup.
Fig. 19 shows variation in atmospheric temperature and solar radia-
tion falling on solar still on a particular day. Solar radiation varied from
596 W/m2 at 9 am; touched to a maximum value of 854 W/m2 at 1 pm.
It felt the lowest value of 266 W/m2 at 5 pm. The average weight of so-
lar incident radiation was estimated to be 631 W/m2 per day. Similarly,
the atmospheric temperature was recorded as 30.8°C at 9 am. It reached
the maximum value of 41.5°C at 1 pm. At 5 pm, the atmosphere was ob-
served at 37.6°C. The average atmospheric temperature throughout the
day was estimated to be 38°C. The measured values of solar incident
radiation and atmospheric temperature were adequate to operate the
solar still for rosewater production (India, 2020).
Wind speed has a significant effect on the performance of solar still.
El-Sebaii (El-Sebaii, 2000) discovered that productivity rises as wind
speed increases up to a certain velocity, beyond which the increase in
output becomes negligible. At higher wind speed, better cooling of con-
denser glass was observed. Wind flow maintains a condenser glass cover
at a lower temperature. Consequently, a better condensation rate was
10
Cleaner and Circular Bioeconomy 2 (2022) 100022
Fig. 18. (a) Rose water; Fig. 18(b) Rose syrup;
Fig 18(c) Rose petals after the distillaton.
Fig. 20. Variation in wind velocity and condenser glass cover temperature.
obtained on the inner side of the glass surface. Fig. 20 shows the varia-
tion in wind velocity and condenser glass cover temperature. Through-
out the day, wind velocity varies from 0.02 m/s to 2.5 m/s. The average
wind velocity was estimated to be 1.4 m/s per day. The corresponding
value of the condenser glass cover was also recorded. It is observed from
Fig. 20 that when wind velocity decreased, the glass cover temperature
increased and vice versa. The average glass cover temperature was esti-
mated to be 48°C.
Fig. 21 illustrates the variation in theoretical and experimental tem-
perature of different components of solar still. The highest tempera-
ture (theoretical and experimental) was recorded at the dull blacked
absorber plate due to its high absorptivity of solar energy. The absorber
plate’s average theoretical and experimental temperatures were 59.1°C
and 55.7°C, respectively. Similarly, theoretical and experimental tem-
peratures were 43.6°C, 48.0°C, and 55.8°C, 54.0°C for condenser glass
cover and basin water. From Fig. 21, it can be easily recognised that
the temperature of all components of solar still followed the path of
atmospheric temperature on a particular day.
The solar still’s rosewater yield is the most vital parameter. It decides
the usefulness of solar still for rosewater production. Solar still must be
designed for the highest yield at the lowest cost. Variation in hourly
rosewater yield of developed solar still in the present work is shown
in Fig. 22. The value of theoretical yield was observed more than the
experimental yield; since the heat loss during the experiment reduced
the heat transfer between the absorber plate and water. The experimen-
V.P. Katekar, A.B. Rao and V.R. Sardeshpande
Fig. 21. Variation in temperature of solar still components.
Fig. 22. Variation in yield of solar still.
tal yield followed a similar path to the theoretical yield, as shown in
Fig. 22. The theoretical and experimental rosewater yield was observed
as 0.10 kg/m2 and 0.05 kg/m2, respectively. The experimental yield was
50% less than the theoretical. For 1 m2 area, the yield was estimated to
be 0.89 kg/m2 per day (theoretical) and 0.48 kg/m2 per day (experi-
mental). The maximum hourly rosewater yield was collected as 0.168
kg/hr @ 2 pm (theoretical) and 0.085 kg/hr @ 1 pm (experimental).
The difference between theoretical and actual results is due to heat loss from
the surfaces of a solar still, such as the bottom surface and side walls.
Fig. 23 shows variation in the energy efficiency of solar still. Higher
energy efficiency is always desirable. In the morning, though the so-
lar still was exposed to the sunlight, initial solar energy was utilised to
warm up the solar still. However, sufficient solar energy was unavail-
able in the evening, but some yield was obtained due to stored inter-
nal energy in basin water. The average theoretical and experimental
energy efficiency was 47% and 25.9 ± 2.9%, respectively. Experimen-
tally estimated energy efficiency was 44.8% less than theoretical. The
maximum hourly energy efficiency was 64% @ 2 pm (theoretical) and
37.2% @ 3 pm (experimental), respectively. Experimental energy effi-
ciency was less than theoretical efficiency; it indicates much more heat
losses from the outer surfaces of solar still than expected. Reducing this
11
Cleaner and Circular Bioeconomy 2 (2022) 100022
Fig. 23. Variation in the energy efficiency of solar still.
Fig. 24. Variation in exergy for different components of solar still.
energy waste by proper insulation design or using some energy storage
system (sensible or latent) can improve energy efficiency.
The system’s exergy is the amount of useful work that may be done
throughout a process to bring it into equilibrium with a surrounding. Ex-
ergy is the amount of energy that can be utilised. The exergy is 0 after
the system and surroundings have reached equilibrium (Sharshir et al.,
2017). Experimental results showed that exergy between the absorber
plate and water had the highest value since the absorber plate was main-
tained at the highest temperature throughout the day. As the theoretical
temperature of the absorber plate and water was always more than ex-
perimental, theoretical exergy was always more than actual exergy. The
average theoretical and actual exergy between absorber plate and wa-
ter was 36.4 W and 13.9 W. The actual exergy was 61.6% less than the
theoretically estimated exergy between the absorber plate and water.
Similarly, the radiative exergy of the basin water had the lowest value
of 0.14 W (theoretical) and 0.06 W (actual), respectively. Variation in
exergy (theoretical and actual) between different solar still components
will be analysed using Fig. 24.
Using energy as a measure for analysing and improving the efficiency
of energy systems may be deceptive and perplexing. Quantity exergy
V.P. Katekar, A.B. Rao and V.R. Sardeshpande
Fig. 25. Variation in exergy efficiency.
may evaluate and enhance energy system efficiency and better under-
stand energy system losses by giving more relevant and meaningful in-
formation than energy alone (Ranjan and Kaushik, 2013; Sharshir et al.,
2017). Exergy efficiency (second-law efficiency) calculates a system’s ef-
ficacy under reversible circumstances. It may be defined as the ratio of
the system’s usable work output to the reversible work output. Higher
the value of exergy efficiency for solar still indicates its better ability
to utilise solar energy falling on it. Fig. 25 reveals variation in exergy
efficiency of solar still used for rosewater production. The theoretically
estimated exergy efficiency was more significant than experimentally
measured exergy efficiency. The average exergy efficiency was 2.3%
(theoretical) and 0.86% (experimental). Experimental exergy efficiency
was 52.4% less than theoretical due to the higher loss of useful energy
in solar still.
Heat loss to the environment, pressure drop throughout the system,
and chemical reaction processes such as reactant and product mixing
are all irreversibilities contributing to exergy degradation. Irreversibil-
ity involved in different components of solar still is a precise indication
of heat loss from it. It is observed that the theoretical irreversibility as-
sociated with the absorber plate was less than the actual irreversibility.
It indicates that heat loss was more than expected for the absorber plate.
For absorber plate, theoretical and actual (experimental) irreversibility
was 98.5W and 123.9 W, respectively. It shows that actual irreversibil-
ity was 25.7% higher than the theoretical one. From Fig. 26, it is found
that the highest irreversibility was associated with the absorber plate.
The average actual irreversibility was 12.0 W, 20.5 W, and 123.9 W for
condenser glass cover, water and absorber plate, respectively. It shows
that the absorber plate is the most crucial component. The maximum en-
ergy loss was associated with the absorber plate. Hence to improve the
thermal performance of developed solar still for higher rosewater pro-
duction, the design of the absorber plate should be modified. The glass
cover had the lowest irreversibility as it was operated at a relatively
lower temperature. The irreversibility of the glass cover was 15.2 W
(theoretical) and 12.0 W (experimental).
6.2. GC/MS analysis
GC/MS, often known as gas chromatography/mass spectrometry, is
an analytical method that combines gas chromatography and mass spec-
trometry features to identify different chemicals within a sample using
a single instrument. GC/MS analysis is often regarded as one of the most
precise methods available. It is beneficial for compounds with low de-
tection limits and may be used to assess samples, even if the sample
12
Cleaner and Circular Bioeconomy 2 (2022) 100022
Fig. 26. Variation in irreversibility in different components of solar still.
Table 4
Chemical compounds present in the different rosewater sample.
Sample no. Rosewater make Number of compounds
1 Rosewater (Experimental) 22
2 Sample-Lo 14
3 Sample-Kh 13
4 Sample-Ap 17
5 Sample-Da 4
6 Rose syrup, (Experiment) 10
amount is restricted. Hence, to identify different compounds present in-
side the rosewater and rose syrup produced during the experiment, also
for comparison, some commercially available rosewater samples were
tested using GC/MS. Table 4 shows the number of chemical compounds
in the different rosewater samples. Table 4 demonstrates that the maxi-
mum number of chemical compounds are present in experimentally pre-
pared rosewater using solar still (22 compounds). The minimum number
of chemical compounds are present in commercially available rosewa-
ter produced by "Sample-Da" corporation (4 compounds). Similarly, rose
syrup obtained from solar still has 10 chemical compounds. Figs. 27 and
28 indicate the chromatograph of rosewater and rose syrup produced us-
ing solar still. The retention time for different compounds can quickly
be recognised by utilising a chromatograph.
Table 5 accounts for the significant compounds (contribution of more
than 10%) present in the several rosewater samples tested using GC/MS.
As mentioned in Table 5, samples 1, 4, 5 and 6 contained three notewor-
thy compounds; however, two compounds were found in the "sample-
Kh" rosewater sample. It was exciting to note that the locally made rose-
water sample had only one compound (share was more than 70%). This
local rosewater may be prepared using chemical fragrance instead of
original rose petals. The chemical compound named Phthalic acid, di
(2-propylpentyl) ester, is found in almost all rosewater samples.
6.3. pH comparison
The pH of the material measures how acidic or basic it is. In this
case, the range is 0 to 14, with 7 representing neutrality. A pH value
less than 7 indicates acidity, while a pH value more than 7 indicates
baseness. Generally speaking, the pH of human skin varies from 4.5
to 6. On the other hand, most skin-care products have a pH of 6.5 to
7.5 (Proksch, 2018). Existing skin problems such as skin redder, itchier,
scaly, spotty, and wrinkled are due to the use of high pH cosmetic
products. However, rosewater’s low pH (say 5.5) helps to re-establish
V.P. Katekar, A.B. Rao and V.R. Sardeshpande Cleaner and Circular Bioeconomy 2 (2022) 100022

Fig. 27. Chromatograph of rosewater produced using solar still.

Fig. 28. Chromatograph of rose syrup produced by solar still.

Table 5
Identification of chemical compounds by GCMS.

Sample no. Rosewater make Major compounds (more than 10%) Chemical formula Percentage

1 Rosewater • p-Cresol C7 H8 O 29.12

(Experiment) • Phthalic acid, di (2-propylpentyl) ester C24 H38 O4 15.65
• 6,6-Dimethyl-2- Vinylidenebicyclo [3.1.1] heptane C11 H16 10.54
2 Sample-Lo • Phthalic acid, di (2-propylpentyl) ester C24 H38 O4 70.27
3 Sample- • Phthalic acid, di (2-propylpentyl) ester C24 H38 O4 6.30
Kh • Phenylethyl Alcohol C8 H10 O 57.44
4 Sample- • Phenylethyl Alcohol C8 H10 O 32.58
Ap • Phthalic acid, di (2-propylpentyl) ester C24 H38 O4 12.09
• Pentaethylene glycol C10 H22 O6 10.97
5 Sample- • Ethanol, 2-phenoxy- C8 H10 O2 82.32
Da • Linalool/ Geraniol C10 H18 O 11.21
• Phenylethyl Alcohol C8 H10 O 11.21
6 Rose • Phenylethyl Alcohol C8 H10 O 41.38
syrup • Ethanol, 2-phenoxy- C8 H10 O2 29.27
• Phthalic acid, di (2- propylpentyl) ester C24 H38 O4 19.05

Table 6
Comparison of different rosewater colour and their selling price.

Sample no. Rosewater manufacturer Colour Price per 100 mlRs. (In the Indian market)

1 Sample-Ap Pink 50
2 Sample-Da Clear 45
3 Sample-Lo Clear 10
4 Sample-Kh Clear 20

the skin’s natural equilibrium and calms it, decreasing skin irritation
(Binega et al., 2014). Fig. 29 compares pH values of different rosewa-
ter samples used in this work. The lowest and highest pH values were
recorded for rose syrup and locally available rosewater samples. Rose-
water produced using solar still had pH 6, beneficial for human skin
application. However, locally available rosewater (Sample-Lo) was un-
suitable for human skin as its pH was more than 7. Table 6 confirms
that rosewater samples are colourless (except ’Sample-Ap’) (including
rosewater extracted using solar still).
Total dissolved solid (TDS) is a term that refers to the total concen-
tration of dissolved substances in a chemical compound. Fig. 30 shows
that the highest TDS was recorded for the "sample-Da" rosewater sample
(426 ppm). The rose syrup produced during the experiment using solar
still had a TDS of 360 ppm. But it is interesting to note that the rosewa-
ter made using solar still had the lowest TDS (13 ppm). A low TDS level
indicates that the rosewater produced is the best quality.
Until now, the manuscript demonstrates how successfully solar still
has been used for rosewater production. Then queries arise! Does the

13
V.P. Katekar, A.B. Rao and V.R. Sardeshpande Cleaner and Circular Bioeconomy 2 (2022) 100022

7.1. The economic model for the solar distiller

Solar still’s operating expenses influence the price of solar-produced

rosewater. One way to examine the cost of rosewater production is to do
an economic study on the solar still, as follows (Agboola et al., 2014):
It is necessary to specify the following parameters to perform an eco-
nomic analysis:

(a) The lifetime of the solar still in years.

(b) The cost of annual maintenance (AMC).
(c) The yearly interest rate (i).
(d) The worth of the salvage (S).
(e) The cost of rosewater.
𝑖(1 + 𝑖)𝑛
The capital r ecovery fact or (CRF) = (53)
(1 + 𝑖)𝑛 − 1

The f irst annual cost of the system = (𝐶𝑅𝐹 ) × 𝑃 (54)

𝑖
The sinking f und factor 𝑆𝐹 𝐹 = (55)
(1 + 𝑖)𝑛 − 1

The annual salvage value = (𝑆𝐹 𝐹 ) × 𝑆 (56)

Fig. 29. pH value for different rose water samples.

The annual cost of the system is stated as follows:

𝐴𝑛𝑛𝑢𝑎𝑙 𝑐𝑜𝑠𝑡 = A𝑛𝑛𝑢𝑎𝑙 𝑚𝑎𝑖𝑛𝑡𝑒𝑛𝑎𝑛𝑐𝑒 𝑐𝑜𝑠𝑡 + 𝐹 𝑖𝑟𝑠𝑡 𝑎𝑛𝑛𝑢𝑎𝑙 𝑐𝑜𝑠𝑡 − A𝑛𝑛𝑢𝑎𝑙 𝑠𝑎𝑙𝑣𝑎𝑔𝑒 𝑐𝑜𝑠𝑡
(57)

𝐴𝑛𝑛𝑢𝑎𝑙 𝐶𝑜𝑠𝑡
𝐴𝑛𝑛𝑢𝑎𝑙 cos 𝑡 𝑝𝑒𝑟 𝑘𝑔 = (58)
𝐴𝑛𝑛𝑢𝑎𝑙 𝑦𝑖𝑒𝑙𝑑

𝐴𝑛𝑛𝑢𝑎𝑙 𝐶𝑜𝑠𝑡
𝐴𝑛𝑛𝑢𝑎𝑙 cos 𝑡 𝑝𝑒𝑟 𝑘𝑊 ℎ = (59)
𝐴𝑛𝑛𝑢𝑎𝑙 𝑢𝑠𝑒𝑓 𝑢𝑙 𝑒𝑛𝑒𝑟𝑔𝑦

𝐶𝑎𝑠ℎ 𝑓 𝑙𝑜𝑤 (𝐶𝐹 ) = 𝑦𝑒𝑎𝑟𝑙𝑦 𝑦𝑖𝑒𝑙𝑑 × 𝑠𝑒𝑙𝑙𝑖𝑛𝑔 𝑝𝑟𝑖𝑐𝑒 (60)

The payback period (𝑛𝑝 ) of solar still is stated as:

Fig. 30. Total dissolved solids in different rosewater samples.
use of solar still for rosewater production economically viable? What is
the cost of rosewater if produced using solar still? What is its fabrica-
tion, operation and maintenance impact on the environment? Answers
to these questions are discussed in the upcoming section using economic
and environ-economic analysis.
7. Economic analysis
The study of economics is predicated on the examination of costs
and benefits. Solar energy’s economics is difficult to gauge while it is
being used (Krishan and Suhag, 2019). The next part explains the eco-
nomic analysis of solar stills used for rosewater production, which may
be helpful to farmers in better understanding their financial advantages.
ln( 𝐶𝐹 −(𝐶𝐹
𝐴𝐹 𝐶×𝑖)
)
𝑛𝑝 = (61)
ln(1 + 𝑖)
The major components of solar still are water basin, glass cover door,
door handle, hinges, condensate collecting trough, side and bottom wall
insulation, rubber gasket, rubber tubing, absorber plate and dull black
paint. For all these components, the initial investment for the 0.27 m2
area was Rs. 9000. However, considering materials, fabrication, over-
head, installation, bottling, branding cost and profit, the total cost was
estimated between Rs. 30,000 to Rs. 35,000 for 1 m2 surface area. The
economic analysis of solar still for rosewater production was done us-
ing the economic model. The results of the economic study are given in
Table 7. The economic analysis states that, for 10 years of lifespan, at
an interest rate of 15%, the cost of rosewater per kg was estimated to
be Rs. 15 with a payback period of 116 clear sunny days.
7.2. Environ-economic model for solar still
The environmental-economic assessment seeks to determine how
much carbon dioxide (CO2 ) is released into the atmosphere via renew-
able energy and the extent to which that is possible. It is possible to
do an environmental-economic analysis using the formula shown here
(Pal et al., 2018):
𝐸𝑖𝑛 × 1.58
Emissions of carbon dioxide(CO2) on an annual basis = (62)
𝑛
The amount of carbon dioxide(CO2) that has been mit igat ed

14
V.P. Katekar, A.B. Rao and V.R. Sardeshpande Cleaner and Circular Bioeconomy 2 (2022) 100022

Table 7
Results of economic analysis of solar still.

Parameter Notation Value

2 2
Initial investment on solar still for 1 m P (Rs./m ) 35000
The daily yield of solar still mew (kg/day) 0.48
Daily yield of solar still per m2 area mew (kg/m2 per day) 1.78
Number of working days n (day/year) 270
Annual yield for 270 working days mew (kg/m2 per year) 480
Life of solar still n (years) 10
Interest rate (15%) i 0.15
Capital recovery factor CRF 0.20
Sinking fund factor SFF 0.05
The salvage value (20% of initial investments) S 7000
Annual salvage value ASV (Rs.) 344
Annual first cost AFC (Rs.) 6973
Annual maintenance cost (15% of annual first cost) AMC (Rs.) 1046
Annual cost/m2 (Rs.) 7675
Annual cost per kg of yield Rs./kg 16
Latent heat of vaporisation hfg (kWh/kg) 0.65
Annual useful energy input kWh 312
Annual cost per kWh Rs./kWh 24.6
Selling price Rs./kg 50∗
Cash flow CF (Rs) 24000
Payback period np (years) 0.32
Payback period np(days) 116
∗
The selling price of produced rosewater was presumed as Rs. 50 per kg. The selling
price of some commercially available rosewater samples is stated in Table 6.

Table 8
The embodied energy in solar-still components.

Material Mass (kg) Embodied energy (MJ/kg) Total energy (MJ) kWh

Glass 2 12.7 25.4 7.05

Aluminium 5 170 850 236
Plywood 10 10 104 28.8
Copper 5 100 500 138.8
Total (Ein ) 410.9

(kg of CO2) = 𝐸𝑜𝑢𝑡 × 1.58 (63) Table 9

Environ-economic analysis for solar still.

Parameter Notation Value

𝑇 ℎ𝑒 𝑦𝑖𝑒𝑙𝑑 𝑜𝑛 𝑎𝑛 𝑎𝑛𝑛𝑢𝑎𝑙 𝑏𝑎𝑠𝑖𝑠 𝐴𝑌 = 𝐴𝑣𝑒𝑟𝑎𝑔𝑒 𝑑𝑎𝑖𝑙𝑦 𝑦𝑖𝑒𝑙𝑑 Embodied energy Ein (kWh) 410.9
Annual energy output Eout(kWh) 312
×𝑛𝑢𝑚𝑏𝑒𝑟 𝑜𝑓 𝑐𝑙𝑒𝑎𝑟 𝑑𝑎𝑦𝑠 𝑖𝑛 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑦𝑒𝑎𝑟 (64) Carbon dioxide mitigation over the lifetime kg of CO2 1,33,099
Net carbon dioxide mitigation over the lifetime Tonnes 4.2
Carbon dioxide merchandised rate Euro/tonnes 7
𝐸 𝑛𝑒𝑟𝑔𝑦 𝑝𝑟𝑜𝑑 𝑢𝑐𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 𝑦𝑒𝑎𝑟𝑙𝑦 𝐸𝑜𝑢𝑡 = 𝐴𝑌 × 𝐿𝑣𝑎𝑝 (65) Cost of 1 Euro as on August 2021 Rs. 87
Carbon credits earned Rs. 2,649
The latent heat of vaporisation (Lvap ) in kWh/kg may be taken as Carbon dioxide emission during the lifetime kWh 649
0.65 kWh/kg. Energy payback period Months 16

( )
The amount of carbon dioxide avoided in kilogrammes of CO2
t hroughout t he project ′ s lifespan = 𝐸𝑜𝑢𝑡 × 𝑛 × 1.58 (66) continues t hroughout t he life of t he dist illat ion unit(kg) = 𝐸𝑖𝑛 × 1.58 (69)

( )
Over the course of the project ′ s lifespan, the net carbon dioxide CO2
mit igat ion is measured in tonnes of CO2 = (𝐸𝑜𝑢𝑡 × 𝑛 − 𝐸𝑖𝑛 ) × 1.58 × 10−3 (67)
Carbon credit has been obtained = (𝐸𝑜𝑢𝑡 × 𝑛 − 𝐸𝑖𝑛 ) × 1.58 × 10−3 × 7.07 × 87.55
(68)
In this case, the assumed carbon dioxide (CO2 ) has been merchan-
dised at €7.07 per tonne of CO2 mitigation, with € 1 equaling Rs. 87.55.
( )
The generation of carbon dioxide CO2
𝐸𝑖𝑛
Energy payback time(EPBT) = (70)
𝐸𝑜𝑢𝑡
Environ-economic study of solar stills was performed using the afore-
mentioned model. Based on Table 8, the average embodied energy of
solar still components is reported. The research findings on the envi-
ronment and economy are shown in Table 9. Carbon credits for the
environmental-economic study were worth Rs. 2,649.4, with 649.2 kWh
of carbon dioxide emissions throughout the lifetime of the system and
an energy payback period of 1.3 years (i.e., 16 months). Experiments
and mathematical calculations suggest that producing rosewater using
solar energy is feasible and a clean and sustainable solution for small
company owners.

15
V.P. Katekar, A.B. Rao and V.R. Sardeshpande Cleaner and Circular Bioeconomy 2 (2022) 100022

Table 10
The uncertainty of measuring devices.

Device Measured parameter Accuracy Range Uncertainty

Anemometer Wind velocity ±0.1 m/s 0.40 – 30 m/s 0.05 m/s

Measuring flask solar still yield ± 20 ml 0 - 5000 ml 2.8 ml
pH meter pH ± 0.10 pH 0 – 14 pH 0.05 pH
Pyranometer Solar irradiation ± 1.0 W/m2 0 - 5000 W/m2 0.5 W/m2
TDS meter TDS ± 1.0 ppm 0 - 990 ppm 0.5 ppm
Thermocouple Temperature ± 0.1o C −20 - 130o C 0.05o C

Table 11 • The chemical compound named Phthalic acid, di (2-propylpentyl)

Assumptions used in error analysis. ester was present in almost all rosewater samples.
• Rosewater produced using solar still has pH 6, beneficial for human
Parameter Unit Error value
skin application.
The least count of the length m 0.01
• The rosewater made using solar still had the lowest TDS (13 ppm),
o
The least count of temperature C 0.1
Error in radiation data W/m2 55 indicating the best quality.
Water measurement kg 0.01 • The economic analysis states that, for 10 years of lifespan, at an
The least count of pressure bar 0.01 interest rate of 15%, the cost of rosewater per kg was estimated to
be Rs. 16 with a payback period of 116 days.
• The experiments and mathematical calculations demonstrate
Table 12
Results of error analysis. that the generation of rosewater using solar energy is feasible.
It is a clean and sustainable solution for small business owners
Particular Unit Value Estimated error to explore adopting.
Length of the absorber plate m 0.52 0.01 • The investigation reveals that rose water production using solar
Width of absorber plate m 0.52 0.01 still is realistic for farmers. They can install small solar still on
Absorber plate area m2 0.27 0.007 their farm and produce rosewater to generate supplementary
Average solar beam radiation W/m2 631 55
Total solar radiation received kW 170 15.5
income from selling rosewater and rose syrup.
at the absorber plate
Average inlet feed water o
C 54 0.1 8.2. Future scope of work
temperature
Average operating pressure bar 1 0.01
From this work, it has been found that the energy efficiency of solar
Latent heat of vapour at kJ/kg 2734 27.3
operating pressure
still is very low (25.9 ± 2.9%). Thus, in future, to enhance its thermal
Mass of water added kg 2.2 0.01 performance for higher rosewater production, the following exertions
Mass of water evaporated in kg 0.47 0.01 will be implemented:
60 min.
Average operating o
C 51 0.51 • The solar still design can be improved by providing steps in the water
temperature basin, reducing the convection heat loss between the water surface
o
Temperature difference C 6.4 0.52 and condenser glass cover.
Sensible heat added to feed kJ 59 4.8
• In addition, fins would be provided on the basin surface, which will
water
Vapour dryness fraction % 98 4.0 increase the heat transfer between the absorber plate and water in
Latent heat added for vapour kJ 1278 60 the basin.
generation • Some nanoparticles would be mixed in black paint, increasing the
Heat absorbed in vapour kW 0.37 0.03
solar radiation absorptivity at the absorber plate.
The efficiency of solar still % 20.8 2.9
• Some heat storage material may be placed underneath the absorber
plate to reduce the heat loss from the bottom surface of a solar still.

8. Conclusions and future scope of work Declaration of Competing Interest

8.1. Conclusions
The present work deals with producing rosewater using single-basin
single-slope solar still. Solar still loaded with rose petals was used for rose-
water production. From this investigation, the following conclusions are
drawn:
• Clear and fragrant rosewater and dark pink-fragrant rose syrup were
generated using solar still, which can be directly sellable in the mar-
ket.
• The daily rosewater yield was estimated to be 0.89 kg/m2 per day
(theoretical) and 0.48 kg/m2 per day (experimental).
• Abdelgaied, M., Attia, M.E.H., Kabeel, A.E., Zayed, M.E., 2022. Improving the thermo-
The average theoretical and experimental energy efficiency was 47%
and 25.9 ± 2.9%, respectively.
• GC/MS analysis showed that the maximum number of chemical com-
pounds are present in experimentally prepared rosewater using solar
still (22 compounds). Similarly, rose syrup obtained from solar still
has 10 chemical compounds.
The authors declare that they have no known competing financial
interests or personal relationships that could have influenced the work
reported in this paper.
Acknowledgement
The authors would like to thank the Editor and the anonymous Re-
viewers for their helpful comments, which helped to enhance the quality
of the present research work.
References
economic performance of hemispherical solar distiller using copper oxide nanofluids
and phase change materials: experimental and theoretical investigation. Sol. Energy
Mater. Sol. Cells 238, 111596. doi:10.1016/j.solmat.2022.111596.
AbuShanab, W.S., Elsheikh, A.H., Ghandourah, E.I., Moustafa, E.B., Sharshir, S.W., 2022.
Performance improvement of solar distiller using hang wick, reflectors and phase
change materials enriched with nano-additives. Case Stud. Therm. Eng. 31, 101856.
doi:10.1016/j.csite.2022.101856.

16
V.P. Katekar, A.B. Rao and V.R. Sardeshpande
Agboola, O.P., Al-Mutaz, I.S., Orfi, J., Egelioglu, F., 2014. Economic investigation of dif-
ferent configurations of inclined solar water desalination systems. Adv. Mech. Eng.
2014. doi:10.1155/2014/925976.
Arunkumar, T., Raj, K., Dsilva Winfred Rufuss, D., Denkenberger, D., Tingting, G., Xuan, L.,
Velraj, R., 2019. A review of efficient high productivity solar stills. Renew. Sustain.
Energy Rev. 101, 197–220. doi:10.1016/j.rser.2018.11.013.
Asbik, M., Ansari, O., Bah, A., Zari, N., Mimet, A., El-Ghetany, H., 2016. Exergy analysis of
solar desalination still combined with heat storage system using phase change material
(PCM). Desalination 381, 26–37. doi:10.1016/j.desal.2015.11.031.
Aybar, H.S., 2007. A review of desalination by solar still. NATO Secur. Through Sci. Ser.
C Environ. Secur. 207–214. doi:10.1007/978-1-4020-5508-9_15.
Bait, O., Si-Ameur, M., 2018. Enhanced heat and mass transfer in solar stills using nanoflu-
ids: a review. Sol. Energy 170, 694–722. doi:10.1016/j.solener.2018.06.020.
Binega, G., Tegegne, G.T., Gelaw, B.K., Defersha, A.D., 2014. Assessment of cosmetic use
and its skin reaction among post graduate students in university of Gondar, Gondar,
North East Ethiopia. Int. J. Curr. Res. Chem. Pharma. Sci. 1, 8–12.
Connect2India, 2021. Rose water export from India [WWW Document]. URL
https://connect2india.com/global/Rose-Water-export-from-india/1 (accessed
8.18.21).
De Keizer, C., Vajen, K., Jordan, U., 2011. Sensitivity and uncertainty analysis for fault
detection in solar thermal systems. In: Proceedings of the 30th ISES Biennial Solar
World Congress, SWC 2011, 6, pp. 4567–4578. doi:10.18086/swc.2011.28.29.
Dsilva Winfred Rufuss, D., Iniyan, S., Suganthi, L., Davies, P.A., 2016. Solar stills: a com-
prehensive review of designs, performance and material advances. Renew. Sustain.
Energy Rev. 63, 464–496. doi:10.1016/j.rser.2016.05.068.
Durkaieswaran, P., Murugavel, K.K., 2015. Various special designs of single basin
passive solar still - a review. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 49, 1048–1060.
doi:10.1016/j.rser.2015.04.111.
Hedayati-Mehdiabadi, E., Sarhaddi, F., Sobhnamayan, F., 2017. Energy analysis of a
stepped cascade solar still connected to photovoltaic thermal collector. Int. J. Au-
tomot. Mech. Eng. 53, 1689–1699. doi:10.1017/CBO9781107415324.004.
Edalatpour, M., Aryana, K., Kianifar, A., Tiwari, G.N., Mahian, O., Wongwises, S., 2016.
Solar stills: a review of the latest developments in numerical simulations. Sol. Energy
135, 897–922. doi:10.1016/j.solener.2016.03.005.
El-Sebaii, A.A., 2000. Effect of wind speed on some designs of solar stills. Energy Convers.
Manag. 41, 523–538. doi:10.1016/S0196-8904(99)00119-3.
Elango, C., Gunasekaran, N., Sampathkumar, K., 2015. Thermal models of so-
lar still - a comprehensive review. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 47, 856–911.
doi:10.1016/j.rser.2015.03.054.
I. Gelle, 2010. Making perfumes according to ancient French methods: Production process.
J. A Travel. nose 1, 1–10.
Ghandourah, E.I., Sangeetha, A., Shanmugan, S., Zayed, M.E., Moustafa, E.B., Tounsi, A.,
Elsheikh, A.H., 2022. Performance assessment of a novel solar distiller with a double
slope basin covered by coated wick with lanthanum cobalt oxide nanoparticles. Case
Stud. Therm. Eng. 32, 101859. doi:10.1016/j.csite.2022.101859.
Hammad, F.A., Shalaby, S.M., Kabeel, A.E., Zayed, M.E., 2022. Experimental investiga-
tion and thermo-economic performance analysis of a modified solar distiller design
with thermal storage material and v-corrugated absorber basin. J. Energy Storage 52,
105020. 10.1016/j.est.2022.105020.
Hanson, A., Zachritz, W., Stevens, K., Mimbela, L., Polka, R., Cisneros, L., 2004. Distillate
water quality of a single-basin solar still: laboratory and field studies. Sol. Energy 76,
635–645. doi:10.1016/j.solener.2003.11.010.
India, M. of F.P.I.G. of, 2020. Processing of rose.
Johnson, A., Mu, L., Park, Y.H., Valles, D.J., Wang, H., Xu, P., Kota, K., Kuravi, S., 2019. A
thermal model for predicting the performance of a solar still with Fresnel lens. Water
11, 1860. doi:10.3390/w11091860.
Juhasz, L., 2011. Comparing net present value and internal rate of return. Econ. Sociol.
4, 46–53.
Kabeel, A.E., El-Agouz, S.A., 2011. Review of researches and developments on solar stills.
Desalination 276, 1–12. doi:10.1016/j.desal.2011.03.042.
Khatod, K.J., Katekar, V.P., Deshmukh, S.S., 2022. An evaluation for the optimal sensible
heat storage material for maximising solar still productivity: a state-of-the-art review.
J. Energy Storage 50, 104622. doi:10.1016/j.est.2022.104622.
Khattak, S., Greenough, R., Sardeshpande, V., Brown, N., 2018. Exergy anal-
ysis of a four pan jaggery making process. Energy Rep. 4, 470–477.
doi:10.1016/j.egyr.2018.06.002.
Kovatcheva, N., Zheljazkov, V.D., Astatkie, T., 2011. Productivity, oil content, com-
position, and bioactivity of oil-bearing rose accessions. HortScience 46, 710–714.
doi:10.21273/hortsci.46.5.710.
Krishan, O., Suhag, S., 2019. Techno-economic analysis of a hybrid renewable en-
ergy system for an energy poor rural community. J. Energy Storage 23, 305–319.
doi:10.1016/j.est.2019.04.002.
Lal, R.K., Mishra, S., Dwivedi, J.P., Dwivedi, H., 2017. A comprehensive study
of the different parameters of solar still. Mater. Today Proc. 4, 3572–3580.
doi:10.1016/j.matpr.2017.02.249.
Mahboubi, M., 2016. Rosa damascena as holy ancient herb with novel applications. J.
Tradit. Complement. Med. 6, 10–16. doi:10.1016/j.jtcme.2015.09.005.
Mevada, D., Panchal, H., Ahmadein, M., Zayed, M.E., Alsaleh, N.A., Djuansjah, J.,
Moustafa, E.B., Elsheikh, A.H., Sadasivuni, K.K., 2022. Investigation and performance
analysis of solar still with energy storage materials: an energy- exergy efficiency anal-
ysis. Case Stud. Therm. Eng. 29, 101687. doi:10.1016/j.csite.2021.101687.
17
Cleaner and Circular Bioeconomy 2 (2022) 100022
kumar Mevada, D., Panchal, H., Sadasivuni, K., Israr, M., Suresh, M., Dha-
raskar, S., Thakkar, H., 2020. Factors affecting solar stills productivity and im-
provement techniques: A detailed review. Groundw. Sustain. Dev. 10, 100289.
doi:10.1016/j.gsd.2019.100289.
Mileva, M., Ilieva, Y., Jovtchev, G., Gateva, S., Zaharieva, M.M., Georgieva, A., Dim-
itrova, L., Dobreva, A., Angelova, T., Vilhelmova-Ilieva, N., Valcheva, V., Najden-
ski, H., 2021. Rose flowers—a delicate perfume or a natural healer? Biomolecules 11,
1–32. doi:10.3390/biom11010127.
Ministry of Food Processing Industries, G. of I., 2020. Model Detailed Project Report on
Rose Water. NIFTEM.
Moein, M., Zarshenas, M.M., Delnavaz, S., 2014. Chemical composition anal-
ysis of rose water samples from Iran. Pharm. Biol. 52, 1358–1361.
doi:10.3109/13880209.2014.885062.
Muthu Manokar, A., Kalidasa Murugavel, K., Esakkimuthu, G., 2014. Different parameters
affecting the rate of evaporation and condensation on passive solar still - a review.
Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 38, 309–322. doi:10.1016/j.rser.2014.05.092.
Pal, P., Dev, R., Singh, D., Ahsan, A., 2018. Energy matrices, exergoeconomic and envi-
roeconomic analysis of modified multi–wick basin type double slope solar still. De-
salination 447, 55–73. doi:10.1016/j.desal.2018.09.006.
Pandey, D., Agrawal, M., Pandey, J.S., 2011. Carbon footprint: current methods of esti-
mation. Environ. Monit. Assess. 178, 135–160. doi:10.1007/s10661-010-1678-y.
Porta-Gándara, M.A., Fernández-Zayas, J.L., Chargoy-del-Valle, N., 2020. Solar still distil-
lation enhancement through water surface perturbation. Sol. Energy 196, 312–318.
doi:10.1016/j.solener.2019.12.028.
Prakash, P., Velmurugan, V., 2015. Parameters influencing the productivity of solar stills –
a review. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 49, 585–609. doi:10.1016/j.rser.2015.04.136.
Proksch, E., 2018. pH in nature, humans and skin. J. Dermatol. 45, 1044–1052.
doi:10.1111/1346-8138.14489.
Ranjan, K.R., Kaushik, S.C., 2013. Energy, exergy and thermo-economic analysis of
solar distillation systems: a review. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 27, 709–723.
doi:10.1016/j.rser.2013.07.025.
Rasheed, H.M., Khan, T., Wahid, F., Khan, R., Shah, A.J., 2015. Chemical composition
and vasorelaxant and antispasmodic effects of essential oil from Rosa indica L. Petals.
Evid. Based Complement. Altern. Med. 2015. doi:10.1155/2015/279247.
Research, C. of S. and I., 2021. Central institute of medicinal and aromatic plants [WWW
Document]. Counc. Sci. Ind. Res. URL https://www.cimap.res.in/english/index.php
(accessed 8.18.21).
Sardeshpande, V.R., Chandak, A.G., Pillai, I.R., 2011. Procedure for thermal performance
evaluation of steam generating point-focus solar concentrators. Sol. Energy 85, 1390–
1398. doi:10.1016/j.solener.2011.03.018.
Sarhaddi, F., Farshchi Tabrizi, F., Aghaei Zoori, H., Mousavi, S.A.H.S., 2017. Com-
parative study of two weir type cascade solar stills with and without PCM stor-
age using energy and exergy analysis. Energy Convers. Manag. 133, 97–109.
doi:10.1016/j.enconman.2016.11.044.
Sarkar, M.N.I., Sifat, A.I., Reza, S.M.S., Sadique, M.S., 2017. A review of optimum param-
eter values of a passive solar still and a design for southern Bangladesh. Renew. Wind.
Water Sol. 4, 1–13. doi:10.1186/s40807-017-0038-8.
Sathyamurthy, R., El-Agouz, S.A., Nagarajan, P.K., Subramani, J., Arunkumar, T., Magesh-
babu, D., Madhu, B., Bharathwaaj, R., Prakash, N., 2017. A review of integrat-
ing solar collectors to solar still. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 77, 1069–1097.
doi:10.1016/j.rser.2016.11.223.
Sharshir, S.W., Elsheikh, A.H., Edreis, E.M.A., Ali, M.K.A., Sathyamurthy, R., Kabeel, A.E.,
Zang, J., Yang, N., 2019. Improving the solar still performance by using thermal en-
ergy storage materials: a review of recent developments. Desalin. Water Treat. 165,
1–15. doi:10.5004/dwt.2019.24362.
Sharshir, S.W., Elsheikh, A.H., Peng, G., Yang, N., El-Samadony, M.O.A., Kabeel, A.E.,
2017. Thermal performance and exergy analysis of solar stills – a review. Renew.
Sustain. Energy Rev. 73, 521–544. doi:10.1016/j.rser.2017.01.156.
Shendre, G., Sambhe, R., Mandaokar, M., Gupta, P., Sonone, S., 2020. Extraction of rose
water by steam distillation. Int. J. Res. Adv. Eng. Technol. 6, 28–30 ISSN:2455-0876.
Sivakumar, V., Ganapathy Sundaram, E., 2013. Improvement techniques of so-
lar still efficiency: a review. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 28, 246–264.
doi:10.1016/j.rser.2013.07.037.
Swetha, R., Shobana, R., Sunayana, M., Prabu, D., Mohan, R., Raj, N., 2019. Antibacterial
and antifungal efficacy of rose petal (Rosa indica) extract on oral microbes - an in vitro
study. Res. Rev. J. Dent. Sci. 7, 19–25.
Vishwanath Kumar, P., Kumar, A., Prakash, O., Kaviti, A.K., 2015. Solar
stills system design: a review. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 51, 153–181.
doi:10.1016/j.rser.2015.04.103.
Yadav, C., Kumar, M., 2016. Recent advances in stepped and weir type solar still. Int. J.
Recent Adv. Eng. Technol. 4, 83–90.
Zayed, M.E., Zhao, J., Li, W., Elsheikh, A.H., Elbanna, A.M., Jing, L., Geweda, A.E., 2020.
Recent progress in phase change materials storage containers: geometries, design con-
siderations and heat transfer improvement methods. J. Energy Storage 30, 101341.
doi:10.1016/j.est.2020.101341.
Zhang, Y., Sivakumar, M., Yang, S., Enever, K., Ramezanianpour, M., 2018. Application
of solar energy in water treatment processes: a review. Desalination 428, 116–145.
doi:10.1016/j.desal.2017.11.020.