Current centralized heating system of Astana city, capital of Kazakhstan, is not able to satisfy the fast growing energy consumption rate of its population. There are homes that are not connected to the central heating system yet and use autonomous heating systems instead. Most decentralized households use electric water heaters and coal as fuel for warming spaces, which results in huge electricity bills and tons of polluting gases into the atmosphere. One of the solutions to mitigate this serious problem is the implementation of Solar Water Heating (SWH) systems. In this work, the assessment of such systems using active indirect solar collectors designed and manufactured by LLP KunTech, a local developer of this technology, is presented. These solar collectors were chosen because aside the fact that they are produced locally, which makes them economically and socially attractive, the working fluid does not freeze at critical low temperature conditions, a feature very valuable for Astana’s severe winter conditions. This work makes evident that, despite the perception that unsubsidized solar technology is not cost effective yet, implementation of SWH system for private households might bring economic and environmental benefits to Kazakhstan when competing with electric heating systems. As a result of this study it is demonstrated that a single-family-home SWH system in Astana may produce around 4.5 MWh of heating per year, reducing 56.3% the amount of electricity used by existing electric heaters. The single-family home system with a capital cost of 1.5M Kazakhstani tenge (KZT), pays off the equity in 9 years under current financial conditions in the country, subject to a low-interest rate loan available for clean energy developers of 5%. Moreover, the greenhouse gas emissions might be reduced in 3.3 tonnes of CO2 eq. annually per household.

1. Effectiveness and prospects of implementing
SWH system in Astana, Kazakhstan
ABSEMETOV, Askar
MUKUSHEV, Medet
YERUBAYEV, Alibek
ZHUMANALINA, Zarina
ROJAS-SOLORZANO, Luis
Split-Croatia May 14-17, 2017

2. Table of Contents
1.Introduction & Background
2.Methodology
3.Results
4.Conclusions
2

3. 1.Introduction & Background
3

4. Introduction
● Astana, capital of Kazakhstan, is a growing
city, with population of 1 million.
● Near 80% of electricity is generated from
burning coal.
● Large use of electric water heaters and coal-
fire space heaters.
● 100 tonnes of daily harmful emissions to
atmosphere.
● Price for electricity has increased two-fold in
last 6 years.
4
https://monitor-cdn5.icef.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/Kazakhstan-map.jpg

5. Introduction
5
• Kazakhstan promotes development and use
of RE and government expects investments
~2 billion US$ in RE by 2020 (e.g., EXPO-
2017).
• Solar energy is abundant. 2200-3000 sunny
hours per year.
• Local RE industry is boosting (Astana Solar,
Kun Tech, etc.)
• 1300-1800kWh/m2/year solar insolation.
http://solargis.com/assets/graphic/free-map/GHI/Solargis-Kazakhstan-GHI-solar-resource-map-en.png

6. Problem & Aim
Main problem
Excessive usage of electricity for water heating by
private houses that results in large bills, as well as
negative environmental impact.
Aim
Assess the viability of using SWH system in Astana
households based on Kazakhstani solar collectors
6

7. 2. Methodology
7

8. Methodology
Economic-
technical
evaluation of the
project
Natural
resources
assessment
Technology
justification
Life Cycle Cost
analysis on the
proposed case
vs. the base case
Base case: 100% electric water heaters
Proposed case: SWH complementing electric heaters
8

9. Economic-technical evaluation
Load, Natural Resources and Technical specifications
Determination of cost-effectiveness and benefits
Assessment of environmental impact
9

10. Natural resources assessment
Data on solar energy of the region was obtained and assessed from two sources:
1. RETScreen platform’s uploaded data
2. Local ground station offered by a research entity, NURIS
Air temperature, oC Relative humidity,
%
Atmospheric
pressure, kPa
Annual values 3.4 67.2 97.8
10

11. Technology justification
Solar collector types available:
1. Unglazed solar collector
2. Glazed flat-plate solar collector
3. Evacuated tube collector
Collector selection factors:
1. Local weather conditions
2. Cost
3. Installation process complexity
Flat plate solar collector specifications
Kun Tech (Kazakhstan, 2016)
Gross area, m2 2.03
Aperture area, m2 1.78
Fr (tau alpha) coefficient 0.81
Fr UL coefficient, (W/m2)/oC 3.59
Storage capacity, L 100
Pump power, W 50
11

12. Proposed SWH system
The proposed case reduces annual
electricity consumption by 56.3%
compared to the base case.
Total component cost,
KZT
1 257 500
Installation cost, KZT 200 000
System total cost, KZT 1 457 500
12

13. Life Cycle Cost Analysis (LCCA)
1. Cost analysis
2. Financial feasibility analysis
3. Risk and sensitivity analysis
Scenario 1 Scenario 2
Debt ratio, % 90 50 (HCSBK)
Debt, KZT 1 311 750 728 750
Debt interest rate, % 15 5
Debt term, years 5 5
Debt payment, KZT
per year
391 315 168 323
13

14. 3. Results
14

15. Financial & emission reduction results
Scenario 1 Scenario 2
Net Present Value, KZT 1 656 487 1 877 325
Annual life cycle savings, KZT/year 205 642 233 058
Benefit-Cost ratio 12.37 3.58
GHG emission reduction, tCO2 3.3 3.3
15

16. SWH system in Astana  reduction of GHG emissions by 3.3 tCO2/year
per household and annual-life-cycle savings of up to 233058 KZT.
206
1 877
Scenario 1
233
1 656
Scenario 2
Annual life cycle savings, thousand KZTNPV, thousand KZT
3.6
12.4
3.33.3
9.0
10.6
Scenario 2Scenario 1
Equity payback, yearsBenefit-Cost (B-C) ratio
GHG emission reduction, tCO2
Cumulative cash flow
Scenario 1
Cumulative cash flow
Scenario 2
Scenario 1 – 10% Equity, 15% interest rate
Scenario 2 – 50% Equity, 5% interest rate
Source: team analysis
16

17. Financial & Risk and sensitivity analysis results
Cash-flow diagram for Scenario 2 Risk and sensitivity analysis for NPV
Scenario 1 Scenario 2
Median, KZT 1 681 286 1 905 549
Level of risk, % 10 10
Minimum
within level of
confidence, KZT
1 340 661 1 557 918
Maximum
within level of
confidence, KZT
2 039 521 2 262 779
17

18. 4. Conclusions
18

19. Conclusions
The proposed SWH system is a convenient technology for residents of
Astana because:
1. The system has solar fraction of 52% producing 4.5 MWh of heating demand
per year.
2. The electricity consumption decreases from 13.5 MWh to 5.9 MWh
(saving 95515 KZT annually).
3. CO2 emissions are reduced from 5.9 tCO2 to 2.6 tCO2 (equiv. to 0.6 cars and
light trucks not used annually).
4. Nevertheless, payback should be improved with grants or other incentives.
19