energies

Article
A Comparative Techno-Economic Analysis of
Different Desalination Technologies in Off-Grid
Islands †
Michael Castro, Myron Alcanzare, Eugene Esparcia, Jr. * and Joey Ocon *
Laboratory of Electrochemical Engineering (LEE), Department of Chemical Engineering,
University of the Philippines Diliman, Diliman 1101, Philippines; [email protected] (M.C.);
[email protected] (M.A.)
* Correspondence: [email protected] (E.E.J.); [email protected] (J.O.)
† This paper is an extended version of our paper published in: Castro, M.T.; Esparcia, E.A.; Odulio, C.M.F.;
Ocon, J.D. Technoeconomics of reverse osmosis as demand-side management for Philippine off-grid islands.
Chem. Eng. Trans. 2019, 76, 1129–1134., also presented at 22nd Conference on Process Integration for Energy
Saving and Pollution Reduction (PRES 19).




Received: 15 January 2020; Accepted: 23 April 2020; Published: 4 May 2020


Abstract: Freshwater in off-grid islands is sourced from rain, groundwater, or mainland imports,
which are unreliable, limited, and expensive, respectively. Sustainable freshwater generation
from desalination of abundant seawater is another alternative worth exploring. Model-based
techno-economic simulations have focused on reverse osmosis desalination due to its low energy
consumption and decreasing costs. However, reverse osmosis requires frequent and costly membrane
replacement. Other desalination technologies have advantages such as less stringent feedwater
requirements, but detailed studies are yet to be done. In this work, a techno-economic comparison
of multi-effect distillation, multi-stage flash, mechanical vapor compression, and reverse osmosis
coupled with solar photovoltaic-lithium ion-diesel hybrid system was performed by comparing
power flows to study the interaction between energy and desalination components. Optimization
with projected costs were then performed to investigate future trends. Lastly, we used stochastic
generation and demand profiles to infer uncertainties in energy and desalination unit sizing. Reverse
osmosis is favorable due to low energy and water costs, as well as possible compatibility with
renewable energy systems. Multi-effect distillation and multi-stage flash may also be advantageous
for low-risk applications due to system robustness.

Keywords: desalination; multi-effect distillation; multi-stage flash; mechanical vapor compression;

reverse osmosis; renewable energy

1. Introduction
Small off-grid islands have costly, limited, and intermittent supply of electricity and water due
to dependence on importation. In the case of the Philippines, they are often electrified by diesel
generators that are supplied with diesel imported from the mainland, resulting in high electricity prices
(i.e., six times that of the mainland) because of high transportation costs [1]. In addition, freshwater for
general purposes on these islands is sourced from an unreliable rainwater supply or a limited and
vulnerable groundwater source [2]. Drinking water may be imported from the mainland at a cost
of around 1 USD/L [3]. Economic activity on these islands are adversely affected as a result of the
high costs of electricity and water. In particular, the International Labor Organization identified that
freshwater scarcity hinders economic growth, as businesses would compete with residents for the
resource [4]. The scarcity of clean freshwater can be solved through seawater desalination, but it is

Energies 2020, 13, 2261; doi:10.3390/en13092261 www.mdpi.com/journal/energies

Energies 2020, 13, 2261 2 of 25

energy intensive [5]. Putting additional conventional power generation capacity must be considered
alongside desalination capacity, but this may be an unsustainable and more costly option [1]. In contrast,
putting up renewable energy (RE) generation capacity to augment desalination may be more feasible
because of the decreasing costs of solar photovoltaic (PV) [6] and battery energy storage systems
(BESS) [7]. Hybrid energy systems consisting of solar PV, diesel generators, and energy storage were
shown to reduce electricity costs in off-grid areas [8]. In the Philippines, Ocon and Bertheau estimated a
20% energy generation cost reduction for Philippine off-grid islands upon transition from a diesel-only
system to a solar PV-based hybrid system [1], while Bertheau and Blechinger considered a 10-year load
growth in their analysis and found the same trend [9]. Note that the works mentioned were focused
on finding the lowest levelized cost of electricity only.
Table 1 summarizes the literatures that conducted feasibility studies for both energy and
desalination systems. Some works have focus on the optimal combination of components. For example,
Fernández-Gil and Petrakopoulou showed that implementing RE-desalination systems on Skyros Island,
Greece yields freshwater at a cost of 2.75 USD/m3 , which is 52% lower than imported freshwater [10].
Tafech et al. show that reverse osmosis (RO) powered by a PV-wind system can yield freshwater
at a cost of 1.87 USD/m3 on King Island, Australia [11]. For comparison, the freshwater cost in
those literatures reviewed are more expensive than that of mainland Philippine water cost which
amounts to 0.70 USD/m3 [12]. Other works focused on dispatch algorithms. For instance, Gökçek
simulated solar PV, wind, and diesel-based energy systems coupled with RO as an additional electrical
load [13]. Corsini and Tortora demonstrated the load leveling capabilities of RO by absorbing excess
RE generation in a PV-diesel hybrid system [14]. Lastly, Bognar et al. compared different RO dispatch
strategies which shows both energy and water generation costs may be minimized by treating RO as a
deferrable load [15]. Note that excessive desalination turndown could arise, which will damage the
desalination plant [16].

Table 1. Summary of energy-desalination feasibility studies. RO: reverse osmosis; PV: photovoltaic.
Energy Desalination
Ref. Remarks
PV Wind Diesel Batt RO Other

• Case study in off-grid areas in Iraq

[17] 3 3 3 3 • Solar-wind-diesel-RO system has lowest water
generation costs

• Case study based on King Island, Australia

[11] 3 3 3 3 3 • Solar PV-RO has the lowest water generation cost
• Water storage important for dealing with uncertainties

• Case study in Algarve, Portugal

[18] 3 3 3 • Decentralized system yields lowest generation cost

• Economic feasibility of supplying water demand of US

[19] 3 3 coastline via RO
• US electricity consumption will increase by only 0.5%

• Case study in Skyros, Greece

[10] 3 3 • Freshwater generated from desalination is cheaper than
imported freshwater

• Compared different brackish water RO methods

[20] 3 • Batch and closed-circuit desalination designs are
energy efficient

• Analyzed the use of desalinated water for agriculture

[21] 3 3 • Case study in Canary Islands, Spain

Table 2 compares different desalination technologies from different works in the literature, which
generally shows insufficient technical detail. In contrast, research listed in Table 1 involve rigorous
Energies 2020, 13, 2261 3 of 25

model-based simulations, but are mostly limited to RO. This is not surprising considering that the
technology has a low energy consumption [19] and decreasing investment costs [22], making it practical
for installation. The technology constitutes the largest share of installed global desalination capacity
with 69% of the global desalinated water production [23].

Table 2. Review of comparative desalination studies. MED: multi-effect distillation; MSF: multi-stage
flash; MVC: mechanical vapor compression.

Desalination
Ref. Remarks
MED MSF MVC RO

• Discusses merits of other technologies

[24] 3 3 3 3 • MED needs less pretreatment than RO
• MVC has more compact installations

• Review of costing methodologies

[25] 3 3 3 3 • Correlate desalination cost with installed capacity or
growth rate

• Parameters for logistic growth curves of cumulative

[26] 3 3 3 installed capacity

• Estimated 29% learning rate 1 between desalination cost

[27] and cumulative installed capacity
• Not specific to any desalination method

[22] 3 • Estimated 15% learning rate 1 for RO

• Compared MED, RO, and novel capillary-driven

desalination (CDD)
[28] 3 3 • CDD has good balance between energy consumption
and water production

1 Learning rate in these studies refers to the percentage by which the cost of desalination decreases when the
cumulative installed capacity doubles. Other definitions, such as those based on the doubling of cumulative
generation, also exist [29].

RO is a membrane-based desalination technology in which saltwater passes through a

semipermeable membrane that blocks ions and other contaminants. Freshwater is collected at
the other end of the membrane [5]. In a continuous process, the feedwater channel, membrane, and
freshwater permeate collectors are pressed and wound in a cylindrical package (Figure 1). At the
center of the cylinder is the permeate tube with freshwater [30]. Despite its advantages, the technology
is still hindered by frequent membrane degradation [31]. Many works have tackled the technical
issue by using different membrane types [32] and managing membrane fouling [33]. This has led
some studies to consider other desalination methods. Other membrane-based technologies include
electrodialysis (ED), wherein saltwater is passed between alternating layers of anodic and cathodic
exchange membranes. These membranes allow only anions and cations to pass, respectively. Ions are
separated and trapped between every other layer when an electric field is applied, forming alternating
layers of freshwater and brine [34].
technical issue by using different membrane types [32] and managing membrane fouling [33]. This
has led some studies to consider other desalination methods. Other membrane-based technologies
include electrodialysis (ED), wherein saltwater is passed between alternating layers of anodic and
cathodic exchange membranes. These membranes allow only anions and cations to pass, respectively.
Ions are separated and trapped between every other layer when an electric field is applied, forming
Energies 2020, 13, 2261 4 of 25
alternating layers of freshwater and brine [34].

Energies 2020, 13, x FOR PEER REVIEW 4 of 25

Energies 2020, 13, x FOR PEER REVIEW 4 of 25
Figure 1. Reverse Osmosis (RO).
Energies 2020, 13, x FOR PEER REVIEW 4 of 25
Figure 1. Reverse Osmosis (RO).
Thermal desalination systems generally produce
Figure 1. Reverse freshwater
Osmosis (RO). from the vapors of heated saltwater
Figure 1. Reverse Osmosis (RO).
[24]. Thermal
An example desalination systems
is multi-effect generally (MED,
distillation produce freshwater
Figure from theisvapors
2). Saltwater placedofinheated a series saltwater
of heat
[24]. Thermal
An example desalination
is multi-effectsystems generally
stage distillation (MED, produce
Figure freshwater
2). Saltwater from the vapors of heated
exchange
Thermal vessels. The
desalinationfirstsystems receives
generallyexternal
produce heating and
freshwater some theisvapors
fromsteam placed ofinheated
is produced. a series
This of heat
steam
saltwater
saltwater
exchange
serves as [24].
vessels.
the heatAnTheexample
first
source of is
stage
the multi-effect
receives
next stage distillation
external
and is heating (MED,
collected and
as Figure
some
freshwater 2).
steam Saltwater
is
upon produced. is
condensing. placed
This in is
steam
This a
[24]. An example is multi-effect distillation (MED, Figure 2). Saltwater is placed in a series of heat
series
serves ofasheat
the exchange
heatseveral
sourcevessels. theThe
ofstage nextfirst stage
stage andreceives external
is heating
collected heating
as freshwater anduponsome steam
condensing. is produced.
repeated
exchange across
vessels. The stages.
first At the
receives final stage,
external the steam
and preheats
some steamthe feed
is produced. saltwaterThis Thisbefore
steam is
This steam
repeated serves
across as the heat source of the next stage and is collected as freshwater upon condensing.
condensing
serves as the heatseveral
[35]. source stages.
Another thermal
of Atdesalination
the next the final
stage andstage,
system theis steam
is collected preheats
multi-stage
as freshwater flashthe (MSF,
upon feed saltwater
Figure
condensing. 3) [36]. before
This The
is
This is repeated
condensing
saltwater is [35].
heated across
Another
using several
thermal
recovered stages.
heat At
desalination
and the final stage,
system
external is thesources.
multi-stage
heating steam preheats
flash
It is(MSF,
then the
Figurefeed3)atsaltwater
flashed [36].
the The
first
repeated across several stages. At the final stage, the steam preheats the feed saltwater before
before
saltwatercondensing
is [35].
heated [35].
using Another
recovered thermal
heatdesalination
and external system
heating is sources.
multi-stage flash
It is(MSF,
then (MSF,
flashed Figure 3) feed
[36].
stage to
condensing produce steam
Another and
thermalconcentrated
desalinationsaltwater.
system The steam
is multi-stage condenses
flash after heating
Figure 3)at[36].
the
the first
The
The
stage saltwater
to produce is heated
steam using recovered heat and external heating sources. It is then flashed at the
saltwater.
saltwater isTheheated using and
condensate concentrated
is collected
recovered heat andsaltwater.
as freshwater.
external TheThe steam
concentrated
heating condenses
sources. saltwater
It is thenafter heating
isflashed
flashed atatthe feed
a lower
the first
first stageinto
saltwater. The produce steam
condensate is and concentrated
collected saltwater.
as freshwater. The The steam condenses
concentrated saltwater after heating partially
is saltwater
flashed the feed
pressure
stage the
to produce next stage.
steam In
and mechanical
concentrated vapor compression
saltwater. The (MVC,
steam Figure
condenses 4) [37],
after heatingatthe a lower
feed
saltwater.
pressure
vaporizesinThe The
inthe condensate
next stage. is collected
In collected
mechanical as freshwater.
vapor The
compression concentrated
(MVC, Figure saltwater
4) [37], is flashed at a lower
saltwater. a condensate
closed vessel.is The vapors are passed
as freshwater. into
The aconcentrated
compressor, which
saltwater is saltwater
raises atpartially
the temperature
flashed a lower
pressure
vaporizes
of the ininthe
vapor a next stage.
closed
stream. vessel.
Heat Inthen
is mechanical
The vapors
exchangedvapor
are compression
passed
with into
the a (MVC,
compressor,
saltwater in theFigure
which
feed 4) [37],
and raises
the saltwater
the
vessel partially
temperature
to produce
pressure in the next stage. In mechanical vapor compression (MVC, Figure 4) [37], saltwater partially
vaporizes
of the vapor.
more vaporin astream.
closed Heat
vessel.is The
then vapors are
exchanged passed
with the into aacompressor,
saltwater in the which
feed raises
and thethe temperature
vessel to produce of
vaporizes in aAlthough this
closed vessel. technology
The vapors is classified
are passed as
into thermal
a compressor, process,
which it raises
does not use
the temperatureexternal
the
more vapor stream. Heat is then exchanged with the saltwater in the feed and the vessel to produce
of the vapor.
heating sources
vapor Although
[38].
stream. Heat this
MSF technology
is then MED is
and exchanged classified
constitute
with the18% as aand
thermal
saltwater 7%in theprocess,
of it does
the global
feed and not use
thedesalinated
vessel external
to producewater
more
heating vapor.
generation, sources Although
[38].
respectively this
MSF
[23]. technology
and MED is classified18%
constitute as aandthermal
7% process,
of the it does
global not use external
desalinated water
more vapor. Although this technology is classified as a thermal process, it does not use external
heating
generation,sources [38]. MSF[23].
respectively and MED constitute 18% and 7% of the global desalinated water generation,
heating sources [38]. MSF and MED constitute 18% and 7% of the global desalinated water
respectively [23].
generation, respectively [23].

Figure 2. Multi-effect distillation (MED).

Figure 2. Multi-effect distillation (MED).
Figure 2. Multi-effect distillation (MED).
Figure 2. Multi-effect distillation (MED).

Figure 3. Multi-stage flash (MSF).

Figure 3. Multi-stage flash (MSF).
Figure 3. Multi-stage flash (MSF).

Figure 3. Multi-stage flash (MSF).

Figure 4. Mechanical vapor compression (MVC).

Figure 4. Mechanical vapor compression (MVC).
Figure 4. Mechanical vapor compression (MVC).
Performing techno-economic studies to integrate water desalination to the off-grid energy
Figure 4. Mechanical vapor compression (MVC).
Performing
systems requires techno-economic
accurate models [39], studies todifferent
while integrateeconomic
water desalination to the off-grid
dispatch algorithms must beenergy
tested
systems
as they requires
generate accurate
varying models
results. [39],
In while
addition, different
results economic
that use dispatch algorithms
deterministic generation
Performing techno-economic studies to integrate water desalination to the off-grid energy must
andbe tested
demand
as they generate
profiles
systems such
requires varying
as the
accurate results.
literatures In
reviewed
models addition,
[39], results
may different
while not that use due
be accurate
economicdeterministic generation
to uncertainties
dispatch andbe
in demand
algorithms must demand
and/or
tested
profiles such as[40].
RE generation the literatures reviewed
Lastly, results may
that use not be accurate
constant cost overdue tomay
time uncertainties in demand
also not be accurate and/or
as it is
Energies 2020, 13, 2261 5 of 25

Performing techno-economic studies to integrate water desalination to the off-grid energy systems
requires accurate models [39], while different economic dispatch algorithms must be tested as they
generate varying results. In addition, results that use deterministic generation and demand profiles
such as2020,
Energies the13,
literatures
x FOR PEERreviewed
REVIEW may not be accurate due to uncertainties in demand and/or RE
5 of 25
generation [40]. Lastly, results that use constant cost over time may also not be accurate as it is expected
that desalination
context, Castro etcosts will decrease
al. have reviewed as the technology
different matures
RO dispatch [26]. ForThe
algorithms. theresults
Philippine context,
suggest that
Castro et al. have reviewed different RO dispatch algorithms. The results suggest
treating RO as a sink while demanding additional generation when water storage is low can minimize that treating RO as a
sink
waterwhile demanding
generation costsadditional generation
[41]. However, testingwhen water storage is low
the techno-economic can minimize
feasibility waterdesalination
of different generation
costs [41]. However,
technologies testing economic
under different the techno-economic feasibilitywhile
dispatch algorithms of different
accountingdesalination
stochastictechnologies
behavior of
under different
generation and economic dispatchand
demand profiles algorithms
projectedwhile accounting
decreasing stochastic
technology hasbehavior
not beenof generation
done yet. and
demand profiles
In this work,and projected decreasing
a techno-economic technology
comparison has not
of MED, MSF,been doneand
MVC, yet.RO desalination coupled
to a In thisPV-diesel
solar work, a techno-economic
hybrid system with comparison
lithium ofionMED, MSF,BESS
(Li-ion) MVC, is and RO desalination
performed. coupled
The desalination
to a solar PV-diesel hybrid system with lithium ion (Li-ion) BESS is performed.
technologies were selected based on their commercial maturity. The analysis of the desalination The desalination
technologies were selected into
was divided basedfour
on their
parts.commercial maturity. sizes
First, the optimum The analysis
of energy of and
the desalination
desalination
technologies was divided into four parts. First, the optimum sizes
components and their uncertainties were determined using stochastic generation and demand of energy and desalination
components and their
profiles. Second, poweruncertainties
flows were were determined
generated using stochastic
to investigate generation between
the interaction and demand profiles.
energy and
Second, power
desalination flows were generated
components. to investigate
Third, energy and water thegeneration
interactioncosts
betweenwereenergy and desalination
calculated at different
components.
starting periods Third, energy the
to analyze andrisks
water generation
and tradeoffscosts were calculated
of delaying at differentLastly,
plant construction. starting periods to
a sensitivity
analyze
analysisthe of risks
optimumand tradeoffs
sizes toofthe
delaying plantdiesel
overnight construction.
and coal Lastly,
costawas
sensitivity analysis
conducted to of optimum
account for
sizes to the overnight
uncertainties in dieseldiesel
prices.and coal cost was conducted to account for uncertainties in diesel prices.

2.
2. Materials
Materials and
and Methods
Methods
2.1. System Architecture
2.1. System Architecture
The coupling of the energy and water system is shown in Figure 5. The energy system supplies
The coupling of the energy and water system is shown in Figure 5. The energy system supplies
both the electrical demand of the island and the desalination unit. The electrical demand of the
both the electrical demand of the island and the desalination unit. The electrical demand of the
desalination system depends on the water storage level and is discussed further in Section 2.3. If
desalination system depends on the water storage level and is discussed further in Section 2.3. If
excess RE generation is present, it is dispatched to the desalination system to generate more water.
excess RE generation is present, it is dispatched to the desalination system to generate more water.
The generated water is sent to the water storage, from where the water demand is drawn. Details on
The generated water is sent to the water storage, from where the water demand is drawn. Details on
the operation of the energy system is shown in Appendix A.
the operation of the energy system is shown in Appendix A.

Figure 5. Architecture of the coupled energy and water system.

Figure 5. Architecture of the coupled energy and water system.
2.2. Modelling Approach
2.2. Modelling Approach
The calculations were performed using Island System LCOE min Algorithm (ISLA), an in-house
microgrid optimization software written in Python 3. The solar PV, diesel,
The calculations were performed using Island System LCOEmin Algorithm Li-ion BESS, and desalination
(ISLA), an in-house
modules
microgridinoptimization
ISLA were used. Microgrid
software energy
written system optimizations
in Python 3. The solar PV,werediesel,
validated with
Li-ion HOMER
BESS, and
Pro ® (HOMER Energy LLC: Golden, CO, USA). The software simulates the interaction of energy
desalination modules in ISLA were used. Microgrid energy system optimizations were validated
with HOMER Pro® (HOMER Energy LLC: Golden, CO, USA). The software simulates the interaction
of energy and water components for one representative year in hourly resolution and calculates the
levelized cost of electricity (LCOE), levelized cost of water (LCOW), and net present costs (NPC) as
shown in Equations (1)–(3), respectively [42]:
CRF⋅∑el 𝐶𝑖
LCOE = 8759 , (1)
Energies 2020, 13, 2261 6 of 25

and water components for one representative year in hourly resolution and calculates the levelized
cost of electricity (LCOE), levelized cost of water (LCOW), and net present costs (NPC) as shown in
Equations (1)–(3), respectively [42]:
P
CRF · el Ci
LCOE = P8759 , (1)
t=0 Pld (t) ∆t
Energies 2020, 13, x FOR PEER REVIEW 6 of 25
+ LCOE · 8759 ∆t
P P
CRF · wt Ci t=0 P de ( t )
LCOW = P8759 . , (2)
CRF⋅∑wtt𝐶
= V
+LCOE⋅∑
𝑖0 ( t ) ∆t
8759
ld 𝑡=0 𝑃𝑑𝑒 (𝑡)Δ𝑡
LCOW = ∑ 8759 𝑉̇ (𝑡)Δ𝑡 , (2)
X 𝑡=0 𝑙𝑑
NPC = Ci , (3)
NPC = ∑𝐶 .𝑖 , (3)
In the equations above, Pld (t) is the electrical load, V ld (t) is the water demand, Pde (t) is the power
In the equations above, 𝑃P(𝑡) is the electrical load, 𝑉̇𝑙𝑑 (𝑡) is the water demand, 𝑃𝑑𝑒 P(𝑡) is the
entering the desalination unit, 𝑙𝑑 Ci is the total annualized cost of electrical components, Ci is the
power entering the desalination el unit, ∑ el 𝐶𝑖 is the
P total annualized cost of electrical components, wt
total
∑wt 𝐶annualized cost of water components, and
𝑖 is the total annualized cost of water components,
Ci is the and total
∑𝐶annualized cost of all components.
𝑖 is the total annualized cost of all
The capital recovery
components. factorrecovery
The capital (CRF) isfactor
defined in Equation
(CRF) is defined (4),inwherein
Equation i is(4),
the wherein
discount 𝑖rate ts is the
anddiscount
is the
project lifetime [y] [42]:
rate and 𝑡𝑠 is the project lifetime [y] [42]:
i(1 + i)t𝑡s𝑠
= = 𝑖(1+𝑖)
CRF CRF ,, (4)
(4)
i)ts𝑡𝑠−−11
(1 +(1+𝑖)
ISLA finds the the component
componentsizes sizes𝑆𝑖Sithatthatminimize
minimize thetheNPC as shown
NPC as shown in Equation
in Equation (5). The
(5).
optimization
The optimization is constrained
is constrained such such
that both
that electricity and water
both electricity demand
and water are always
demand satisfiedsatisfied
are always during
the representative
during the representativeyear. These year. are formalized
These in Equations
are formalized (6) and (6)
in Equations (7).and
In these
(7). Inequations, 𝑃𝑃𝑉 (𝑡),
these equations,
𝑃PV
P 𝐿𝑖 (𝑡),
( t ) , and
P Li ( t𝑃) ,
𝑑𝑠 (𝑡)
and Pare
ds ( the
t ) power
are the outputs
power of
outputs solar
of PV,
solar Li-ion
PV, BESS,
Li-ion and
BESS, anddiesel
dieselgenset,
genset, respectively.
respectively.
𝑉𝑡𝑎𝑛𝑘
V tank ((𝑡)
t) isisthethevolume
volumeof ofwater
waterin instorage.
storage.These
These variables
variables are
are subject
subject to
to additional
additional constraints
constraints based
based
on the
on the component
componentmodels modelsand sizesSi𝑆. 𝑖The
andsizes . Themodels
modelsfor forenergy
energy and
and water
water components
components areare discussed
discussed in
in Appendix
Appendix A and A and Section
Section 2.3,2.3, respectively.
respectively.
min NPC(𝑆 ), (5)
minNPC(Si )𝑖, (5)
𝑃𝑃𝑉(t(𝑡)
) ++P𝑃𝐿𝑖 (𝑡) + 𝑃𝑑𝑠 (𝑡) ≥ 𝑃𝑙𝑑 (𝑡) + 𝑃𝑑𝑒 (𝑡) ∀𝑡 ∈ [0, 8759], 𝑡 ∈ ℕ, (6)
PPV Li (t) + Pds (t) ≥ Pld (t) + Pde (t) ∀t ∈ [0, 8759], t ∈ N , (6)
.
𝑉𝑡𝑎𝑛𝑘
Vtank (t)(𝑡)
≥≥V ld𝑉(̇𝑙𝑑t)(𝑡)𝛥𝑡 ∈ [∈0,[0,
∆t ∀t∀𝑡 8759],
8759 ], t ∈𝑡 N
∈ ℕ,
, (7)
(7)
The optimization
The optimization process
process is performed
is performed using anusing an search
iterative iterativespacesearch spaceas demonstrated
algorithm algorithm as
demonstrated in Figure 6. Sets of component sizes are generated, and the
in Figure 6. Sets of component sizes are generated, and the NPC of each combination is NPC of each combination
calculated.
is calculated.
The The with
combination combination
the lowestwithNPC
the lowest NPC and
is selected, is selected,
a finer and
search a finer
spacesearch space is generated
is generated from this
from this combination.
combination. The generation
The generation of the
of the initial initialspace
search search is space is to
crucial crucial
obtain to aobtain
proper a proper
optimum optimum
value,
value, which is discussed further in
which is discussed further in Appendix B.Appendix B.

Figure 6. Iterative
Figure 6. Iterative search
search space
space algorithm
algorithm used
used by
by Island
Island System
SystemLCOE
LCOEmin Algorithm (ISLA) on a
min Algorithm (ISLA) on a
hypothetical PV-Diesel system. N/A values in the figure indicate a technically infeasible
hypothetical PV-Diesel system. N/A values in the figure indicate a technically infeasible system andand
system are
ignored. LCOE: levelized cost of electricity.
are ignored. LCOE: levelized cost of electricity.

2.3. Desalination Model

The energy required for a desalination plant to generate one volumetric unit of freshwater is
defined as the energy intensity (EI). It is divided into electrical energy intensity (EIel ) for mechanical
Energies 2020, 13, 2261 7 of 25

2.3. Desalination Model

The energy required for a desalination plant to generate one volumetric unit of freshwater is
defined as the energy intensity (EI). It is divided into electrical energy intensity (EIel ) for mechanical
processes and a thermal energy intensity (EIth ) for heating processes [19]. MVC and RO, which do not
.
have external heating, have zero EIth [19]. Equation (8) relates the EIel to the water generated V de (t)
and the electrical power entering the desalination plant Pde (t) at time t. For desalination technologies
.
that require external heating, the mass of coal used mcl (t) [kg/h] is given by Equation (9), wherein ∆H
is the lower heating value of coal (17.89 MJ/kg) [43]:

. Pde (t)
V de (t) = , (8)
EIel

. Pde (t) EIth

mcl (t) = × , (9)
∆H EIel
The generated water is then sent to a storage tank, where the water demanded is simultaneously
.
drawn. This is summarized by Equation (10), wherein V (t) is the volume of water in the tank, V ld (t) is
the water demand, and ∆t is the simulation time step (1 h):
h. . i
V (t + ∆t) = V (t) + V de (t) − V ld (t) ∆t, (10)

The power that enters the desalination plant depends on the water level. If the water level is
above 20%, then the minimum power requirement Pmin de
(t) depends on the turndown ratio (TDR).
The TDR is the ratio between minimum and rated production, and operation below this point will
damage the desalination plant. If the water level is below 20%, the minimum power requirement will
be set to restore the water level to at least 20%. This is summarized by Equation (11), wherein Vtank is
the volume of the storage tank:

TDR
 ·S V (t) ≥ 0.2Vtank
 de

Pmin

de
( t ) = EI V (t)
 , (11)
 ∆tel 0.2 − V (t) < 0.2Vtank



Vtank

The EI and TDR of the considered desalination technologies are shown in Table 3.

Table 3. Energy intensity (EI) and turndown ratio (TDR) of desalination technologies.

Desalination EIel [kWh/m3 ] Ref. EIth [kWh/m3 ] Ref. TDR Ref.

MED 2.50 [44–46] 53.20 [44,45] 0.50 [47]
MSF 4.17 [44–46] 64.79 [44,45] 0.70 [48]
MVC 12.41 [19,45] - [19,44] 0.50 [49]
RO 4.35 [19,44,45] - [19,44] 0.33 [50]

2.4. Techno-Economic Assumptions

The techno-economic parameters as of 2015 of each desalination technology are shown in Table 4.
The operating costs were adjusted so that electrical and thermal requirements were excluded, as these
were modeled explicitly. The techno-economic parameters of the energy components are shown in
Appendix C.
Energies 2020, 13, 2261 8 of 25

Table 4. Techno-economic parameters of desalination technologies.

Component Parameter Unit Value Ref.

MED CapEx USD/(m3 /d) 1150 [25,46]
OpEx USD/m3 0.232 [25]
Lifetime y 6 [31]
MSF CapEx USD/(m3 /d) 1425 [25,46]
OpEx USD/m3 0.232 [25]
Lifetime y 10 [51]
MVC CapEx USD/(m3 /d) 1000 [52]
OpEx USD/m3 0.232 [25]
Lifetime y 10 [51]
RO CapEx USD/(m3 /d) 1250 [25,46]
OpEx USD/m3 0.232 [25]
Lifetime y 10 [51]
Water Storage CapEx USD/m3 1000 [13]
OpEx USD/m3 /y 10
Lifetime y 20
Coal Unit Cost USD/kg 0.09 [53,54]
Inflation Rate % 3

2.5. Future Costs

The capital cost of a desalination technology Ccap (t) at year t is given by Equation (12). The capital
cost decreases with the cumulative installed capacity X(t) given by Equation (13). In these equations, a
is a normalization constant, b is an empirical parameter based on learning rates, K is the saturation
capacity, r is the growth rate, and tm is the year when half of the saturation capacity is installed [26].
The parameter values for each desalination technology are given in Table 5, while the future cost
parameters for energy components are shown in Appendix D.

Ccap (t)
= a[X(t)]−b , (12)
Ccap (2015)

K
X (t) = , (13)
1 + exp[−r(t − tm )]

Table 5. Future cost parameters of desalination technologies.

Component K [GW(h)] r [y−1 ] tm [y] Ref. b Ref.

MED 10.30 0.1126 2011 [26] 0.3771 [55]
MSF 21.10 0.0935 1999 [26] 0.5146 [55]
MVC 0.24 0.1888 1966 [56] 0.4941 [27]
RO 147.20 0.1256 2019 [22] 0.2345 [22]

2.6. Case Study

In this work, Camasusu Island, Masbate (12.2 ◦ N; 123.2 ◦ E) and Lubang Island, Occidental Mindoro
(13.8 ◦ N; 120.1 ◦ E) in the Philippines are selected as case studies to represent small and big islands,
respectively. The daily water demand profiles were estimated from the work of the California Public
Utilities Commission [57], with monthly variations based on Griffin and Chang [58]. The resulting
water demand profiles were scaled to meet the 20-L water requirement per day per capita estimate
by the World Health Organization [56]. Camasusu and Lubang Island have a population of 532 and
18,556, respectively, which yields an annual water demand of 3.88 × 103 m3 /y and 1.35 × 105 m3 /y. This
 In this work, Camasusu Island, Masbate (12.2 °N; 123.2 °E) and Lubang Island, Occidental
Mindoro (13.8 °N; 120.1 °E) in the Philippines are selected as case studies to represent small and big
islands, respectively. The daily water demand profiles were estimated from the work of the California
Public Utilities Commission [57], with monthly variations based on Griffin and Chang [58]. The
resulting
Energies 2020, water demand profiles were scaled to meet the 20-L water requirement per day
13, 2261 per
9 of 25 capita
estimate by the World Health Organization [56]. Camasusu and Lubang Island have a population of
532 and 18,556, respectively, which yields an annual water demand of 3.88 × 103 m3/y and 1.35 × 105
estimate 3includes water for drinking and activities such as bathing and laundry [56]. The normalized
m /y. This estimate includes water for drinking and activities such as bathing and laundry [56]. The
water demand profile is shown in Figure 7. The details regarding demand and generation profiles of
normalized water demand profile is shown in Figure 7. The details regarding demand and generation
the energy components are given in Appendix E.
profiles of the energy components are given in Appendix E.

Figure
Figure 7. 7. Normalized
Normalized water demand
water demand profile. profile. This isup
This is scaled scaled up tothe
to match match the demand.
annual annual demand.
The leftThe left
panelthe
panel shows shows
dailythe daily average
average demanddemand
in hourlyin resolution,
hourly resolution, while
while the rightthe rightshows
panel panelthe
shows the monthly
monthly
variation
variation over a year.
over a year.

2.7. Stochastic Profile Generation

2.7. Stochastic Profile Generation
Stochastic energy and water demand profiles were generated using Equations (14) and (15).
.
In these equations, Pld (t) and V ld (t) are the deterministic energy and water profiles, δhr (t) is a random
number that varies every hour, and δdy (t) varies every day. Both random numbers are drawn from a
normal distribution centered at 0 with 5% variance. Generation of the stochastic hourly solar insolation
profiles are discussed by Bendt et al. in [59] and Graham et al. in [60,61].
h i
Pstoc
ld
( t ) = Pld ( t ) 1 + δ hr ( t ) + δ dy ( t ) , (14)

. stoc . h i
V ld (t) = V ld (t) 1 + δhr (t) + δdy (t) , (15)

After each set of generation and demand profiles are formed, a Monte-Carlo approach calculated
the corresponding optimum sizes and metrics 100 times to determine their distribution. The number
of simulation points were chosen to balance computation time and accuracy.

3. Results

3.1. Optimum Sizes

Figures 8–10 present the results of the Monte-Carlo simulation. Figure 8 shows that diesel-favored
systems need less energy storage capacity, while solar PV-favored systems will need larger Li-ion BESS
capacities. For these hybrid systems, larger Li-ion BESS sizes indicate higher RE shares. Bimodal
distributions indicate the possibility of either RE-favored generation or diesel-favored generation.
Figure 8 also presents that low energy and water demand on an island such as in Camasusu would
result in diesel-favored generation systems, as the installation costs for diesel-favored generations
are lower than that of RE. At low energy demands, the large installation cost required makes RE less
economical than diesel-generation. In contrast, larger islands with more energy and water demands
such as in Lubang prefer RE-favored systems. On these islands, the large installation cost of RE is
offset by the decreased fuel consumption.
generation. Figure 8 also presents that low energy and water demand on an island such as in
Camasusu would result in diesel-favored generation systems, as the installation costs for diesel-
favored generations are lower than that of RE. At low energy demands, the large installation cost
required makes RE less economical than diesel-generation. In contrast, larger islands with more
energy and water demands such as in Lubang prefer RE-favored systems. On these islands, the large
Energies 2020, 13, 2261 10 of 25
installation cost of RE is offset by the decreased fuel consumption.

Figure 8. Distribution of optimum sizes of energy components on Camasusu Island (top) and Lubang
Figure(bottom).
Island 8. Distribution of optimum
Systems sizeshave
in Camasusu of energy
smallcomponents on Camasusu
Li-ion BESS installation Island
sizes, (top)
except forand
RO,Lubang
where
Energies 2020, 13, x FOR PEER REVIEW 10 of 25
Island
the (bottom).
Li-ion Systems in is
BESS installation Camasusu have small
large. Systems Li-ionhave
in Lubang BESSlarge
installation sizes,installations.
Li-ion BESS except for RO, where
the Li-ion BESS installation is large. Systems in Lubang have large Li-ion BESS installations.

Figure 9. Distribution of optimum sizes of water storage (left axis) and desalination unit (right axis) on
Figure 9. Distribution of optimum sizes of water storage (left axis) and desalination unit (right axis)
Camasusu Island (top) and Lubang Island (bottom). There is high uncertainty in the optimum water
on Camasusu Island (top) and Lubang Island (bottom). There is high uncertainty in the optimum
storage sizes in Camasusu, except for RO.
water storage sizes in Camasusu, except for RO.
Figure 9 shows how diesel-dominated systems compensate for the lack of Li-ion BESS capacity.
As these systems do not have energy storage, they use the desalination plant as an energy sink to
produce and store water that will be utilized daily. The same figure presents that if the desalination
plant is used as an energy sink, the resulting storage sizes for water have large uncertainty or spread.
The RO system in Camasusu is an exception to the trends observed earlier. RO has a high turndown
capability that allows RE intermittence as seen in the spread between solar PV and Li-ion BESS
installation in Figure 8. In cases where RE is heavily preferred over diesel-generators, RO systems are
suggested for small islands.
 Figure 9. Distribution of optimum sizes of water storage (left axis) and desalination unit (right axis)
on2020,
Energies Camasusu
13, 2261 Island (top) and Lubang Island (bottom). There is high uncertainty in the optimum
11 of 25
water storage sizes in Camasusu, except for RO.

Figure 10. Distribution of optimum LCOE (left axis) and levelized cost of water (LCOW) (right axis)
Figure 10. Distribution of optimum LCOE (left axis) and levelized cost of water (LCOW) (right axis)
on Camasusu Island (top) and Lubang Island (bottom). The metrics of the MED and MVC systems in
on Camasusu Island (top) and Lubang Island (bottom). The metrics of the MED and MVC systems in
Camasusu exhibit a bimodal distribution.
Camasusu exhibit a bimodal distribution.
As for the optimum metrics shown in Figure 10, RO desalination provides the lowest water
Figure 9 shows how diesel-dominated systems compensate for the lack of Li-ion BESS capacity.
generation costs from its low energy intensity and fuel independence. Electricity generation costs are
As these systems do not have energy storage, they use the desalination plant as an energy sink to
comparable for MED, MSF, and RO because the corresponding desalination unit has low electricity
produce and store water that will be utilized daily. The same figure presents that if the desalination
consumption, although MED may achieve a lower cost. The larger Lubang Island has lower generation
plant is used as an energy sink, the resulting storage sizes for water have large uncertainty or spread.
costs than Camasusu Island, further demonstrating the effectiveness of RE systems on larger islands.
The RO system in Camasusu is an exception to the trends observed earlier. RO has a high turndown
Figure 10 also reflects the importance of desalination turndown on the stability of generation costs.
capability that allows RE intermittence as seen in the spread between solar PV and Li-ion BESS
RO systems have a more distinct generation cost distribution because shortage in generation due to
installation in Figure 8. In cases where RE is heavily preferred over diesel-generators, RO systems are
intermittencies is allowed by larger turndown; thus, additional generation capacity and the associated
suggested for small islands.
costs are unnecessary. In other systems, however, turndown is limited and therefore, intermittency is
As for the optimum metrics shown in Figure 10, RO desalination provides the lowest water
met with additional generation capacity. The amount of additional generation is unpredictable, and
generation costs from its low energy intensity and fuel independence. Electricity generation costs are
this reflects as uncertainties in generation costs.

3.2. Hourly Power and Water Flows

Figure 11 shows the power flows of a representative day associated with each desalination
technology coupled with hybrid energy systems on both islands. The power flows confirm that systems
on Camasusu Island are diesel-favored, while those on Lubang Island are RE-favored. An exception is
the RO system on Camasusu Island, which uses an RE-favored system because of its high turndown
capability. The diesel-favored systems have batteries that drain to 20% outside of sun-hours, which
result in diesel generation to meet the baseload. In contrast, the RE-favored systems only utilize diesel
generation during days with low solar irradiation.
Figure 12 compares the power consumed by the different desalination units and demonstrates
how water is stored. In MED and MSF, water output is continuous because of the low turndown,
increasing water level over time. In RO systems, however, water storage is drained until it reaches
the minimum water level. After this, the RO plant will start producing water to meet the demand,
explaining the uneven energy demand profile. Because of this, the RO system behaves as an additional
load during the day. This is evidenced by the monthly average water level shown in Figure 13 wherein
MED and MSF water storage tanks are full, while RO water storage is minimum.
 technology coupled with hybrid energy systems on both islands. The power flows confirm that
systems on Camasusu Island are diesel-favored, while those on Lubang Island are RE-favored. An
exception is the RO system on Camasusu Island, which uses an RE-favored system because of its high
turndown capability. The diesel-favored systems have batteries that drain to 20% outside of sun-
hours,
Energies which
2020, result in diesel generation to meet the baseload. In contrast, the RE-favored systems
13, 2261 12 of 25
only utilize diesel generation during days with low solar irradiation.

Figure
Figure 11.11. Hourly
Hourly poweroutput
power outputofofelectrical
electrical components
components and
and Li-ion
Li-ionBESS
BESSstate
stateofofcharge
charge(SOC)
(SOC)onon
Camasusu
Camasusu Island
Island (top)
(top) andLubang
and LubangIsland
Island(bottom).
(bottom). Li-ion
Li-ion BESS
BESSusage
usageisishigh
highon
onLubang
LubangIsland.
Island.
Energies 2020, 13, x FOR PEER REVIEW 12 of 25

Figure 12 compares the power consumed by the different desalination units and demonstrates
how water is stored. In MED and MSF, water output is continuous because of the low turndown,
increasing water level over time. In RO systems, however, water storage is drained until it reaches
the minimum water level. After this, the RO plant will start producing water to meet the demand,
explaining the uneven energy demand profile. Because of this, the RO system behaves as an
additional load during the day. This is evidenced by the monthly average water level shown in Figure
13 wherein MED and MSF water storage tanks are full, while RO water storage is minimum.

Figure 12. Hourly desalination energy consumption and water storage fraction on Camasusu Island
Figure 12. Hourly desalination energy consumption and water storage fraction on Camasusu Island
(top) and Lubang Island (bottom). Power consumption is uneven in the RO system on Camasusu Island.
(top) and Lubang Island (bottom). Power consumption is uneven in the RO system on Camasusu Island.
3.3. Future LCOE and LCOW
Figure 14 shows the projected LCOE and LCOW of one representative case for both islands from
2015 to 2050. Note that the LCOE and LCOW of a particular year does not account construction time.
The results suggest that RO will provide the lowest water generation costs, followed by MED and MSF.
MED, MSF, and RO have comparable electricity generation costs, which is also suggested by Figure 10.
The systems in Camasusu and the MVC system in Lubang have a small price spike. This suggests a
transition to RE-favored generation in the future.
 Figure
Energies 12. 2261
2020, 13, Hourly desalination energy consumption and water storage fraction on Camasusu Island
13 of 25
(top) and Lubang Island (bottom). Power consumption is uneven in the RO system on Camasusu Island.

Figure 13. Monthly average PV power and water level on Camasusu Island (top) and Lubang Island
Figure 13. Monthly average PV power and water level on Camasusu Island (top) and Lubang Island
(bottom). Note that stability of the system is ensured due to an imposed minimum water level of 20%.
Energies 2020, 13,Note
(bottom). x FOR PEER
that REVIEW
stability of the system is ensured due to an imposed minimum water level of 20%.13 of 25

3.3. Future LCOE and LCOW

Figure 14 shows the projected LCOE and LCOW of one representative case for both islands from
2015 to 2050. Note that the LCOE and LCOW of a particular year does not account construction time.
The results suggest that RO will provide the lowest water generation costs, followed by MED and
MSF. MED, MSF, and RO have comparable electricity generation costs, which is also suggested by
Figure 10. The systems in Camasusu and the MVC system in Lubang have a small price spike. This
suggests a transition to RE-favored generation in the future.

Figure 14. Projected LCOE and LCOW on Camasusu Island (top) and Lubang Island (bottom).
Figure
The 14. Projected
bumps near 2020LCOE anda LCOW
indicates shift to on Camasusu
a more Island
RE-favored (top) and
optimum Lubang Island (bottom). The
configuration.
bumps near 2020 indicates a shift to a more RE-favored optimum configuration.
3.4. Sensitivity Analysis
3.4. Sensitivity Analysis
3.4.1. −25% Overnight Fuel Cost
3.4.1.At
−25%
a 25%Overnight
decrease Fuel
of theCost
overnight diesel and coal price, the Li-ion BESS installation sizes sharply
decreased, as shown by Figure 15. The bimodal
At a 25% decrease of the overnight distribution
diesel and coal price,that
the was once
Li-ion BESSpresent in MED
installation and
sizes MVC
sharply
systems
decreased,in as
Camasusu
shown byhave become
Figure a tight
15. The distribution,
bimodal suggesting
distribution that wasthat RE-favored
once present ingeneration
MED and MVC is no
longer feasible. Systems on Lubang Island also favored diesel. Figure 16 also shows
systems in Camasusu have become a tight distribution, suggesting that RE-favored generation is no that all systems
exhibit uncertainty
longer feasible. in optimum
Systems on Lubang storage
Islandsizes. Generation
also favored costs
diesel. have
Figure 16 decreased
also shows(Figure 17), especially
that all systems exhibit
for MVC, which consumes large quantities of diesel due to its high electrical energy intensity.
uncertainty in optimum storage sizes. Generation costs have decreased (Figure 17), especially for MVC, Bimodal
spreads of LCOElarge
which consumes and LCOW have
quantities of disappeared
diesel due to due to systems
its high heavily
electrical energyfavoring
intensity.diesel
Bimodaloverspreads
RE. of
LCOE and LCOW have disappeared due to systems heavily favoring diesel over RE.
decreased, as shown by Figure 15. The bimodal distribution that was once present in MED and MVC
systems in Camasusu have become a tight distribution, suggesting that RE-favored generation is no
longer feasible. Systems on Lubang Island also favored diesel. Figure 16 also shows that all systems exhibit
uncertainty in optimum storage sizes. Generation costs have decreased (Figure 17), especially for MVC,
Energies consumes
which 2020, 13, 2261 14 of of
large quantities of diesel due to its high electrical energy intensity. Bimodal spreads 25

LCOE and LCOW have disappeared due to systems heavily favoring diesel over RE.

Figure 15. Distribution of optimum sizes of energy components on Camasusu Island (top) and Lubang
Energies 2020, 13, x FOR PEER REVIEW 14 of 25
Island (bottom)
Figure at −25% of
15. Distribution overnight
optimumfuelsizes
price.
of energy components on Camasusu Island (top) and
Lubang Island (bottom) at −25% overnight fuel price.

Figure 16. Distribution of optimum sizes of water storage and desalination unit on Camasusu Island
Figure 16. Distribution of optimum sizes of water storage and desalination unit on Camasusu Island
(top) and Lubang Island (bottom) at −25% overnight fuel price. There is high uncertainty in the
(top) and Lubang Island (bottom) at −25% overnight fuel price. There is high uncertainty in the
optimum water storage sizes in all systems on both islands.
optimum water storage sizes in all systems on both islands.
3.4.2. +25% Overnight Fuel Cost
At a 25% increase in overnight diesel and coal cost, all systems have large Li-ion BESS installation
sizes (Figure 18) preferring RE-favored generation due to prohibitive diesel costs. Figure 19 also shows
minimal uncertainty in optimum storage sizes, confirming that RE-favored generation is favored.
Generation costs have increased (Figure 20) especially in MVC systems, wherein diesel is used for
energy generation, which in turn powers the MVC plant. This is less efficient that MED and MSF,
which use the fuel directly.
 Figure 16. Distribution of optimum sizes of water storage and desalination unit on Camasusu Island
(top)
Energies 2020,and Lubang Island (bottom) at −25% overnight fuel price. There is high uncertainty in the
13, 2261 15 of 25
optimum water storage sizes in all systems on both islands.

Figure 17. Distribution

Figure 17. of optimum
Distribution of optimum LCOE
LCOE and
and LCOW
LCOW on
on Camasusu
Camasusu Island
Island (top)
(top) and
and Lubang
Lubang Island
Island
(bottom)
(bottom)
Energies
at −25%
2020, 13,atx FOR
overnight
−25%PEER
overnight
REVIEW
fuel price. There is minimal uncertainty for these metrics.
fuel price. There is minimal uncertainty for these metrics. 15 of 25

3.4.2. +25% Overnight Fuel Cost

At a 25% increase in overnight diesel and coal cost, all systems have large Li-ion BESS installation
sizes (Figure 18) preferring RE-favored generation due to prohibitive diesel costs. Figure 19 also
shows minimal uncertainty in optimum storage sizes, confirming that RE-favored generation is
favored. Generation costs have increased (Figure 20) especially in MVC systems, wherein diesel is
used for energy generation, which in turn powers the MVC plant. This is less efficient that MED and
MSF, which use the fuel directly.

Figure 18. Distribution of optimum sizes of energy components on Camasusu Island (top) and Lubang
Figure (bottom)
Island at +25% overnight
18. Distribution of optimum
fuelsizes
price.of energy components on Camasusu Island (top) and
Lubang Island (bottom) at +25% overnight fuel price.
 Figure 18. Distribution of optimum sizes of energy components on Camasusu Island (top) and
Energies 2020, 13, 2261 16 of 25
Lubang Island (bottom) at +25% overnight fuel price.

Figure 19. Distribution of optimum sizes of water storage and desalination unit on Camasusu Island
Figure 19. Distribution of optimum sizes of water storage and desalination unit on Camasusu Island
(top) and Lubang Island (bottom) at +25% overnight fuel price. There is minimal uncertainty in
(top)
Energies 2020,and
13, xLubang
sizes in allIsland
FOR PEER REVIEW (bottom)
on bothatislands.
+25% overnight fuel price. There is minimal uncertainty in
16 of 25
optimum systems
optimum sizes in all systems on both islands.

Figure
Figure 20. Distribution of
20. Distribution of optimum
optimum LCOE
LCOE and
and LCOW
LCOW for
for Camasusu
Camasusu Island
Island (top)
(top) and
and Lubang
Lubang Island
Island
(bottom) at +25% overnight fuel price. There is minimal uncertainty for these metrics.
(bottom) at +25% overnight fuel price. There is minimal uncertainty for these metrics.
4. Discussion
4. Discussion
Upon analysis of the optimum size and metric distributions, RO systems have the lowest water
Upon analysis
generation cost. Theof low
the optimum
energy use size
andand metric
high distributions,
turndown of RO RO systems
allows have thecoupling
for possible lowest water
with
generation cost. The low energy use and high turndown of RO allows for
RE-favored generation. The average LCOW of RO systems is 5.11 USD/m and 4.70 USD/m possible
3 coupling with3 RE-
for
favored generation. The average LCOW of RO systems is 5.11 USD/m 3 and 4.70 USD/m
Camasusu and Lubang, respectively. Compared to the mainland price of 0.70 USD/m , however, 3 3 for

Camasusu
water and Lubang,
generation costs arerespectively.
still higher Compared
by 630% and to 572%
the mainland price of
for Camasusu and0.70 USD/mrespectively.
Lubang,
3, however,

water
As for generation costs are still
electricity generation higher
costs, MED bysystems
630% and 572%
have thefor Camasusu
lowest averageand Lubang,
LCOE respectively.
of 0.348 USD/kWhAs in
for electricity generation costs, MED systems have the lowest average LCOE of
Camasusu, while RO systems have the lowest average LCOE of 0.296 USD/kWh in Lubang. These are 0.348 USD/kWh in
Camasusu, while RO systems have the lowest average LCOE of 0.296 USD/kWh
74% and 47% more expensive for Camasusu and Lubang, respectively, compared to the mainland pricein Lubang. These
are0.2
of 74% and 47%[62].
USD/kWh moreOverall,
expensiveROfor Camasusu
systems andcost-effective
provide Lubang, respectively,
water andcompared to especially
electricity, the mainlandfor
price of 0.2 USD/kWh [62]. Overall, RO systems
larger islands, where RE-favored generation is preferred.provide cost-effective water and electricity, especially
for larger islands, where RE-favored generation is preferred.
For project developers, MED and MSF could be more attractive because these systems are less
RE-dependent than RO due to the limited turndown. This allows easier entry into off-grid islands
currently powered by diesel generators. There is also less uncertainty in optimum sizes, especially
for MSF, implying that there is less risk of installing an undersized system. Seasonal weather patterns
Energies 2020, 13, 2261 17 of 25

For project developers, MED and MSF could be more attractive because these systems are less
RE-dependent than RO due to the limited turndown. This allows easier entry into off-grid islands
currently powered by diesel generators. There is also less uncertainty in optimum sizes, especially for
MSF, implying that there is less risk of installing an undersized system. Seasonal weather patterns also
do not strongly affect the stored water level. Lastly, these technologies have smaller water storage
sizes that are more appropriate for off-grid islands. However, due to the large typical sizes of MED
and MSF plants, these technologies are favorable for larger islands only [44].
Energy-desalination systems on small islands prefer diesel-favored generation, while larger islands
prefer RE-favored generation, as shown by the power flows. Cost projection analysis, however, suggests
that RE-favored generation will be more favorable in the future even for small islands. RO desalination
is therefore a favorable investment as its high turndown allows it to accept RE intermittency, in addition
to its low generation costs. Given that most of the off-grid islands are currently powered by diesel
generators [1] and that PV-based installations are gradually being deployed [63], energy-RO systems
for energy and water cogeneration may be feasible in the near future.
The sensitivity analysis shows that energy-desalination system configurations heavily depend on
diesel and coal prices. If fuel prices are low, the fuel share in thermal desalination systems increases
and uncertainty in water storage installation size increases. Energy and water generation costs are
reduced especially for MED, MSF, and MVC, as they rely on fuel. If fuel prices are high, RE-favored
generation becomes favorable. There is less uncertainty in the optimum sizes of both energy and water
components because Li-ion BESS energy storage minimizes intermittencies. However, large Li-ion
BESS installations for RE-dominated generation result in high costs of energy and water.
In addition to the fuel dependence of the optimum configuration, the sensitivity analysis also
has implications on system resiliency on fuel price shocks. If fuel prices were to surge upwards,
the generation costs of RO systems will be affected the least due to its low dependence on fuel. MVC
systems will have the largest increase in generation costs due to its inefficient fuel usage. Small
islands are more susceptible to fuel price surges, as these tend to have diesel-favored energy systems.
In contrast, large islands are more likely to have RE-favored generation, which is optimal at higher fuel
prices. This incentivizes the implementation of RE-RO systems, as they are favorable for small islands
and are resistant to fuel price shocks.

5. Conclusions
The RO desalination systems have favorable properties due to high turndown capabilities and
low energy use. Coupled energy-RO systems provide a low energy generation cost and the lowest
water generation cost due to the efficient energy use of RO. Its high turndown allows for compatibility
with RE-favored generation and makes it a future-proof investment as RE installations increase in the
future. RO-RE systems have greater resistance to fuel price surges, providing resiliency against the
decreasing fuel supply and current political climate.
MED and MSF are easier to implement given the present configuration on off-grid islands in the
Philippines. These desalination technologies are more compatible with diesel-favored generation,
which is the status-quo on Philippine off-grid islands. The MED and MSF systems are robust against
weather patterns, making them a viable investment in the Philippines. These technologies may also
have niche applications where diesel prices are low or if small water storage units are preferable.

Author Contributions: Conceptualization, methodology, validation, and formal analysis was done by M.C. and
J.O. Writing—original draft preparation was done by M.C. and M.A. Writing—review and editing and supervision
was done by M.A., E.E.J., and J.O. Funding acquisition was done by J.O. All authors have read and agreed to the
published version of the manuscript.
Funding: This research is part of the Energy Research Fund (ERF) project entitled “ElectriPHI—Electrification
Planning in Small Off-grid Islands in the Philippines” funded through the University of the Philippines Office of
the Vice-President for Academic Affairs (UP OVPAA) and the Senate Committee on Energy led by Sen. Sherwin
T. Gatchalian.
Energies 2020, 13, 2261 18 of 25

Acknowledgments: J.O. would like to acknowledge the Federico Puno Professorial Chair Award and the
US-ASEAN Science & Technology Fellowship. M.C. would like to acknowledge the Department of Science and
Technology Science Education Institute (DOST-SEI) Merit Scholarship Program.
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Appendix A

A.1. Energy System Models

A.1.1. Solar PV
The power output of the solar system is given by Equation (A1). It is proportional to the incident
radiation on the tilted surface G(t) and is partly influenced by the cell temperature TC (t). Details
regarding the calculation of these parameters can be found in [64]. In Equation (A1), SPV is the rated
size of the solar PV installation, ηPV is the derating factor (0.8), GSTC is the irradiance at standard test
conditions (STC, 1 kW/m2 ), αP is the temperature coefficient of power (−0.005 K−1 ), and TSTC is the
temperature at STC.
G(t)
PPV (t) = SPV ηPV [1 + αP (TC (t) − TSTC )], (A1)
GSTC

A.1.2. Diesel
Diesel generators can output any power below its rated size Sds . A minimum power ratio r (0.1) is
implemented and the minimum power output of a diesel generator is given by Equation (A2):

Pmin
ds
(t) = rSds , (A2)

The amount of fuel consumed by the plant is directly proportional to the rated size and the power
output Pds (t) as given by Equation (A3). Both C0 and C1 are arbitrary constants [65].
.
V f l (t) = C0 Sds + C1 Pds (t), (A3)

The fuel efficiency is given by Equation (A4), wherein ρ is the density of diesel (820 kg/m3 ) and
∆HLHV is the lower heating value of diesel (43.2 MJ/kg). The efficiency is specified as 0.3 and 0.4 at
the minimum and maximum loading, respectively. This allows the coefficients in Equation (A3) to
be determined.
Pds (t)
ηds (t) = . , (A4)
ρV ds (t)∆HLHV

A.1.3. Li-Ion BESS

The charging and discharging rate of the Li-ion BESS is limited by either the C-rate or the state
of charge (SOC) as shown by Equations (A5) and (A6). In these equations, SLi is the rated size of the

Li-ion BESS installation, C is the C-rate, and the min x, y function returns whichever is smaller among
x or y. The negative sign indicates charging, as this will be relevant in the later equations. In Equation
(A6), a maximum depth of discharge (DODmax ) of 0.8 is implemented as too much discharge that will
damage the BESS: n o
Pmax
c (t) = −min SLi C, SLi (1 − SOC(t)) , (A5)
n o
Pmax
dc
(t) = min SLi C, SLi (SOC − (1 − DODmax )) , (A6)

Next, the power entering one battery module P(t) is determined as shown in Equations (A7) and
(A8) for charging and discharging, respectively. A charge c and discharge dc efficiency of 0.95 is
that will damage the BESS:
𝑃𝑐𝑚𝑎𝑥 (𝑡) = − min{𝑆𝐿𝑖 𝐶, 𝑆𝐿𝑖 (1 − SOC(𝑡))}, (A5)

𝑚𝑎𝑥 (𝑡)
𝑃𝑑𝑐 = min{𝑆𝐿𝑖 𝐶, 𝑆𝐿𝑖 (SOC − (1 − DODmax ))}, (A6)
Energies 2020, 13, 2261 19 of 25
Next, the power entering one battery module 𝑃(𝑡) is determined as shown in Equations (A7)
and (A8) for charging and discharging, respectively. A charge 𝜖𝑐 and discharge 𝜖𝑑𝑐 efficiency of 0.95
is applied,
applied, which
which results
results in ainroundtrip
a roundtrip efficiency
efficiency of 0.90
of 0.90 whenwhen combined.
combined. 𝑆𝑛𝑜𝑚
Snom is is the nominal
the nominal size of size
one
of one battery
battery modulemodule (4.8 kWh).
(4.8 kWh).
Pc (t)c
P(t)== 𝑃𝑐 (𝑡)𝜖𝑐 , ,
𝑃(𝑡) (A7)
(A7)
𝑆𝑠𝑡S⁄st /Snom
𝑆𝑛𝑜𝑚

Pdc (t)/dc
P(t)==𝑃𝑑𝑐 (𝑡)⁄𝜖𝑑𝑐, ,
𝑃(𝑡) (A8)
(A8)
𝑆𝑠𝑡S⁄st /Snom
𝑆𝑛𝑜𝑚

The Li-ion battery chemistry is modeled using the Thevenin equivalent circuit as shown in
Figure
Figure A1. (t) represents
A1.P𝑃(𝑡) the the
represents power at theatterminals.
power R1 (1.4𝑅Ω)
the terminals. is theΩ)resistance
1 (1.4 due to thedue
is the resistance electrolyte,
to the
while R (0.5
electrolyte,
2 Ω) and C (52 F) are resistances at the electrode interface [66].
while 𝑅2 (0.5 Ω) and 𝐶 (52 F) are resistances at the electrode interface [66].

Figure A1. Thevenin

Thevenin equivalent circuit for modelling Li-ion battery chemistry.
chemistry.

The current
current through
throughthe theEMF
EMFelement
elementisisdetermined
determinedand
andthe SOC
the forfor
SOC thethe
next timestep
next is given
timestep by
is given
Equation (A9). V ( t ) is the open circuit voltage (OCV) of the battery module.
by Equation (A9).0 𝑉0 (𝑡) is the open circuit voltage (OCV) of the battery module.
𝐼(𝑡)𝑉 (𝑡)
SOC(𝑡 + 1) = SOC(𝑡) − I (t0)V,0 (t) (A9)
SOC(t + 1) = SOC(t) − 𝑆𝑛𝑜𝑚 , (A9)
Snom
The module OCV is given as a function of SOC by Figure A2.
The
Energies module
2020, OCV
13, x FOR is REVIEW
PEER given as a function of SOC by Figure A2. 19 of 25

Figure A2. Open

Figure A2. Open circuit
circuit voltage
voltage (OCV)
(OCV) as
as aa function
function of
of SOC
SOC for
for aa 48
48 V
V Li-ion
Li-ion battery
battery module.
module.
A.2. Dispatch Algorithm
A.2. Dispatch Algorithm
The dispatch algorithm decides how energy is distributed throughout the system. ISLA uses a
The dispatch algorithm decides how energy is distributed throughout the system. ISLA uses a
load-following dispatch algorithm that has been modified to accommodate desalination as shown in
load-following dispatch algorithm that has been modified to accommodate desalination as shown in
Figure A3. First, the algorithm checks if solar PV power at that timestep can supply both the electrical
Figure A3. First, the algorithm checks if solar PV power at that timestep can supply both the electrical
demand and desalination power. If so, the BESS is charged, and any more excess power is absorbed
demand and desalination power. If so, the BESS is charged, and any more excess power is absorbed
by the desalination plant. Otherwise, power is drawn from the Li-ion BESS. If the Li-ion BESS does
by the desalination plant. Otherwise, power is drawn from the Li-ion BESS. If the Li-ion BESS does
not suffice, additional diesel generation is called. If this still does not suffice, then a power outage is
not suffice, additional diesel generation is called. If this still does not suffice, then a power outage is
declared, and the system is infeasible.
declared, and the system is infeasible.
load-following dispatch algorithm that has been modified to accommodate desalination as shown in
Figure A3. First, the algorithm checks if solar PV power at that timestep can supply both the electrical
demand and desalination power. If so, the BESS is charged, and any more excess power is absorbed
by the desalination plant. Otherwise, power is drawn from the Li-ion BESS. If the Li-ion BESS does
not suffice, additional diesel generation is called. If this still does not suffice, then a power outage is
Energies 2020, 13, 2261 20 of 25
declared, and the system is infeasible.

Figure A3. Load-following dispatch algorithm used by ISLA. To reduce carbon emissions, the system
Figure A3.the
prioritizes Load-following dispatch
usage of stored Li-ion algorithm used
BESS energy by diesel
over ISLA. power
To reduce carbon
if solar PV emissions, the system
power is insufficient.
prioritizes the usage of stored Li-ion BESS energy over diesel power if solar PV power is insufficient.
Appendix B
Appendix B
To ensure that a physically sensible optimum is obtained, the initial search space must be generated
properly. The procedure
To ensure below shows
that a physically how optimum
sensible ISLA generates the initial
is obtained, thesearch
initialspace,
searchbut this does
space mustnotbe
guarantee
generated aproperly.
global optimum value as
The procedure withshows
below nonlinear
howoptimization problems.
ISLA generates Nonetheless,
the initial thebut
search space, results
this
generated by ISLA for
does not guarantee energy-only
a global microgrid
optimum systems
value as were consistent
with nonlinear with those
optimization from HOMER
problems. Pro® .
Nonetheless,
The sizes
the results of solar by
generated PV,ISLA
diesel,
forand the desalination
energy-only unit systems
microgrid are ratedwere
basedconsistent
on their maximum
with thosepower
from
[kW] or flowrate [m 3 /h] generation, thus, the optimum value must be based on the peak demand.
HOMER Pro® .
A crude approximation of the peak electrical demand Ppk is calculated as shown in Equation (A10).
The constant 10 kW/(m3 /h) was arbitrarily chosen such that it is near the electrical energy intensities
EIel of the desalination units in this study.
( )
10 kW .
Ppk = max Pld (t) + 3 V ld (t) , (A10)
m /h

The initial search spaces of solar PV {SPV }0 , diesel {Sds }0 , and the desalination unit {Sde }0 are shown
in Equations (A11)–(A13). Constants are multiplied to Ppk due to the possibility of the optimum size
deviating from the crudely approximated peak demand. The diesel generator has a small associated
constant because its optimum size must be near the peak demand. Smaller sizes may be technically
infeasible, while larger sizes will incur high capital cost. Solar PV has a larger associated constant
because it has power peaks during the day that are much larger than the peak demand.
h i
{SPV }0 = 0, 5Ppk , (A11)
h i
{Sds }0 = 0,
3Ppk , (A12)
 
2P
{Sde }0 = 0, EIpk , (A13)
el

The Li-ion BESS and water storage undergo daily cycles of influx and efflux; thus, it is unlikely to
have a Li-ion BESS or water storage that drains in less than a day. Their search spaces are therefore
Energies 2020, 13, 2261 21 of 25

based on daily consumption. A crude approximation of the daily power consumption Edy is given by
Equation (A14). Compared to Equation (A10), a smaller constant of 5 kW/(m3 /h) was chosen because
the average daily power consumption is less sensitive to sharp peaks in the actual demand profile.
8759 8759

1  X 5 kW X . 
Edy =  Pld (t)∆t + 3 · V ld (t)∆t, (A14)
365  m /h i=0
i=0

The initial search spaces of Li-ion BESS {SLi }0 and water storage {Stank }0 are shown in Equations
(A15) and (A16). Constants are multiplied to Edy due to the possibility of the optimum size deviating
from the crudely approximated daily energy consumption. These constants are smaller, however,
because caution against sharp peaks in the actual demand profile is unnecessary.
h i
{SLi }0 = 0, 2Edy , (A15)
 
2Edy
{Stank }0 = 0, EIel
, (A16)

Appendix C
The techno-economic parameters of the energy generation components are shown in Table A1.
These parameters are valid for the year 2015.

Table A1. Techno-economic parameters of energy components.

Component Parameter Unit Value Ref.

PV CapEx USD/kW 1200 [67]
OpEx USD/kW/y 25
Lifetime y 20 [68]
Li-ion BESS CapEx USD/kWh 300 [69]
OpEx USD/kWh/y 3
Lifetime y 10
RT Efficiency % 90
Diesel CapEx USD/kW 500
Generator OpEx USD/kWh 0.03
Lifetime h 15,000
Diesel Cost USD/L 0.9
Inflation Rate % 3
Project CapEx USD 0
OpEx USD/y 0
Discount Rate % 10
Lifetime y 20

Appendix D
The future cost parameters of energy components are summarized in Table A2.

Table A2. Future cost parameters of energy components.

Component K [GW(h)] r [y−1 ] tm [y] Ref. b Ref.

PV 200 1.7362 2004 [6] 0.376 [6]
Li-ion BESS 2600 2.7363 2011 [6] 0.251 [6]
 The future cost parameters of energy components are summarized in Table A2.

Table A2. Future cost parameters of energy components.

Component 𝑲 [GW(h)] 𝒓 [y−1] 𝒕𝒎 [y] Ref. 𝒃 Ref.

Energies 2020, 13, 2261 PV 200 1.7362 2004 [6] 0.376 [6] 22 of 25
Li-ion BESS 2600 2.7363 2011 [6] 0.251 [6]

Appendix E
Appendix E
The global
The global horizontal
horizontal irradiance
irradiance (GHI),
(GHI), energy
energy demand,
demand, and
and water
water demand
demand ofof Camasusu
Camasusu Island
Island
and Lubang Island are shown in Figures A4 and A5, respectively. The GHI profiles were
and Lubang Island are shown in Figures A4 and A5, respectively. The GHI profiles were obtained obtained
from PHIL-LIDAR
from PHIL-LIDAR 22 dataset,
dataset,while
whilethe
theelectrical
electricaldemand
demandload
loadprofiles
profileswere
wereobtained
obtainedfrom thethe
from work
workof
Navarro [70].
of Navarro [70].

Energies 2020, 13, xA4.

Figure
Figure FORDaily
PEERand
Daily REVIEW
and monthly average
monthly average electric,
electric, water,
water, and GHI profiles on Camasusu Island. 22 of 25

Figure A5.
Figure Daily and
A5. Daily and monthly
monthly average
average electric,
electric, water,
water, and GHI profiles on Lubang Island.

References
References.
1.
1. Ocon, J.D.;
Ocon, J.D.; Bertheau,
Bertheau, P.P. Energy
Energy Transition
Transition from
from Diesel-based
Diesel-based toto Solar
Solar Photovoltaics-Battery-Diesel Hybrid
Photovoltaics-Battery-Diesel Hybrid
System-based Island Grids in the Philippines—Techno-Economic Potential and
System-based Island Grids in the Philippines—Techno-Economic Potential and Policy Implication on Policy Implication on
Missionary Electrification. J. Sustain. Dev. Energy Water Environ. Syst. 2019,
Missionary Electrification. J. Sustain. Dev. Energy Water Environ. Syst. 2019, 7, 139–154.7, 139–154. [CrossRef]
2.
2. Holding, S.;
Holding, S.;Allen,
Allen,D.M.; Foster,
D.M.; S.; Hsieh,
Foster, A.; Larocque,
S.; Hsieh, I.; Klassen,
A.; Larocque, J.; Van Pelt,
I.; Klassen, J.; S.C.
VanGroundwater vulnerability
Pelt, S.C. Groundwater
on small islands. Nat. Clim. Chang. 2016, 6, 1100–1103. [CrossRef]
vulnerability on small islands. Nat. Clim. Chang. 2016, 6, 1100–1103.
3.
3. NEA totoGive
NEA Romblons
Give Romblons Cobrador IslandIsland
Cobrador PotablePotable
Water Thru Hydropanels.
Water Available online:
thru Hydropanels. https://www.
Available online:
ikot.ph/nea-to-give-romblons-cobrador-island-potable-water-thru-hydropanels (accessed
https://www.ikot.ph/nea-to-give-romblons-cobrador-island-potable-water-thru-hydropanels (accessed on 24 April 2020).
on
24 April 2020).
4. International Labor Organization. Report V: Sustainable Development, Decent Work and Green Jobs;
International Labor Organization: Geneva, Switzerland, 2013.
5. Lilane, A.; Saifaoui, D.; Hariss, S.; Jenkal, H.; Chouiekh, M. Modeling and simulation of the performances
of the reverse osmosis membrane. Mater. Today Proc. 2019, 24, 114–118.
Energies 2020, 13, 2261 23 of 25

4. International Labor Organization. Report V: Sustainable Development, Decent Work and Green Jobs; International
Labor Organization: Geneva, Switzerland, 2013.
5. Lilane, A.; Saifaoui, D.; Hariss, S.; Jenkal, H.; Chouiekh, M. Modeling and simulation of the performances of
the reverse osmosis membrane. Mater. Today Proc. 2019, 24, 114–118. [CrossRef]
6. Schmidt, O.; Hawkes, A.; Gambhir, A.; Staffell, I. The future cost of electrical energy storage based on
experience rates. Nat. Energy 2017, 2, 1–8. [CrossRef]
7. Schmidt, O.; Melchior, S.; Hawkes, A.; Staffell, I. Projecting the Future Levelized Cost of Electricity Storage
Technologies. Joule 2019, 3, 81–100. [CrossRef]
8. Bajpai, P.; Dash, V. Hybrid renewable energy systems for power generation in stand-alone applications:
A review. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2012, 16, 2926–2939. [CrossRef]
9. Bertheau, P.; Blechinger, P. Resilient solar energy island supply to support SDG7 on the Philippines:
Techno-economic optimized electrification strategy for small islands. Util. Policy 2018, 54, 55–77. [CrossRef]
10. Fernández-Gil, G.; Petrakopoulou, F. Sustainable water generation on a mediterranean island in Greece.
Energies 2019, 12, 4247. [CrossRef]
11. Tafech, A.; Milani, D.; Abbas, A. Water storage instead of energy storage for desalination powered by
renewable energy—King Island case study. Energies 2016, 9, 839. [CrossRef]
12. Philstar Global Water Rates up in July 2018. Available online: https://www.philstar.com/headlines/2018/06/
15/1824833/water-rates-july-2018 (accessed on 24 April 2020).
13. Gökçek, M. Integration of hybrid power (wind-photovoltaic-diesel-battery) and seawater reverse osmosis
systems for small-scale desalination applications. Desalination 2018, 435, 210–220. [CrossRef]
14. Corsini, A.; Tortora, E. Sea-Water Desalination for Load Levelling of Gen-Sets in Small Off-Grid Islands.
Energies 2018, 11, 2068. [CrossRef]
15. Bognar, K.; Pohl, R.; Behrendt, F. Seawater reverse osmosis (SWRO) as deferrable load in micro grids. Desalin.
Water Treat. 2013, 51, 1190–1199. [CrossRef]
16. International Atomic Energy Agency. Use of Nuclear Reactors for Seawater Desalination; International Atomic
Energy Agency: Vienna, Austria, 1990.
17. Khalifa, A.J.N. Evaluation of different hybrid power scenarios to Reverse Osmosis (RO) desalination units in
isolated areas in Iraq. Energy Sustain. Dev. 2011, 15, 49–54. [CrossRef]
18. Azinheira, G.; Segurado, R.; Costa, M. Is renewable energy-powered desalination a viable solution for water
stressed regions? A case study in Algarve, Portugal. Energies 2019, 12, 4651. [CrossRef]
19. Rao, P.; Morrow, W.R.; Aghajanzadeh, A.; Sheaffer, P.; Dollinger, C.; Brueske, S.; Cresko, J. Energy
considerations associated with increased adoption of seawater desalination in the United States. Desalination
2018, 445, 213–224. [CrossRef]
20. Qiu, T.; Davies, P.A. Comparison of configurations for high-recovery inland desalination systems. Water
2012, 4, 690–706. [CrossRef]
21. Monterrey-Viña, A.; Musicki-Savic, A.; Díaz-Peña, F.J.; Peñate-Suárez, B. Technical and agronomical
assessment of the use of desalinated seawater for coastal irrigation in an insular context. Water 2020, 12, 272.
[CrossRef]
22. Caldera, U.; Breyer, C. Learning Curve for Seawater Reverse Osmosis Desalination Plants: Capital Cost
Trend of the Past, Present, and Future. Water Resour. Res. 2017, 53, 10523–10538. [CrossRef]
23. Jones, E.; Qadir, M.; van Vliet, M.T.H.; Smakhtin, V.; Kang, S. mu The state of desalination and brine
production: A global outlook. Sci. Total Environ. 2019, 657, 1343–1356. [CrossRef]
24. Ullah, I.; Rasul, M.G. Recent developments in solar thermal desalination technologies: A review. Energies
2019, 12, 119. [CrossRef]
25. Reddy, K.V.; Ghaffour, N. Overview of the cost of desalinated water and costing methodologies. Desalination
2007, 205, 340–353. [CrossRef]
26. Mayor, B. Growth patterns in mature desalination technologies and analogies with the energy field.
Desalination 2019, 457, 75–84. [CrossRef]
27. Sood, A.; Smakhtin, V. Can desalination and clean energy combined help to alleviate global water scarcity?
J. Am. Water Resour. Assoc. 2014, 50, 1111–1123. [CrossRef]
28. Ahmadvand, S.; Abbasi, B.; Azarfar, B.; Elhashimi, M.; Zhang, X.; Abbasi, B. Looking beyond energy
efficiency: An applied review of water desalination technologies and an introduction to capillary-driven
desalination. Water 2019, 11, 696. [CrossRef]
Energies 2020, 13, 2261 24 of 25

29. Williams, E.; Hittinger, E.; Carvalho, R.; Williams, R. Wind power costs expected to decrease due to
technological progress. Energy Policy 2017, 106, 427–435. [CrossRef]
30. Maqbool, N.; Saleem, Z.; Jamal, Y. Open Access Journal of Waste Management & Xenobiotics A Short Review
on A Short Review on Reverse Osmosis Membranes: Fouling and Control. A Short Rev. Reverse Osmosis
Membr. Fouling Control 2019, 2. [CrossRef]
31. Coutinho de Paula, E.; Amaral, M.C.S. Extending the life-cycle of reverse osmosis membranes: A review.
Waste Manag. Res. 2017, 35, 456–470. [CrossRef]
32. Yang, Z.; Zhou, Y.; Feng, Z.; Rui, X.; Zhang, T.; Zhang, Z. A review on reverse osmosis and nanofiltration
membranes for water purification. Polymers 2019, 11, 1252. [CrossRef]
33. Ruiz-García, A.; Melián-Martel, N.; Nuez, I. Short review on predicting fouling in RO desalination. Membranes
2017, 7, 62. [CrossRef]
34. Al-Amshawee, S.; Yunus, M.Y.B.M.; Azoddein, A.A.M.; Hassell, D.G.; Dakhil, I.H.; Hasan, H.A. Electrodialysis
desalination for water and wastewater: A review. Chem. Eng. J. 2020, 380, 122231. [CrossRef]
35. Carballo, J.A.; Bonilla, J.; Roca, L.; De la Calle, A.; Palenzuela, P.; Alarcón-Padilla, D.C. Optimal operating
conditions analysis for a multi-effect distillation plant according to energetic and exergetic criteria. Desalination
2018, 435, 70–76. [CrossRef]
36. Nannarone, A.; Toro, C.; Sciubba, E. Multi-stage flash desalination process: Modeling and simulation.
In Proceedings of the 30th International Conference on Efficiency, Cost, Optimization, Simulation and
Environmental Impact of Energy Systems-ECOS 2017, San Diego, CA, USA, 2–6 July 2017.
37. El-Feky, A.K. Mechanical Vapor Compression (MVC) Desalination System Optimal Design. Arab J. Nucl. Sci.
Appl. 2016, 94, 1–13.
38. Jamil, M.A.; Zubair, S.M. On thermoeconomic analysis of a single-effect mechanical vapor compression
desalination system. Desalination 2017, 420, 292–307. [CrossRef]
39. Namany, S.; Al-Ansari, T.; Govindan, R. Optimisation of the energy, water, and food nexus for food security
scenarios. Comput. Chem. Eng. 2019, 129, 106513. [CrossRef]
40. Mandelli, S.; Brivio, C.; Colombo, E.; Merlo, M. Effect of load profile uncertainty on the optimum sizing of
off-grid PV systems for rural electrification. Sustain. Energy Technol. Assess. 2016, 18, 34–47. [CrossRef]
41. Castro, M.T.; Esparcia, E.A.; Odulio, C.M.F.; Ocon, J.D. Technoeconomics of reverse osmosis as demand-side
management for Philippine off-grid islands. Chem. Eng. Trans. 2019, 76, 1129–1134.
42. Gökçek, M.; Gökçek, Ö.B. Technical and economic evaluation of freshwater production from a wind-powered
small-scale seawater reverse osmosis system (WP-SWRO). Desalination 2016, 381, 47–57. [CrossRef]
43. Ozonoh, M.; Aniokete, T.C.; Oboirien, B.O.; Daramola, M.O. Techno-economic analysis of electricity and
heat production by co-gasification of coal, biomass and waste tyre in South Africa. J. Clean. Prod. 2018, 201,
192–206. [CrossRef]
44. Abdelkareem, M.A.; El Haj Assad, M.; Sayed, E.T.; Soudan, B. Recent progress in the use of renewable energy
sources to power water desalination plants. Desalination 2018, 435, 97–113. [CrossRef]
45. Ghalavand, Y.; Hatamipour, M.S.; Rahimi, A. A review on energy consumption of desalination processes.
Desalin. Water Treat. 2015, 54, 1526–1541. [CrossRef]
46. Ghaffour, N.; Missimer, T.M.; Amy, G.L. Technical review and evaluation of the economics of water
desalination: Current and future challenges for better water supply sustainability. Desalination 2013, 309,
197–207. [CrossRef]
47. Aquatech International Corporation. Case Study: Seawater Desalination at Rabigh Refinery; Aquatech
International Corporation: Canonsburg, PA, USA, 2020.
48. Rahimi, B.; Chua, H. Low Grade Heat Driven Multi-effect Distillation and Desalination, 1st ed.; Elsevier:
Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2017.
49. Elsayed, M.L.; Mesalhy, O.; Mohammed, R.H.; Chow, L.C. Transient and thermo-economic analysis of
MED-MVC desalination system. Energy 2019, 167, 283–296. [CrossRef]
50. Kim, J.S.; Garcia, H.E. Hybrid Energy: Combining Nuclear and Other Energy Sources; Idaho National Lab. (INL):
Idaho Falls, ID, USA, 2015.
51. Papapetrou, M.; Cipollina, A.; La Commare, U.; Micale, G.; Zaragoza, G.; Kosmadakis, G. Assessment of
methodologies and data used to calculate desalination costs. Desalination 2017, 419, 8–19. [CrossRef]
52. Lara, J.; Osunsan, O.; Holtzapple, M. Advanced mechanical vapor-compression desalination system. In
Desalination, Trends and Technologies; Schorr, M., Ed.; IntechOpen: London, UK, 2012.
Energies 2020, 13, 2261 25 of 25

53. De Andrade Cruz, M.; Araújo, O.d.Q.F.; de Medeiros, J.L.; de Castro, R.d.P.V.; Ribeiro, G.T.; de Oliveira, V.R.
Impact of solid waste treatment from spray dryer absorber on the levelized cost of energy of a coal-fired
power plant. J. Clean. Prod. 2017, 164, 1623–1634. [CrossRef]
54. Wang, F.; Deng, S.; Zhao, J.; Zhao, J.; Yang, G.; Yan, J. Integrating geothermal into coal-fired power plant
with carbon capture: A comparative study with solar energy. Energy Convers. Manag. 2017, 148, 569–582.
[CrossRef]
55. Mayor, B. Unraveling the Historical Economies of Scale and Learning Effects for Desalination Technologies.
Water Resour. Res. 2020, 56, 1–10. [CrossRef]
56. Cipollina, A.; Micale, G.; Rizzuti, L. Seawater Desalination: Conventional and Renewable Energy Processes;
Springer: Berlin, Germany, 2012; ISBN 9781608054220.
57. California Public Utilities Commission. Embedded Energy in Water Studies Study 3: End Use Water Demand
Profiles; California Public Utilities Commission: San Francisco, CA, USA, 2011.
58. Griffin, R.C.; Chang, C. Seasonality in Community Water Demand. West. J. Agric. Econ. 1991, 16, 207–217.
59. Bendt, P.; Collares-Pereira, M.; Rabl, A. The frequency distribution of daily insolation values. Sol. Energy
1981, 27, 1–5. [CrossRef]
60. Graham, V.A.; Hollands, K.G.T.; Unny, T.E. A time series model for Kt with application to global synthetic
weather generation. Sol. Energy 1988, 40, 83–92. [CrossRef]
61. Graham, V.A.; Hollands, K.G.T. A method to generate synthetic hourly solar radiation globally. Sol. Energy
1990, 44, 333–341. [CrossRef]
62. MERALCO Local DU Rate. Available online: www.meralco.com.ph (accessed on 24 April 2020).
63. National Power Corporation NPC Holds Groundbreaking of Solar Power Plant in Limasawa Island. Available
online: https://www.napocor.gov.ph/index.php/news/archived-news/189-npc-holds-groundbreaking-of-
solar-power-plant-in-limasawa-island (accessed on 24 April 2020).
64. Duffie, J.; Beckman, W. Solar Engineering of Thermal Processes; Wiley: New York, NY, USA, 2013;
ISBN 9780470873663.
65. McGowan, J.G.; Manwell, J.F.; Connors, S.R. Wind/diesel energy systems: Review of design options and
recent developments. Sol. Energy 1988, 41, 561–575. [CrossRef]
66. He, H.; Xiong, R.; Fan, J. Evaluation of lithium-ion battery equivalent circuit models for state of charge
estimation by an experimental approach. Energies 2011, 4, 582–598. [CrossRef]
67. Fu, R.; Feldman, D.; Margolis, R. US Solar Photovoltaic System Cost Benchmark: Q1 2018; NREL/TP-6A20-72399;
National Renewable Energy Laboratory: Golden, CO, USA, 2018.
68. Blechinger, P. Barriers and Solutions to Implementing Renewable Energies on Caribbean Islands in Respect of
Technical, Economic, Political, and Social Conditions, Schriftenreihe der Reiner Lemoine-Stiftung; Shaker Verlag:
Herzogenrath, Germany, 2015.
69. Diorio, N.; Dobos, A.; Janzou, S.; Nelson, A.; Lundstrom, B. Technoeconomic Modeling of Battery Energy Storage
in SAM; NREL Technical Report; National Renewable Energy Laboratory: Golden, CO, USA, 2015.
70. Navarro, S. Hybrid opportunities in SPUG areas using HOMER. In Proceedings of the Asian Clean Energy
Forum, Manila, Philippines, 6–10 June 2016.

© 2020 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access
article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution
(CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).