Northumbria Research Link

Citation: Chen, Fuying, Yang, Qing, Zheng, Niting, Wang, Yuxuan, Huang, Junling, Xing, Lu,
Li, Jianlan, Feng, Shuanglei, Chen, Guoqian and Kleissl, Jan (2022) Assessment of
concentrated solar power generation potential in China based on Geographic Information
System (GIS). Applied Energy, 315. p. 119045. ISSN 0306-2619

Published by: Elsevier

URL: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2022.119045
<https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2022.119045>

This version was downloaded from Northumbria Research Link:

https://nrl.northumbria.ac.uk/id/eprint/48887/

Northumbria University has developed Northumbria Research Link (NRL) to enable users
to access the University’s research output. Copyright © and moral rights for items on
NRL are retained by the individual author(s) and/or other copyright owners. Single copies
of full items can be reproduced, displayed or performed, and given to third parties in any
format or medium for personal research or study, educational, or not-for-profit purposes
without prior permission or charge, provided the authors, title and full bibliographic
details are given, as well as a hyperlink and/or URL to the original metadata page. The
content must not be changed in any way. Full items must not be sold commercially in any
format or medium without formal permission of the copyright holder. The full policy is
available online: http://nrl.northumbria.ac.uk/policies.html

This document may differ from the final, published version of the research and has been
made available online in accordance with publisher policies. To read and/or cite from the
published version of the research, please visit the publisher’s website (a subscription
may be required.)
 Assessment of concentrated solar power generation potential in

China based on Geographic Information System (GIS)

Fuying Chen1,2, Qing Yang1,2,3,4*, Niting Zheng2, Yuxuan Wang5, Junling Huang6, Lu
Xing7, Jianlan Li2, Shuanglei Feng1, Guoqian Chen8, Jan Kleissl9

1
State Key Laboratory of Operation and Control of Renewable Energy & Storage
Systems, China Electric Power Research Institute, Beijing 100192, P.R. China
2
State Key Laboratory of Coal Combustion, Huazhong University of Science and
Technology, 1037 Luoyu Road, Wuhan, Hubei 430074, P.R. China
3
China-EU Institute for Clean and Renewable Energy, Huazhong University of
Science and Technology, Wuhan 430074, P.R. China
4
John A. Paulson School of Engineering and Applied Sciences, Harvard University,
Cambridge, MA 02138, USA
5
School of electronic & electrical engineering, University of Leeds, Leeds, LS2 9JT,
UK
6
International Clean Energy Research Office, China Three Gorges Corporation,
Beijing, P.R. China
7
Engineering and Environment Faculty, Northumbria University, Newcastle upon
Tyne, NE1 8ST, UK
8
College of Engineering, Peking University, Beijing 10084, P.R. China
9
Department of Mechanical & Aerospace Engineering, University of California, San
Diego, La Jolla, CA, 92093, USA

* Corresponding authors: State Key Laboratory of Operation and Control of Renewable

Energy & Storage Systems, China Electric Power Research Institute, Beijing 100192,
P.R. China.
E-mail address: [email protected] (Q. Yang).
Abstract
Concentrating solar power (CSP) technology can not only match peak demand in power
systems but also play an important role in the carbon neutrality pathway worldwide.
Actions in China is decisive. Few previous studies have estimated CSP technology’s
power generation and CO2 emission reduction potentials in China. To address this
knowledge gap, the geographical, technical, and CO2 emission reduction potential of
CSP in China was evaluated by province based on a high resolution geographical
information system with up-to-date data. A comprehensive framework including
geographic and technical constrains was proposed. Exclusion criteria including solar
radiation, slope, land-use type, natural reserve, and water resources were adopted to
determine the suitability of CSP plant construction. Then, based on the power
conversion efficiency difference from various CSP technologies, the technical potential
was calculated on suitable land. The results show that approximately 1.02 × 106 km2 of
land is available to support CSP development in China. Based on the available solar
resource on the suitable land, the geographical potential is 2.13 × 1015 kWh. The
potential installed capacity is 2.45 × 107–5.40 × 107 MW, considering four CSP
technologies. The corresponding annual energy generation potential is 6.46 × 1013–1.85
× 1014 kWh. Considering the scenario of using the potential of CSP to replace the
current power supply to the maximum extent, CO2 emission would have been reduced
by 5.19 × 108, 5.61 × 108, and 6.24 × 108 t in 2017, 2018, and 2019, respectively. At the
provincial level, more than 99% of China’s technical potential is concentrated in five
western provinces, including Xinjiang, Inner Mongolia, Qinghai, Gansu, and Tibet.
These results provide policy guidance and serve as a reference for the future
development of CSP and site selection for CSP plant construction both in China and
worldwide.
Keywords: Concentrated solar power, Geographic information system, Resource
assessment
 Nomenclature
Item Definition
CSP Concentrating solar power
PV Photovoltaic
PTC Parabolic trough collector
LFC Linear Fresnel collector
sCO2 Supercritical carbon dioxide
CRS Central receiver system
PDS Parabolic dish system
DEM Digital elevation model
DNI Direct normal irradiance
GIS Geographical information system
NEA National Energy Administration
PG Power generation
LA Land area
EFF Efficiency
LUF Land-use factor
PC Potential capacity
LCF Land conversion factor
UHV Ultra-high voltage
ER Emission reduction
EF Emission factor
PD Power demand
LCOE Levelized cost of electricity
1. Introduction
At present, more than 130 countries and regions have proposed "zero carbon" or
"carbon neutral" climate goals [1]. Meanwhile, speeding up the clean and low-carbon
energy technologies development to overcome global challenges related to climate
change and sustainable development has become the international community’s
universal consensus and concerted action [2]. The energy transition strategy of the
European Union and its Member States has been basically based on the integration of
renewable energy technologies in the national grid [3]. However, one of the most
significant challenges of this strategy is that the high proportion of renewable energy
technologies has brought considerable obstacles to grid management and strengthened
the demand for peak shaving units [3].
Concentrated solar power (CSP) is a promising solar thermal power technology
that can participate in power systems’ peak shaving and frequency support [4,5].
Compared with solar photovoltaics (PV), wind power, and other power technologies
with strong output fluctuation, CSP can integrate a large-capacity heat storage system
to ensure smooth power generation output and improve the flexibility of power delivery
to the grid [6,7]. CSP plants also have a ramping ability and generation range equivalent
to gas-fired units, superior to ordinary thermal power units [8]. The life cycle
greenhouse gas emissions of CSP are lower than conventional sources [9]. Therefore, a
CSP plant integrated with thermal energy storage can play an important role in
providing ancillary services to power grids with high renewable penetration, especially
in multi-energy systems [10].
China’s action is decisive for international goals. To deal with climate change,
China has put forward a new goal of “striving to achieve carbon peak by 2030 and
carbon neutrality by 2060” [11]. The trend of various typical electrification indicators
continues to improve, which shows that China’s electrification is advancing rapidly [12].
Achieving carbon neutrality in the power sector mainly relies on promoting more
renewable energy to be used on a large scale through conversion to electricity [13].
However, the problem of grid-connected consumption has begun to emerge, and the
problem of abandoning wind and solar has become more prominent. Therefore, as the
proportion of fluctuating renewable energy sources in the power grid continues to
increase in the future, CSP with large-capacity heat storage will be an attractive energy
source as it can regulate the power system peak output.
Since an electric system with high renewable penetration in China could be
decisive for averting the global climate crisis, it is imperative to determine the power
generation potential of CSP and its geographic distributions in the country. The relevant
research in China is still insufficient. The potential for solar energy generation can be
classified as geographical and technical. The geographical potential is the annual total
solar radiation in a suitable regional area, taking into account geographic constraints
[14]. Northwest China is rich in solar energy resources, and the annual average solar
radiation can reach 1750 kWh/m2 [15]. Solar radiation received on the surface in China
was estimated to be up to 5.28 × 1016 MJ [16].
However, not all solar resources can be used for power generation, depending on
the specific land-use type and other geographic constraints, e.g., nearby available water
resources and slope. In terms of land use, most studies eliminated protected areas first,
including national parks, safari areas, historical and touristic monuments, and natural
reserves [17,18,19,20]. Uyan et al. established a 0.5-km buffer zone for a natural reserve
[21]. Similarly, most studies excluded water bodies such as rivers, lakes, and wetlands
[22,23]. In addition to a protected area and water body, Hermann et al. excluded
agricultural zones and forests [24]. Barren and low-productivity areas were suggested
to be the priority locations for solar energy plants [25]. Sharma et al. selected five types
of wasteland suitable for CSP station construction [26]. Different technology types of
CSP stations have different slope requirements, wherein parabolic trough collector
(PTC) and linear Fresnel collector (LFC) techniques are particularly limited by the
slope [27]. Djebbar et al. excluded areas with slopes exceeding 1%‒4% [22]. Water
resource constraints should also be considered. While other renewable energy
technologies such as solar PV or wind power use relatively little water, CSP with wet
cooling – like most thermal power technologies - requires a considerable amount of
water, mainly for cooling [28]. Supercritical carbon dioxide (sCO2) Brayton cycle
technology can significantly reduce water consumption, but it has not yet reached
commercial application in China [29]. At present, the CSP station mainly adopts the
steam turbine for power generation, which has high requirements for water resources
[29]. Tlhallerwa et al. adopted air cooling technology to provide greater siting flexibility
because air cooling reduces the water demand by 90% compared with water cooling
[30]. Giamalaki et al. considered that the use of water to cool the CSP system would
cause severe environmental pollution owing to the thermal pollution of the water body;
therefore, a site located at a long distance from water resources was determined to be
suitable [25]. However, since dry cooling increases costs and reduces efficiency [30],
the construction of CSP stations using wet cooling technology is preferred in the
vicinity of water resources [19,31]. Other factors, including the distance to roads and
power grids were taken into account [32]. In addition, the distance to settlements was
also considered [33,34]. Boukelia et al. took proximity to the transmission-line corridor
and natural gas pipeline as constraints [35].
The technical potential of solar energy generation in the selected area can be
defined as the geographical potential of the area, which can be converted into electrical
energy under the conditions of existing solar power technology [14]. CSP technologies
can be classified into four types: parabolic trough collector (PTC), linear Fresnel
collector (LFC), central receiver system (CRS), and parabolic dish system (PDS). The
schematic view of the applied technologies is shown in Fig. 1. Solar collectors receive
maximum solar radiation at the optimum slope and surface azimuth [36,37]. Optimizing
the heliostat layout of the CSP plant can achieve maximum heliostat field efficiency
[38]. Therefore, it is assumed that the mirror fields are equipped with tracking devices
and arranged according to the optimum mirror slope and ground azimuth. The power
generation potential of the PTC was often calculated as technical potential because it
represents the largest proportion and most mature CSP technology currently in the
market [30,31,34]. Few studies have considered the four different CSP technologies and
calculated their annual power generation based on the average solar-to-electric
conversion efficiency [39,40].
 Fig. 1. The schematic view of four CSP technologies: (A) Parabolic trough collector (PTC), (B)

linear Fresnel collector (LFC), (C) central receiver system (CRS), and (D) parabolic dish system

(PDS).

For geographical potential, a few studies have proposed the framework for
screening suitable areas for the CSP plants construction and evaluated the CSP potential
in specific areas in China. Early in 2007, Wang et al. proposed a decision support system
framework for site selection of CSP plants based on geographic constrains [41]. Then,
according to the annual mean solar radiation of 97 stations, the radiation distribution
with a resolution of 1 km in China was obtained by spatial interpolation [41]. Zhao et
al. established a screening index using the analytic hierarchy process to calculate the
weights of related factors, then applied the screening method to select suitable places
for planning CSP plants in Inner Mongolia [42,43]. Wu et al. proposed a more complete
and practical multi-criteria decision-making framework for PTC solar power plant
location selection [44]. Then, case studies were conducted in five cities in Western
China to find the most suitable location for CSP stations [44]. However, the above
studies did not apply their land screen method to the nation. For nationwide CSP
technical potentials, He et al. adopted 10-year (from 2001 to 2010) hourly solar
radiation data from 200 representative sites in China to screen the areas suitable for
developing CSP plants considering geographic constraints [45]. Moreover, the annual
power generation and the installed capacity of potential CSP plants were calculated by
province based on an average land use conversion factor [45]. However, due to technical
data unavailability, the difference in the results of different CSP technologies was
ignored. Water resources availability, usually considered an important factor, was also
ignored in He et al.’s study [45]. On the other hand, the data used in He et al.’s study is
the most accurate data at that time, such as solar irradiance data for 200 chosen locations,
land cover dataset, and the digital elevation model (DEM) dataset with 1 km ×1 km
resolution, however, the data quality is improving with time, and higher data resolution
will allow more accurate estimation. Therefore, compared with the previous studies in
China, there are improvements and innovations in the methodological framework, data
accuracy, and result resolution.
To narrow the knowledge gap, it is necessary to assess the geographical, technical,
and CO2 emission reduction potential of CSP in China based on a high resolution
geographical information system with up-to-date data and more concerns on water
resource availability. The novelties of this study compared with previous studies in
China are as follows: first, a comprehensive framework was proposed to evaluate
geographic and technical CSP potentials and associated GHG emission reduction
potentials for the first time. Geographic constrains included five factors: solar radiation,
slope, land-use type, natural reserve, and water resources. Among them, in the previous
studies in China, water resources were often ignored, but it was an important factor in
the screening framework and should be considered. At the same time, the power
conversion efficiency difference from various CSP technologies was considered in
technical constrains. Second, accurate and reliable data were adopted, such as direct
normal irradiance (DNI) data, from 2008 to 2017, with a spatial resolution of 9 km and
temporal resolution of 1 h. This is the first time that the non-public data has been used
to assess China's CSP potential. Besides, land cover data came from an essential
achievement of China's 863 Program, with a spatial resolution of 30 m. Third, to allow
evaluating the geographical and technical potential of CSP plants in the context of grid
needs and constrains, the results are presented at a more granular level by province.
Therefore, this research aimed to accurately assess the geographical and technical
potential of CSP stations, and provide a scientific basis and data base for CSP
development plans in various provinces in China.

2. Material and methods

2.1 Geographical information system (GIS) tool and criteria overview
The framework for assessing the geographical, technical, and CO2 emission
reduction potential of CSP in China is illustrated in Fig. 2. The land conversion factor
is the ratio of the power plant’s installed capacity to the ground area. Land use efficiency
includes solar-to-electric conversion efficiency and land use factor, which is the ratio
of the reflector area to the total area of the power station [30]. This study established
screening principles to select suitable locations for CSP plant construction. ArcGIS
version 10.4.1 has rich functions and comprehensive processing capacity, applied to
process all collected data [32]. Based on previous research, five criteria (i.e., solar
radiation, protected areas, land use, slope percentage, and distance from water resources)
were considered. However, there was no agreement in the literature on standard
threshold values of site selection for CSP construction in China. Therefore, the
threshold values in this study were based on the first CSP demonstration projects in
China and the previous studies. Table 1 provides information regarding the first CSP
demonstration projects [44,46,47]. The missing area for some plants is due to the slow
development of CSP in China, with more than half of the first batch of demonstration
projects still under construction or suspended. System conversion efficiency was
estimated by the company when establishing a project.
 Fig. 2. Research framework of this study.

2.2 DNI
Unlike PV technology, which can use both direct and diffuse solar irradiance, CSP
technology converts only DNI to electricity [48]. DNI is the most basic and vital factor
in the location selection of CSP stations because it directly affects the efficiency and
economics of the plant [49]. Ziuku et al. believed that commercial development of the
CSP project required the site with DNI of at least 2000 kWh/m2 [17]. Djebbar et al. set
minimum DNI limits at 1500 kWh/m2 [22]. A study on estimating the CSP potential of
Africa excluded areas with DNI < 1800 kWh/m2 [24]. According to the “Notice on
Organizing the Construction of Solar Thermal Power Demonstration Projects” issued
by the National Energy Administration (NEA), DNI at the site should be more than
1600 kWh/m2 [50]. Therefore, in this study, the threshold of 1600 kWh/m2 was set to
eliminate inappropriate areas. DNI data were obtained from the Renewable Energy
Department of China Electric Power Research Institute, which generated
meteorological data for China for 2008‒2017 with a 9-km spatial resolution and a 1-h
temporal resolution numerical weather prediction model.
Table 1. Relevant data of the first batch of demonstration projects of concentrating solar power (CSP) plants in China [44,46,47]. DNI - direct normal irradiance, CRS

– central receiver system, PTC – parabolic trough collector, LFC – linear Fresnel collector.

Technology Project name Long. Lat. DNI Area (km2) Thermal energy System conversion

(kWh/m2/yr) storage capacity (h) efficiency (%)

CRS Qinghai Supcon Delingha 50 MW molten salt 97.36° 37.37° 1976 2.40 6 18

Dunhuang 100 MW molten salt 94.48° 40.14° 2000 7.84 11 16

Qinghai Gonghe 50 MW molten salt 100.9° 36.40° 1900 / 6 16

Hami 50 MW molten salt 93.45° 42.89° 1920 / 8 16

Delingha 135 MW direct steam generation 97.36° 37.37° 1900 / 4 15

Gansu Jinta 100 MW molten salt 98.74° 40.01° 1900 6.00 8 16

Shangyi 50 MW direct steam generation 113.9° 41.07° 1600 / 4 17

Yumen 50 MW molten salt 97.93° 39.81° 1800 2.47 6 19

Yumen 100 MW molten salt 97.05° 40.29° 1800 6.80 10 17

PTC Yumen East Town 50 MW thermal oil (Royal 97.92° 39.81° 1800 2.48 7 25

tech CSP Co., Ltd..)

Yumen East Town 50 MW thermal oil 97.05° 40.29° 1800 2.90 7 25

(Rayspower Energy Group Co., Ltd.)

 Gansu Akesai 50 MW molten salt 94.37° 39.62° 2056.5 / 15 21

Urat Middle Banner 100 MW thermal oil 108.51° 41.59° 2025 4.67 4 27

Delingha 50 MW thermal oil 97.36° 41.59° 1976 2.60 9 14

Gansu Gulang 100 MW thermal oil 102.90° 37.47° 1913 / 7 22

Zhangjiakou 64 MW molten salt 114.94° 41.42° 1700 2.87 16 22

LFC Dunhuang 50 MW molten salt 94.48° 40.14° 2000 3.19 13 17

Urat Middle Banner 50 MW thermal oil 108.52° 41.59° 2025 / 6 19

Zhangbei 50 MW direct steam generation 114.72° 41.07° 1750 / 14 11

Zhangjiakou 50 MW direct steam generation 114.72° 41.07° 1750 / 14 12

2.3 Protected areas
The establishment of protected areas is a fundamental measure of biodiversity
conservation, which plays an essential role in climate change mitigation and adaptation.
According to the design standard for CRS solar power stations issued in 2018, site
selection should align with the national medium and long-term development plan, and
natural reserves should be avoided [51]. Natural reserve data were obtained from the
World Database on Protected Areas, and ecological functional reserve data were
adopted from the Chinese Academy of Sciences Resource and Environment Science
and Data Center; both were excluded from consideration for the construction of CSP
plants.
2.4 Land cover
Land cover information was provided by the GlobeLand30 dataset of the National
Catalogue Service for Geographic Information. The dataset contained 10 main land-
cover types, including cultivated land, forest, grassland, shrubland, wetland, water
bodies, tundra, artificial surfaces, bareland, and permanent snow & ice. Ideally, CSP
station construction should occur on unused and low-productivity agriculture or pasture
areas and areas usually covered by grassland or shrubland to minimize the impact on
land use [52]. However, for power stations that have been built in China, the lands used
in the projects include desert and other state-owned unused lands [53]. Therefore,
bareland was selected as a land type that can construct CSP stations.
2.5 Slope percentage
Flat and wide lands are optimal for CSP station construction because the
construction costs go up for land levelling [25]. Giamalaki et al. considered the slope
less than 4.0° was particularly suitable [25]. Ziuku et al. set the upper boundary of
suitable slopes to 1.7° [17]. In the International Renewable Energy Agency studies, 2.1°
was adopted as the upper limit [24,54]. Djebbar et al. considered a constraint of 0.6°‒
2.3° [22]. He et al. set 0.6° and 1.7° as the lower and upper limits, respectively [45].
Therefore, an intermediate value of 3° was adopted to be the upper limit in this study.
The influence of the slope change on the results was discussed in the sensitivity analysis
part. DEM data with a 500 m resolution were obtained from the Chinese Academy of
Sciences Resource and Environment Science and Data Center. The Arctoolbox in
ArcGIS was applied to derive slope from the DEM data.
2.6 Distance from water resources
Because CSP systems still use a steam turbine to generate electricity from the solar
heat, the demand for water consumption of CSP stations is similar to that of thermal
power generation [55]. In addition, water resources are needed to clean the mirror to
ensure the high reflection efficiency of the mirror field. Some water sources can be
recycled; however, non-recyclable water sources need to be supplemented by local
resources. CSP plants usually have two cooling methods: water and air cooling. The
total amount of water required for air cooling is approximately 12% of that required for
water cooling [56]. If air cooling technology is adopted, water consumption can be
significantly reduced; however, this may be accompanied by a substantial increase in
the investment cost (by approximately 7%–9%) and a reduction in power generation
(by approximately 5%) [57]. Consequently, the CSP station should be near a water body.
According to a document issued by the NEA, air cooling units should be adopted in
principle for coal-fired power station projects in water-scarce regions in northern China.
Therefore, in the northern water-deficient provinces (including Beijing, Tianjin, Hebei,
Gansu, Inner Mongolia, Shanxi, Shaanxi, Henan, Jiangsu, Shandong, Anhui,
Heilongjiang, Jilin, Liaoning, and Ningxia), CSP stations adopt air cooling technology,
whereas water cooling is adopted in the remaining provinces. Therefore, the proximity
to water resources was required to be less than 50 km based on previous literature and
China’s land area [17,18,19]. The distribution of water resources was provided by the
National Catalogue Service for Geographic Information.
2.7 CSP generation potential
Through the five screening principles mentioned above and data processing
operations in ArcGIS, the potential areas were screened out, and the area suitable for
CSP generation was obtained for each province. Then, the annual generation capacity
of the CSP station in different provinces was calculated using Eq 1, developed by
Hermann et al [24].
PG = LA × DNI × EFF × LUF, (1)
where PG is the annual power generation (kWh); LA is suitable land area per the
screening criteria (m2); DNI is the annual average DNI per unit area (kWh/m2); EFF
is the solar-to-electricity conversion efficiency of the power station; and LUF is the
land-use factor, which is the ratio of the reflector area to the total area of the power
station. Since air cooling is required in northern China due to water scarcity, it will
reduce the efficiency of CSP plants, resulting in a 5% reduction in the power generation
in that area.
The potential installed capacity of the CSP plants was assessed using Eq 2, adopted
by He et al. [45].
PC = LA × LCF, (2)
where PC is the potential capacity (MW); and LCF is the land conversion factor,
which is the ratio of the power plant’s installed capacity to the ground area (MW/km2).
Land conversion factors vary owing to differences in technology [45].
The four CSP technologies differ in their power generation properties. There are
differences in the land-use factor, land conversion factor, and solar-to-electric
conversion efficiency due to changes in local conditions, array configuration, tracking
technology, and thermal storage methods, as listed in Table 2 [34,49,58,59,60,61]. The
upper and lower limits of solar-to-electric conversion efficiency were used to calculate
the interval value of power generation.

Table 2. Parameters of different concentrating solar power (CSP) technologies. PTC - parabolic

trough collector, LFC - linear Fresnel collector, CRS - central receiver system, PDS - parabolic dish

system [34,49,58,59,60,61].

Technology Land-use factor Land conversion Annual solar-to-electric conversion

(%) factor (MW/km2) efficiency (for water cooling, %)

PTC 28 26 11‒21

LFC 49 53 8‒18

CRS 23 24 15‒35

PDS 22 25 25‒30
2.8 CO2 emission reduction potential of CSP plants
In 2016, the NEA officially approved the first batch of demonstration projects of
CSP plants in China. The CO2 emission reduction potential in 2017‒2019 was
calculated based on the CRS technology, wherein the land-use factor was assumed to
be 23%, and the solar-to-electric conversion efficiency was assumed to be 25%. China
made a voluntary carbon reduction commitment at the 2015 Paris Climate Conference,
whereby CO2 emissions would peak by 2030. CSP stations reduce CO2 emissions by
replacing traditional power stations. In this study, it was assumed that CSP plants can
replace the current power generation mode to the maximum extent, based on which two
scenarios were established. Scenario one assumed that the province-to-province
absorption capacity of ultra-high voltage (UHV) transmission lines in China was
limited. If the local CSP generation potential cannot meet the power demand, the
generation potential is the maximum power supply substitution value for these
provinces. This means that CSP generation can reduce CO2 emissions by replacing part
of the electricity supply. The CO2 emission reduction is calculated as following [62]:
ER = (EF − CSPEF) × PG, (3)
where ER is the CO2 emission reduction (kg CO2); EF is the grid emission factor (kg
CO2/kWh); CSPEF is the life cycle CO2 emission intensity of CSP plants (kg CO2/kWh);
and PG is the potential of solar thermal power generation (kWh).
If the power generation potential is greater than the power demand, then the excess
generation is curtailed, and Equation (3) becomes [62]:
ER = (EF − CSPEF) × PD, (4)
where PD is the local power demand in kWh, which can be obtained from the "China
Statistical Yearbook" issued by the National Bureau of Statistics [63]. In Scenario 2, it
was assumed that the UHV power grid could fully transmit excess generation across
provinces to achieve a complete replacement of the existing power supply with CSP
generation. Therefore, the CO2 emission reduction in each province under Scenario 2
was calculated from Equation 3.
China’s power grid is divided into six regions (excluding Tibet, Hong Kong,
Macau, and Taiwan, which are not discussed in this paper). The emission factors from
the power grids of each region in China vary according to the local power sources. The
CO2 emission factor of each region consists of the operating margin and build margin
obtained from the Institute for Global Environmental Strategies [64]. Operating margin
refers to the emission factor for marginal emissions related to the operation of a set of
existing power plants whose current power generation will be influenced [62]. Build
margin refers to the emission factor for marginal emissions related to the construction
process of a set of potential power plants whose construction and future operation will
be influenced [62]. Combined margin is the weighted average of operating margin and
build margin [65]. In this study, the emission weight of the two parts was taken as 0.5
[65]. The 2015-2017 emission factors were assumed and are shown in Table 3.
Although CSP plants are generally considered to have little negative
environmental impact, from a life-cycle perspective, CO2 emissions are still generated
during the construction and material production stages [9,27]. According to Li [66], the
life-cycle carbon footprint of a central receiver system CSP plant is 0.035 kg/kWh. The
summary of data sources is shown in Table 4.

Table 3. Grid emission factors of China in 2015‒2017 (kg CO2/kWh) [64].

Regional grid Operating margin Build margin Combined margin

North China Grid 1.0032 0.4621 0.7327

Northeast China Grid 1.1181 0.4015 0.7598

East China Grid 0.8079 0.5449 0.6764

Central China Grid 0.9253 0.3227 0.6420

Northwest China Grid 0.9309 0.2920 0.6115

Southern China Grid 0.8667 0.3065 0.5866

Table 4. The summary of data sources. DNI - direct normal irradiance, DEM - Digital elevation

model.

Data Descriptions Sources

DNI Raster data, Renewable Energy Department of China Electric

Time span: 2008-2017, Power Research Institute (Non-publicise)

Temporal resolution: 1 h,

Spatial resolution: 9 km

Natural reserve Vector data World Database on Protected Areas

(https://www.protectedplanet.net/country/CHN)

Ecological Vector data Chinese Academy of Sciences Resource and

functional reserve Environment Science and Data Center

(https://www.resdc.cn/data.aspx?DATAID=137)

Land cover Raster data, National Catalogue Service for Geographic

Spatial resolution: 30 m Information

(https://www.webmap.cn/commres.do?method=d

ataDownload)

DEM Raster data, Chinese Academy of Sciences Resource and

Spatial resolution: 250 m Environment Science and Data Center

(https://www.resdc.cn/data.aspx?DATAID=123)

Water resources Vector data National Catalogue Service for Geographic

Information

(https://www.webmap.cn/commres.do?method=d

ataDownload)

Local power Time span: 2017-2019 China Statistical Yearbook

demand (http://www.stats.gov.cn/tjsj/ndsj/2020/html/C09

14.jpg)

Grid emission Time span: 2015-2017 Institute for Global Environmental Strategies

factor (https://www.iges.or.jp/en/pub/list-grid-emission-

factor/en)
3. Results and discussion
3.1 Geographical potential
The collected DNI meteorological file data were imported into GIS for processing
and overlayed onto the map of China to obtain Fig. 3. As shown in Fig. 3, the best solar
energy resources in China are mainly concentrated in the western regions of Inner
Mongolia, Tibet, Qinghai, Xinjiang, Gansu, Yunnan, and Sichuan. The annual mean
DNI of these areas is between 1700 and 3100 kWh/m2, which satisfies the standard for
establishing CSP stations per Section 2.1.

Fig. 3. Annual mean direct normal irradiance (DNI) of each province in China (kWh/m2).

Then, based on the five exclusion criteria, the suitable areas for CSP plant
construction were identified, as shown in Fig. 4. Fig. 4 also shows the locations of the
first CSP demonstration projects in 2016, which are mostly consistent with the selected
areas and are mainly concentrated in China’s Xinjiang, Inner Mongolia, Qinghai, Gansu,
and Tibet. Because of the similar geographical locations of some demonstration power
stations, the actual locations of the 20 power stations are not separately identifiable in
Fig. 4. Then, the annual mean DNI of each province was obtained through GIS
operation based on the annual mean DNI original data at the resolution of 9 km. The
geographical CSP potential in the suitable areas is summarized in Table 5. The total
geographical potential can reach 2.13 × 1015 kWh. The total area suitable for
construction was 1.02 × 106 km2, accounting for approximately 11% of the national
area. Xinjiang, Inner Mongolia, Qinghai, Gansu, and Tibet (i.e., the five northwestern
provinces) occupy only 52.69% of the land area in China but represent 99.62% of the
CSP potential area. Although the suitable land area of Tibet is smaller than that of Gansu,
its geographical potential is higher than that of Gansu owing to the more abundant solar
resources. The DNI distribution in the suitable area was also visualized (Fig. 5). Of note,
a minimum DNI of 1600 kWh/m2 was set in this study, which led to the exclusion of
14 provinces.

Table 5. Geographical potential of the suitable region of each province in China. DNI - direct normal

irradiance. Provinces without suitable area are not shown.

Province Annual mean Suitable area Ratio of suitable area Geographical

DNI (kWh/m2) (km2) to total area (%) potential (GWh)

Yunnan 2343.83 1.57 × 100 0.00 3.68 × 103

Heilongjiang 1613.25 2.14 × 100 0.00 3.45 × 103

Hebei 1926.07 1.87 × 101 0.01 3.60 × 104

Shaanxi 1926.55 1.03 × 102 0.05 1.98 × 105

Sichuan 2738.74 3.41 × 102 0.07 9.33 × 105

Ningxia 1742.12 3.38 × 103 6.88 5.89 × 106

Tibet 3247.14 9.65 × 104 8.12 3.13 × 108

Gansu 1936.64 1.13 × 105 29.58 2.19 × 108

Qinghai 2440.26 1.23 × 105 17.90 3.00 × 108

Inner 1876.49 2.17 × 105 20.40 4.07 × 108

Mongolia

Xinjiang 1893.65 4.66 × 105 30.36 8.82 × 108

Fig. 4. Areas suitable for construction of concentrating solar power (CSP) stations in China in green.

Markers show the locations of twenty demonstration projects sites in 2016: CRS - central receiver

system, LFC - linear Fresnel collector, PTC - parabolic trough collector.

Fig. 5. Direct normal irradiance (DNI) distribution on suitable lands.

3.2 Technical potential
Based on the assessment of the geographical potential of the available area obtained
using Equation 1 and the parameters in Table 3, the total annual power generation of
CSP plants using four different technologies, i.e., PTC, LFC, CRS, and PDS, are 6.46
× 1013–1.23 × 1014, 8.22 × 1013–1.85 × 1014, 7.23 × 1013–1.69 × 1014, and 1.15 × 1014–
1.38 × 1014 kWh, respectively, which are 8.91‒25.52 times the national electricity
consumption in 2019. The corresponding installed capacities of CSP in China are
approximately 2.65 × 107, 5.40 × 107, 2.45 × 107, and 2.55 × 107 MW for PTC, LFC,
CRS, and PDS, respectively, and 4,900–10,800 times the installed capacity target by
the end of 2020 proposed in the 13th Five-Year Plan for Electric Power Development
[67]. This reflects the abundance of solar energy resources in China and demonstrates
the potential for the development of CSP technology. If CSP is developed according to
its potential, it can generate a significant fraction of China’s electricity consumption in
the future.
Figure 6 shows the power generation and capacity potential of different CSP
technologies in each province. The province with the largest power generation potential
is Xinjiang, accounting for approximately 42.06% of the country's total power
generation potential, and Tibet, Inner Mongolia, Qinghai, and Gansu account for
14.95%, 18.44%, 14.29%, and 9.94%, respectively. These five provinces account for
99.68% of the country's total power generation potential; however, they only accounted
for 11.87% of the national electricity consumption in 2019. Similarly, the provinces
with the highest installed capacities are Xinjiang, Inner Mongolia, Qinghai, Gansu, and
Tibet. It can be concluded that future CSP development in China will focus on provinces
in the northwest. The majority of the first batch of CSP demonstration stations is
concentrated in Qinghai (4), Gansu (9), and Hebei (4), whereas only three stations are
located in Xinjiang and Inner Mongolia, which are the provinces with the richest solar
resources. The development of CSP technologies in Xinjiang and Inner Mongolia is
difficult. The remoteness of these two provinces, the local lack of skilled labor and raw
materials for establishing plants, and the need to import materials and supplies by train
result in higher construction costs. However, after solving these problems, the rich
geographical potential in Xinjiang and Inner Mongolia has a great potential for power
generation.
From the perspective of the technology type, LFC has a higher land conversion
factor; therefore, its power generation potential is higher than that of the other three
technologies (PTC, CRS, and PDS). Higher solar-to-electric conversion efficiency also
improves the annual power generation of the power station. Therefore, while
developing the CSP potential area, improving technology to reduce the cost and
improve the efficiency of CSP can yield further gains in potential. In addition, thermal
energy storage is an indispensable part of CSP installations [68], and all existing plants
in China have storage capacities [69]. Thus, CSP technology with large-capacity
thermal energy storage will enable peak load regulation of the power system. With
increasingly mature thermal energy storage technology, annual power generation will
also be further increased.

Fig. 6. Annual power generation and potential installed capacity of concentrating solar power (CSP)

plants with four different technologies by province in China: (A) Parabolic trough collector (PTC),

(B) linear Fresnel collector (LFC), (C) central receiver system (CRS), and (D) parabolic dish system
(PDS).

3.3 CO2 emission reduction potential

The life-cycle CO2 emission intensity of CRS power generation is 0.035
kgCO2/kWh, which is lower than existing power plants. Fig. 7 shows the potential for
CO2 emission reduction. If CSP plants had been constructed according to their technical
potential under Scenario 1, the total amounts of CO2 emission reductions in 2017, 2018
and 2019 would have reached 5.18 × 108, 5.61 × 108, and 6.24 × 108 t, respectively,
accounting for 5.33%, 5.77%, and 6.41% of China’s total CO2 emissions in 2017, issued
by China Emission Accounts and Datasets [70]. In terms of the distribution of CO2
emission reduction potential by province, although Qinghai has high power generation
potential, the CO2 emission reduction potential is not high because of the low power
demand of the province. In contrast, Inner Mongolia, Xinjiang, and other provinces
with large power generation potential and large power demand have higher CO2
emission reduction potential. Yunnan, Heilongjiang, and Hebei (limited by the CSP
generation potential) are far from meeting their power demand, and their CO2 emission
reductions are limited. If power transmission between provinces could be fully realized
under Scenario 2, the CO2 emission reduction would reach 6.18 × 1010 t, which will
exceed the global CO2 emission of 5.6 × 1010 t predicted by the Intergovernmental Panel
on Climate Change in a 2018 report [62]. In other words, if China was able to export
CSP electricity to other countries, it could decarbonize the entire world.

Fig. 7. CO2 emission reduction potential of China's provinces: (A) Scenario 1, (B) Scenario 2.

3.4 Sensitivity analysis

 The potential calculation in this study considers the surface slope and solar
resources for geographic screening to clarify further the distribution of power
generation potential under different geographic conditions and provide a reference for
the actual construction of CSP plants. To explore sensitivities, the distribution of the
power generation potential was calculated at different surface slopes and annual mean
DNI values. The power generation potential when the annual mean DNI was higher
than 1600 kWh/m2 and the slope was less than 3° were taken as the zero reference point.
The results of the sensitivity analysis are shown in Fig. 8. According to Fig. 8, when
the minimum allowable annual DNI value is between 1000‒1400 and 2400‒2800
kWh/m2, the total potential does not decrease significantly. The total potential is most
sensitive to minimum annual DNI values between 1600 and 1800 kWh/m2. When the
DNI limit becomes more stringent at 1800 kWh/m2, power generation decreases by
approximately 30.19%. When the slope limit is relaxed to 5° or 7°, power generation
increases by 10.72%–34.31% or 17.03%–57.24%, respectively. In the case of
different land slopes, assuming that the mirror field with tracking device is arranged,
the sunlight will be tracked according to the best angle. It means that the land slope
only affects the suitable land area and then affects the power generation. In the case of
DNI > 1600 kWh/m2, when the slope limit becomes 5° and 7°, suitable areas increase
to 1.13 × 106 and 1.19 × 106 km2, respectively.

Fig. 8. Sensitivity analysis of generation potential based on different slope ranges and minimum

direct normal irradiance (DNI).

3.5 Discussion
At present, little research has been conducted on evaluating China’s CSP
generation potential based on GIS; hence, it is difficult to compare the research results.
The total power generation potential obtained in the present study is higher than He et
al. [45]. This difference is mainly because the surface slope was set to a more stringent
1.7° in He et al., which leads to the omission of the power generation potential.
Compared with similar studies, the innovation of the present study lies in the adoption
of high-accuracy and high-precision solar irradiance and land-use data, accounting for
water resource constraints and estimating the power generation potential of different
types of CSP technologies by province. This provides a scientific basis and data base
for industrial development and policy formulation.
Table 6 shows the CSP generation potential of China estimated in this research
based on GIS and that of other countries or regions. It can be seen that CSP has great
potential in China compared to these countries or regions because of large land areas
and abundant solar radiation resources. Canada was poor in solar resources; only 1.30–
4.18% of the area was suitable for the construction of CSP stations, according to the
research by Djebbar et al [22]. Therefore, although China's total land area is smaller
than that of Canada, its CSP generation potential is much larger than that of Canada.
Sistan and Baluchistan province in Iran is not very rich in CSP resources [32]. About
12% of the areas are most suitable for CSP generation, with an average annual solar
radiation of 1456 kWh/m2 [32]. In the study of Ghasemi et al., the difference between
specular area and specular field area was ignored, resulting in an overestimation of
power generation potential [32]. Oman's land area is 1/31 of China's, but 82% of the
land slope is less than 0.57° and is rich in solar resources [20]. The flat terrain is
conducive to constructing a large-scale CSP station in Oman without additional cost to
level the land. The land area of the United States is similar to that of China, and about
12% of the land is suitable for supporting the development of CSP [71]. This research
proposes a complete research framework based on geographic constrains and technical
constrains, and considers the impact of four CSP technologies and water resources
differences in different provinces. Therefore, this framework can provide a theoretical
basis for similar research in other countries.

Table 6. Comparison of research on CSP generation potential in countries/regions based on GIS

[20,22,32,71,72].

Country/region Technical potential (1013 kWh/y)

Canada 0.83–2.62

Iran (Sistan and Baluchistan province) 0.74

Oman 0.76–1.37

Central Africa 2.99

Eastern Africa 17.58

Northern Africa 9.35

Southern Africa 14.96

Western Africa 2.27

United States 11.61

China (This research) 6.46–18.5

Owing to low power generation efficiency and high water consumption, the
commercialization of CSP in China is relatively slow, and the current proportion in the
grid is not large. Supercritical carbon dioxide (sCO2) Brayton cycle power modules are
among the most promising technologies to improve and replace current heat-to-electric
conversion technologies [73]. It adopts sCO2 as the working fluid, and the power
generation cycle is a closed Brayton cycle [29]. Compared with the traditional steam
turbine, the water demand of the whole system is significantly reduced, and the
thermoelectric conversion efficiency is higher [29]. With the commercial operation of
the sCO2 Brayton cycle system in the future, it will gradually solve the problem that
China's northwest region, rich in solar resources but lack water resources, is not suitable
for the construction of large-scale CSP plants powered by steam turbines.
Ji et al. calculated the levelized cost of electricity (LCOE) of the CRS and PTC for
31 provinces in China, as shown in Table 7 [74]. Compared with other renewable energy
sources, the LCOE of the CSP station is relatively high [74]. The LCOE of the PTC
with storage is relatively higher than that without storage, but lower than the CRS with
storage [74]. Although the proportion of PTC in operating CSP plants globally is much
larger than other technologies, CRS may be the leading technical direction of CSP in
the future. From the perspective of provincial distribution, although Tibet has higher
solar resources and lower LCOE than Xinjiang and Inner Mongolia, Tibet is not the
most suitable province for constructing the CSP plants due to its relatively low suitable
land areas. The LCOE of Sichuan and Yunnan is similar to that of Inner Mongolia, but
they are still not suitable for developing CSP technology due to poor land suitability.
Xinjiang has low LCOE and the largest proportion of the suitable land area. Therefore,
Xinjiang is the most promising province in China to develop large-scale CSP
technology.

Table 7. The LCOE of the CRS and PTC with 9-h storage of suitable provinces in China ($/MWh)

[74]. LCOE - levelized cost of electricity.

Province CRS with 9-h storage PTC with 9-h storage

Tibet 142 186

Xinjiang 167 219

Qinghai 174 231

Gansu 203 266

Inner Mongolia 217 284

Sichuan 224 291

Yunnan 225 295

Ningxia 251 330

Heilongjiang 253 334

Shaanxi 255 342

Hebei 296 381

Combined with the research results and industry development status, the following
policy suggestions on the future development of CSP technology are put forward.
(1) In terms of power station project construction, the geographical and technical
potential of CSP is concentrated in several provinces in Northwest China. Therefore,
the focus should be on developing the northwest region with vast unused land areas.
Under the same technical conditions, the land with abundant solar resources and the
gentle slope is preferentially selected for project construction, to effectively utilize solar
energy resources and obtain the best power generation performance.
(2) In terms of transmission side construction and electricity price management, the
development of the CSP industry should be coordinated and promoted based on market
demand and consumption. In the northwest region with rich resource potential, key
trans-provincial power transmission channels such as transmission from the west to the
east should be continued. This can also further promote China’s carbon peaking and
carbon neutrality goals, and maximize the carbon reduction potential of CSP technology.
At the same time, the reform of the power system should be deepened to improve the
market competitiveness of CSP power generation and further promote the reduction of
LCOE.
(3) In terms of market scale, only 7 of the first batch of CSP demonstration projects
were successfully connected to the grid. Therefore, the withdrawn and disqualified
projects in the first batch of demonstration projects should be revitalized as soon as
possible to expand market volume further. In addition, the complementary and
coordinated development of CSP, photovoltaic, and wind power should be vigorously
promoted. The core advantage of CSP is that it can complete the smooth output through
the energy storage system. CSP, photovoltaic, and wind power can make full use of this
advantage to achieve win-win results.
(4) In terms of technological development, LFC technology has greater technical
potential than the other three technologies. However, since the technology has not yet
reached commercial operation, the current market share is small. Therefore, investment
in improving the CSP efficiency and reducing the costs should be increased, including
improving the efficiency of the mirror field, reducing mirror costs, improving the
efficiency of the heat transfer process, and reducing operating costs.
4. Conclusions
By collecting various geographic resource data and combining ArcGIS software,
regions with the potential to develop CSP plants were screened considering geographic
constraints. Then, based on technical constraints, the geographical, technical, and CO2
emission reduction potential of CSP in China were evaluated by province.
The results show that China is rich in solar resources and has excellent CSP
development potential. Approximately 11% of China’s land is suitable for the
construction of CSP stations, of which more than 99% is concentrated in five provinces
in the northwest region (i.e., Xinjiang, Tibet, Inner Mongolia, Qinghai, and Ningxia).
The current installed capacity of CSP of 420 MW is much lower than China's total
potential installed capacity (2.45 × 107–5.40 × 107 MW) estimated in this study. The
power generation potential is expected to be 6.46 × 1013–1.85 × 1014 kWh, which is
8.91‒25.52 times the national power consumption in 2019. The more extensive interval
range is because of different CSP technologies. Future improvements in CSP
conversion efficiencies will add to the power generation potential. Based on the
assumption that if CSP plants replaced the existing power generators, the total CO2
emission reduction potential of China in 2017, 2018, and 2019 would have reached 5.19
× 108, 5.61 × 108, and 6.24 × 108 t, respectively, which would have contributed to
China's carbon reduction commitment. Assuming that the UHV power grid can fully
satisfy the trans-regional power transmission, the CO2 emission reduction of 6.18 × 1010
t can be achieved. Finally, combined with the development status of China's CSP
industry and the research results, policy suggestions are put forward on China's CSP
station project construction, transmission side construction and electricity price
management, market scale, and technology development.

Acknowledgements
This research is supported by Open Fund of State Key Laboratory of Operation
and Control of Renewable Energy & Storage Systems (China Electric Power Research
Institute) (No.NYB51202101980).
 References
[1] Energy & Climate Intelligence Unit. Net Zero Emissions Race, https://eciu.net/netzerotracker;

2021 [accessed 7 Sept 2021].

[2] Choi Y, Rayl J, Tammineedi C, Brownson JRS. PV Analyst: Coupling ArcGIS with TRNSYS to

assess distributed photovoltaic potential in urban areas. Sol Energy 2011;85:2924–39.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.solener.2011.08.034.

[3] Kiefer CP, Caldés N, Río PD. Will dispatchability be a main driver to the European Union

cooperation mechanisms for concentrated solar power? Energy Sources Part B 2021;16:42-54,

https://doi.org/10.1080/15567249.2021.1885526.

[4] Bouhal T, Agrouaz Y, Kousksou T, Allouhi A, Rhafiki TE, Jamil A, et al. Technical feasibility of

a sustainable Concentrated Solar Power in Morocco through an energy analysis. Renew Sustain

Energy Rev 2018;81:1087‒95. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2017.08.056.

[5] The 5th China Solar Thermal Power Conference. Assumption of large scale development of solar

power generation, https://max.book118.com/html/2019/0904/6032010052002102.shtm; 2019.

[accessed 7 June 2021 ].

[6] Casati E, Casella F, Colonna P. Design of CSP plants with optimally operated thermal storage.

Sol Energy 2015;116:371–87. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.solener.2015.03.048.

[7] Pelay U, Luo L, Fan Y, Stitou D, Rood M. Thermal energy storage systems for concentrated

solar power plants. Renew Sust Energ Rev 2017;79:82–100.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2017.03.139.

[8] Sha Y, Zhou M, Yang HJ, Liu SW, Li GY, Qi QR. Interconnected power system optimal operation

with renewable generation considering flexibility of concentrating solar power plants & HVDC tie-

line. Power System Technology 2020;44:3306‒13.

[9] Chen GQ, Yang Q, Zhao YH, Wang ZF. Nonrenewable energy cost and greenhouse gas emissions

of a 1.5 MW solar power tower plant in China. Renew Sust Energ Rev 2011;15:1961‒7.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2010.12.014.

[10] Zhang Q, Cao D, Jiang K, Du X, Xu, E. Heat transport characteristics of a peak shaving solar

power tower station. Renew Energ 2020;156:493‒508.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2020.04.099.
[11] The Central People's Government of the People's Republic of China. Government Work Report,

http://www.gov.cn/guowuyuan/zfgzbg.htm; 2021 [accessed 7 June 2021].

[12] Electric Power Development Research Institute. China Electrification Development Report

(2019), https://www.cec.org.cn/upload/zt/2019report/; 2020 [accessed 7 June 2021].

[13] State Grid Corporation of China released the action plan of "carbon peaking and carbon

neutralization", https://baijiahao.baidu.com/s?id=1693118969767306816&wfr=spider&for=pc;

2021 [accessed 7 June 2021].

[14] Sun YW, Hof A, Wang R, Liu J, Lin YJ, Yang DW. GIS-based approach for potential analysis

of solar PV generation at the regional scale: A case study of Fujian Province. Energy Policy

2013;58:248‒59. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2013.03.002.

[15] CMA, Wind and Solar Energy Resources Center. China Wind and Solar Energy Resources

Bulletin in 2019, https://news.bjx.com.cn/html/20200107/1034564.shtml; 2020 [accessed 7 June

2021].

[16] CMA Wind and Solar Energy Resources Center of China Meteorological Administration. Solar

and Wind Energy Resource Inventory 2015,

http://www.cma.gov.cn/2011xwzx/2011xqxxw/2011xqxyw/201602/t20160220_304586.html;2016

[accessed 7 June 2021].

[17] Ziuku S, Seyitini L, Mapurisa B, Chikodzi D, van Kuijk K. Potential of concentrated solar

power (CSP) in Zimbabwe. Energy Sustain Dev 2014;23:220–7.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esd.2014.07.006.

[18] Brewer J, Ames DP, Solan D, Lee R, Carlisle J. Using GIS analytics and social preference data

to evaluate utility-scale solar power site suitability. Renew Energy 2015;81:825–36.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2015.04.017.

[19] Anwarzai MA, Nagasaka K. Utility-scale implementable potential of wind and solar energies

for Afghanistan using GIS multi-criteria decision analysis. Renew Sust Energ Rev 2017;71:150–60.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2016.12.048.

[20] Gastli A, Charabi Y. Solar electricity prospects in Oman using GIS-based solar radiation maps.

Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2010;14:790–7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2009.08.018.

[21] Uyan M. GIS-based solar farms site selection using analytic hierarchy process (AHP) in

Karapinar region, Konya/Turkey. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2013;28:11–7.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2013.07.042.

[22] Djebbar R, Belanger D, Boutin D, Weterings E, Poirier M. Potential of concentrating solar

power in Canada. Energy Procedia 2014;49:2303–12. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.egypro.2014.03.244.

[23] Janke JR. Multicriteria GIS modeling of wind and solar farms in Colorado. Renew Energy

2010;35:2228–34. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2010.03.014.

[24] Hermann S, Miketa A, Fichaux N. Estimating the renewable energy potential in Africa: A GIS-

based approach; IRENA Working Paper; International Renewable Energy Agency: Abu Dhabi, UAE,

2014.

[25] Giamalaki M, Tsoutsos T. Sustainable siting of solar power installations in Mediterranean using

a GIS/AHP approach. Renew Energ 2019;141:64‒75. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2019.03.100.

[26] Sharma C, Sharma AK, Mullick SC, Kandpal TC. Assessment of solar thermal power

generation potential in India. Renew Sust Energ Rev 2015;42:902‒12.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2014.10.059.

[27] Dawson L, Schlyter P. Less is more: Strategic scale site suitability for concentrated solar

thermal power in Western Australia. Energy Policy 2012;47:91-101.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2012.04.025.

[28] Damerau K, Williges K, Patt AG, Gauché P. Costs of reducing water use of concentrating solar

power to sustainable levels: Scenarios for North Africa. Energy Policy 2011;39:4391–8.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2011.04.059.

[29] Yuan XX, Zhang XB. Demonstration of Supercritical Carbon Dioxide BraytonCycle in Solar

Thermal Power Generation. Dongfang Turbine 2021;01:33‒8.

[30] Tlhalerwa K, Mulalu M. Assessment of the concentrated solar power potential in Botswana.

Renew Sust Energ Rev 2019;109:294‒306. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2019.04.019.

[31] Aly A, Jensen SS, Pedersen AB. Solar power potential of Tanzania: Identifying CSP and PV

hot spots through a GIS multicriteria decision making analysis. Renew Energ 2017;113:159‒75.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2017.05.077.

[32] Ghasemi G, Noorollahi Y, Alavi H, Marzband M, Shahbazi M. Theoretical and technical

potential evaluation of solar power generation in Iran. Renew Energ 2019;138:1250‒61.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2019.02.068.

[33] Merrouni AA, Mezrhab A, Mezrhab A. CSP sites suitability analysis in the Eastern region of
Morocco. Energy Procedia 2014;49: 2270‒9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.egypro.2014.03.240.

[34] Yushchenko A, De Bono A, Chatenoux B, Patel MK, Ray N. GIS-based assessment of

photovoltaic (PV) and concentrated solar power (CSP) generation potential in West Africa. Renew

Sust Energ Rev 2017;81:2088‒103.

[35] Boukelia TE, Mecibah MS. Parabolic trough solar thermal power plant: Potential, and projects

development in Algeria. Renew Sust Energ Rev 2013;21:288–97.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2012.11.074.

[36] Talebizadeh P, Mehrabian MA, Abdolzadeh M. Prediction of the optimum slope and surface

azimuth angles using the Genetic Algorithm. Energy Build 2011;43:2998-3005.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enbuild.2011.07.013.

[37] Keshavarz SA, Talebizadeh P, Adalati S, Mehrabian MA, Abdolzadeh M. Optimal Slope-

Angles to Determine Maximum Solar Energy Gain for Solar Collectors Used in Iran. Int. J. Renew.

Energy Res 2012;2:665-73.

[38] Talebizadeh P, Mehrabian MA, Rahimzadeh H. Optimization of Heliostat Layout in Central

Receiver Solar Power Plants. J. Energy Eng 2014;140:04014005.

https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)EY.1943-7897.0000162.

[39] Purohit I, Purohit P. Technical and economic potential of concentrating solar thermal power

generation in India. Renew Sust Energ Rev 2017;78:648‒667.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2017.04.059.

[40] Charabi Y, Gastli A. GIS assessment of large CSP plant in Duqum, Oman. Renew Sust Energ

Rev 2010;14:835‒41. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2009.08.019.

[41] Wang JF, Meng B, Li LF. A location choice model of solar heat power plant in China. Journal

of Geo-Information Science 2007;9:43‒8.

[42] Zhao MZ, Song SJ, Zhang XM. A selection method of trough solar thermal power station siting

at a micro level. Renew Energ Resour 2013;3:18‒22.

[43] Zhao MZ, Jiang X, Song SJ. Development situation and potential analysis about Parabdic

Trough solar thermal power technique in China. Energ Engineer 2013;2:27‒30.

[44] Wu Y, Zhang B, Wu C, Zhang T, Liu F. Optimal site selection for parabolic trough concentrating

solar power plant using extended PROMETHEE method: A case in China. Renew Energ

2019;143:1910‒27. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2019.05.131.
[45] He G, Kammen DM. Where, when and how much solar is available? A provincial-scale solar

resource assessment for China. Renew Energ 2016;85:74‒82.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2015.06.027.

[46] NEA. Notice of the National energy Administration on the Construction of Solar Thermal

Power Generation Demonstration Projects.

http://zfxxgk.nea.gov.cn/auto87/201609/t20160914_2298.htm; 2016[accessed 7 June 2021].

[47] Ling-Zhi R, Xin-Gang Z, Xin-Xuan Y, Yu-Zhuo Z. Cost-benefit evolution for concentrated

solar power in China. J Clean Prod 2018;190:471‒82. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.04.059.

[48] Clifton J, Boruff BJ. Assessing the potential for concentrated solar power development in rural

Australia. Energy Policy 2010;38:5272‒80. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2010.05.036.

[49] Liu J, Xu F, Lin S. Site selection of photovoltaic power plants in a value chain based on grey

cumulative prospect theory for sustainability: A case study in Northwest China. J Clean Prod

2017;148:386‒97. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.02.012.

[50] NEA. Notice on Organizing the Construction of Solar Thermal Power Demonstration Projects.

http://zfxxgk.nea.gov.cn/auto87/201509/t20150930_1968.htm; 2015[accessed 7 June 2021].

[51] Ministry of Housing and Urban-Rural Development of the People’s Republic of China. Design

standard for tower solar thermal power station.

http://www.mohurd.gov.cn/wjfb/201904/t20190402_240025.html; 2018 [accessed 7 June 2021].

[52] Turney D, Fthenakis V. Environmental impacts from the installation and operation of large-

scale solar power plants. Renew Sust Energ Rev 2011;15:3261‒70.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2011.04.023.

[53] Sun R. Promote the healthy development of solar thermal power generation and help the steady

implementation of energy transformation. China Energy News 2020;025.

[54] IRENA. Unleashing the solar potential in ECOWAS: Seeking areas of opportunity for grid-

connected and decentralised PV applications. An opportunity-based approach. International

Renewable Energy Agency 2013.

[55] Concentrating solar power commercial application study: Reducing water consumption of

concentrating solar power electricity generation. U.S. Department of Energy. 2010;1‒35.

[56] Aseri TK, Sharma C, Kandpal TC. Assessment of water availability for wet cooling at potential

locations for solar thermal power generation in India. Int J Ambient Energy 2018;41:1126‒41.
https://doi.org/10.1080/01430750.2018.1507926.

[57] Wang ZF. Design of solar thermal power plants. Beijing: Chemical Industry Press 2012;10:241.

[58] Duvenhage DF, Brent AC, Stafford WHL, Van Den Heever D. Optimising the concentrating

solar power potential in South Africa through an Improved GIS Analysis. Energies 2020;13:3258.

https://doi.org/10.3390/en13123258.

[59] Ong S, Campbell C, Denholm P, Margolis R, Heath G. Land-use Requirements for solar power

plants in the United States. National Renewable Energy Laboratory,

https://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy13osti/56290.pdf; 2013 [accessed 7 June 2021].

[60] Viebahn P, Lechon Y, Trieb F. The potential role of concentrated solar power (CSP) in Africa

and Europe—a dynamic assessment of technology development, cost development and life cycle

inventories until 2050. Energy Policy 2011;39:4420–30.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2010.09.026.

[61] National Renewable Energy Laboratory. Concentrating Solar Power Projects.

https://solarpaces.nrel.gov/; [accessed 7 June 2021].

[62] Yang Q, Huang TY, Wang SG, Li JS, Dai SQ, Wright S, et al. A GIS-based high spatial

resolution assessment of large-scale PV generation potential in China. Appl Energ 2019;247:254‒

69. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2019.04.005.

[63] National Bureau of Statistics of China. China statistical yearbook. [Chinese version]

http://www.stats.gov.cn/tjsj/ndsj/2020/html/C0914.jpg; 2020 [accessed 7 June 2021].

[64] Institute for Global Environmental Strategies. IGES list of grid emission factors (version 10.9).

https://www.iges.or.jp/en/pub/list-grid-emission-factor/en; 2020 [accessed 7 June 2021].

[65] Marnay C, Fisher D, Murtishaw S, Phadke A, Price L, Sathaye J. Estimating carbon dioxide

emissions factors for the California electric power sector. Berkeley: Lawrence Berkeley National

Laboratory; 2002.

[66] Li RX, Zhang HR, Wang HR, Tu QS, Wang XJ. Integrated hybrid life cycle assessment and

contribution analysis for CO2 emission and energy consumption of a concentrated solar power plant

in China. Energy 2019;174:310‒22.

[67] Ren LZ, Zhao XG , Yu XX, Zhang YZ. Cost-benefit evolution for concentrated solar power in

China. J Clean Prod 2018;190:471‒82. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.04.059.

[68] Islam MT, Huda N, Abdullah AB, Saidur R. A comprehensive review of state-of-the-art
concentrating solar power (CSP) technologies: Current status and research trends. Renew Sustain

Energy Rev 2018;91:987–1018. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2018.04.097.

[69] SolarPACES. CSP projects around the world. SolarPACES. https://www.solarpaces.org/csp-

technologies/csp-projects-around-the-world/;2018 [accessed 7 June 2021].

[70] China Emission Accounts and Datasets. National Emission Inventory 2016‒2017.

https://www.ceads.net.cn/[accessed 7 January 2021].

[71] Lopez A, Roberts B, Heimiller D, Blair N, Porro G. U.S.Renewable Energy Technical

Potentials: A GIS-Based Analysis. National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) 2012.

https://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy12osti/51946.pdf [accessed on 11 October 2021].

[72] Hermann S, Miketa A, Ficaux N. Estimating the renewable energy potential in Africa: A GIS-

based approach. International Renewable Energy Agency (IRENA) 2014. https://www.irena.org/-

/media/Files/IRENA/Agency/Publication/2014/IRENA_Africa_Resource_Potential_Aug2014.pdf

[accessed on 11 October 2021].

[73] Sorbet FJ, Mendoza M, J García-Barberena. Performance evaluation of CSP power tower plants

schemes using supercritical carbon dioxide Brayton power block. International Conference on

Concentrating Solar Power and Chemical Energy Systems 2019. https://doi.org/10.1063/1.5117568.

[74] Ji JP, Tang H, Jin P. Economic potential to develop concentrating solar power in China: A

provincial assessment. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 2019;114:109279.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2019.109279.