D8.2.3 Report on Life Cycle Costing: Prospective Economic Assessment of ASTEP system

This report provides the updated version of the economic life cycle assessment (LCA) of the ASTEP system due to an increase in the estimated CAPEX, operational & maintenance, labour and disposal costs of the ASTEP system, since submission of the previous deliverable (D8.2.2 Life Cycle Cost Assessment of ASTEP system).The subsequent life cycle costs (LCC), levelized cost of energy (LCOE), benefit-cost ratio (BCR) and EU carbon cost savings are evaluated and economic prediction of ASTEP system of over 30 years are estimated. The results showed that AMTP’s ASTEP system had higher capital costs, LCC and LCOE, than MAND, which was mainly due to AMTP’s high-latitude location, resulting in lower solar irradiance than MAND. This led to AMTP’s ASTEP system requiring a different design, which was more expensive than the design of MAND’s system. The results of this study suggest that solar thermal systems located at sites with high latitude and low solar irradiance such as AMTP are likely to have higher CAPEX than those installed at sites of low latitude and high solar irradiance, such as MAND. This is supported by results in the reviewed literature, which showed that the CAPEX of the solar thermal plants was lower at locations with high solar irradiance but greater at locations with low solar irradiance. The BCR measures the profitability or economic feasibility of a product or project. MAND’s ASTEP system achieved a BCR of 1.25, making it profitable, while the BCR of AMTP’s ASTEP system is 1, meaning the system breaks even. Although the feasibility is limited in this case, the result is better than that obtained by other solar thermal technologies, which are not currently feasible at high latitude. The energy cost savings achieved by MAND and AMTP’s ASTEP systems were EUR 110,054 and EUR 143,827, respectively. The EU carbon cost savings of the ASTEP system when used to supply thermal energy to the industrial processes were EUR 139,193 for MAND and EUR 119,104 for AMTP. This resulted in total financial savings of EUR 249,248 and EUR 262,931 for MAND and AMTP’s ASTEP system, respectively, over a period of 30 years. This shows the significant financial benefits of the ASTEP system for industries through its energy and EU carbon cost savings, which can encourage businesses to use the ASTEP system instead of fossil fuels to provide thermal energy for their processes, leading to greater environmental sustainability and economic savings.