Design and Sizing Characteristics of a Solar Thermal Power Plant with Parabolic
Trough Collectors for a Typical Site in Palestine
Aysar M. Yasina and Osama I. Draidia
a Energy Engineering and Environment Department, An Najah National University-Nablus
Email: Aysar.yasin@najah.edu (corresponding author)
Abstract. The concentrated solar power (CSP)
technology has been implemented in some countries and
proved good effectiveness. Palestine has enormous
potential in solar energy which makes CSP technology one
of the feasible options to mitigate the crisis of electricity
shortage and reduce the dependability on Israeli Electric
Company.
The main objective of this research is to perform a design and
sizing of solar thermal power plant with parabolic trough
collectors (PTC) without storage system for Jericho region in
Palestine. This site is proposed due to larger area of land
availability and its closeness to national grid.
The initial nominal power demand of the proposed solar thermal
plant is 10 MWe functioning in a Rankine cycle using Therminol
VP1 thermal oil (HTF) as working fluid. The average monthly
power of the designed plant is 9.98 MW. The capacity factor of
the proposed power plant comes out to be 36%. The design
comprises 20 collector loops with 4 parabolic trough collectors
(PTC) per loop.
Economic analysis is conducted: The levelized cost of electricity
generation by the proposed solar thermal power plant (LCOE) is
found to be 0.16 $/kWh. The annual electricity generation is
about 31.5 GWh and the capital recovery factor is 0.106.
Keywords—direct normal irradiance (DNI), concentrated solar
power, parabolic trough collector (PTC), solar thermal power (STP)
and Economic analysis.
I. INTRODUCTION
Palestine is suffering from severe shortage of conventional
energy sources, this powers the growing interest to generate
electric power from green energies. Palestine buys all of its
needs of fossil fuels from Israel and imports about 90% of its
electricity demand from Israel Electricity Company (IEC).
The only Palestinian electricity production is from the Gaza
power plant, with 140 MW of production total capacity which
covers a part of Gaza city and other surrounding areas [1].
Palestinian Energy Authority PEA signed two agreements
with Egypt and Jordan to supply Rafah (south of Gaza) by 33
kV overhead 17 MW and to supply Jericho in the West Bank
by 33 kV overhead 20 MW, respectively [2].
The Electrical Energy in Palestine represents about 31% of
total energy consumed. The available electrical energy is
insufficient to cover the needs of the local market especially
the growth in electricity consumption reaches about 7%. High
tariff imposed from the IEC compared with neighbor countries
and no purchase agreement with IEC. Gaza power plant
suffers from continuous interruptions as the diesel is not
available all the time [1, 2].
The world interest in the alternative clean energies sources
has been increased due to the rising up in energy consumption,
environmental issues, and also due to the predicted depletion
of the conventional energy sources in the near future.
The generation using clean, secure, reliable, and affordable
renewable energy sources can assist countries to meet their
sustainable development goals. An integration of existing
power plants with renewable energy such as wind and solar
sources is going to be considered as a new strategy should be
applied in the upcoming years.
Palestine has a high solar thermal energy potential which is
around 5.46 kWh/m2.day and the main solar thermal
applications is water heating, space heating, crop and
vegetable drying and green house agriculture.
Utilizing renewable energy for electricity generation is the
main motivation behind making Palestinian Renewable
Energy Strategy by PEA. The objective of this strategy is to o
generate 240 GWh electricity from renewable energy sources
RES which represents about 10% of electrical energy demand
by 2020[3].
Utilizing concentrated solar thermal power (CSP)
technology is considered in renewable energy RE strategy
which represents about 15% (20MW) from the predicted
generated power [3].
Worldwide CSP technology has attracted researchers and
utilities which in role participates in increasing public and
private initiatives towards furthering researches in the field of
CSP and CSP projects implementation [4, 5].
Pilot plants and projects have been installed in many
countries and now CSP is a well-known and reliable
technology, although new CSP technologies and large power
plants are being experimented [6].

The CSP systems make use of concentrating mirrors to
collect the sunlight as heat. This collected heat raises the
temperature of a working fluid significantly high. A
conventional thermal power block extracts the heat from
working fluid and drives a steam engine [7].
Three main types of CSP plant technology were developed
and commercialized so far, can be identified [7]: Troughs,
Towers and Dishes. Among them Parabolic Trough Solar
Collector (PTSC) is currently the most proven solar thermal
electric technology.
This paper presents design and sizing characteristics of a
grid connected solar thermal power plant with parabolic
trough collectors for a typical site in Palestine with a net
capacity of 10 MW. Jericho city is selected due to larger area
of land availability and because it is a deserted flat land
located in the vicinity of the main Jericho's electrical
substation.
The paper is organized as follows: Section 2 discusses the
selected site data and characteristics. The description of solar
thermal power plant is addressed in Section 3. Section 4
discusses the design and sizing of a solar field of the
cylindrical parabolic collector. The pipes layout is addressed
in section 5. Section 6 discusses the financial evaluation of
CSP technologies; and finally the conclusion of the study is
addressed in Section 7.
II. SEELCTED SITE DATA AND CHARACTERSTICS
Palestine lies on the western edge of the Asian continent and
the eastern extremity of the Mediterranean Sea, between
34º20’– 35º30’ E and 31º10’– 32º30’ N. Palestine’s elevation
ranges from 300 m below sea level in the Jordan Valley, to sea
level along the Gaza Strip seashore, reaching 1000 m above sea
level in some locations in West Bank.
The location of the proposed concentrated solar thermal
power plant is Jericho city which considered one of the main
provinces of Palestine. Jericho city is located near the Jordan
River as shown in Figure 1 in the West Bank.
Figure 1 Jericho Location in the Map [8]
It is located 230 m below sea level. Jericho is an attractive
place because of constant sunshine and abundant water from
the spring. The average annual temperature in Jericho is nearly
to 23°C. The average temperature in January is 13.9°C and in
July about 30.2°C [8].
The site selection for constructing a Parabolic Trough Solar
Collector (PTSC) is subjected to some essential requirements
which must be fulfilled in order to ensure the economic power
generation [9-13]:
The direct normal irradiation (DNI) should be greater than
1900 kWh/m2/year (5.2 kWh/m2/day) and wind speed
should be less than 15.64 m/s which is applied to Jericho
that has an annual direct normal radiation 2071
kWh/m /year [8] and annual wind speed 1.25 m/s [14]. The
2
support structure of solar collector assembly is designed to
withstand certain wind load.
To get maximum incident solar radiation, one axis sun
tracking mechanism should be used.
Flat land with an overall slope of less than 1 - 3%. Jericho
is considered one of flat areas in Palestine with slope
inclination 1.4 %.
Availability of convenient grid connection, this is applied
in the proposed site as it is close to the general grid of
Jericho city.[2]
The proposed site in Jericho province has enough water
resources and good transportation facilities.
Availability of back up fuel.
III. SYSTEM DESCRIPTION
Great resemblance between conventional fossil-fuel power
plant and solar thermal power plant (STPP), the main
difference is in heat generation method. Conventional power
generation uses the heat source from burning the fossil fuels
while STPP uses radiant energy from the sun. A description of
STPP is illustrated in Figure 2.
Figure 2 Description of solar thermal power plant without
storage
The main parts of the system are: the solar field, power
block which contains heat exchanger (as steam boiler),
turbine, condenser, pump and generator.
 A heat transfer fluid (HTF) gains heat as it goes through Table3 shows the technical characteristics of the cylindrical
the collectors and passes it to the power block by using heat parabolic collector [18].
exchanger which is resulting in generating high-pressure
steam. The steam is then fed to turbine/generator to produce Table 3 Technical Characteristics of the Cylindrical Parabolic
electricity. The spent steam from the turbine is condensed in a Collector
standard condenser connected to a mechanical draft wet Length of collector (m) 150
cooling tower and then it returned to the heat exchangers Opening width (m) 5.77
through pumps to be transformed back into steam [15]. Opening area (m2) 817.5
Outer diameter of the receiver (m) 0.07
Inner diameter of the receiver (m) 0.065
IV. DESIGN AND SIZING OF A SOLAR THERMAL POWER STATION
Optical efficiency 0.77
WITH CYLINDRICAL PARABOLIC COLLECTORS
Overall thermal loss coefficient at Tabs=370ºC 5.5
The design of a solar field is influenced by technical and Tamb=20ºC, (W/m2C)
characteristics of the selected collectors, the location of the Dirt factor 0.97
plant and the climate data. All these parameters are called Incidence angle modifier for 18.7 º 0.97
design-point conditions. Table1 shows the set data of the Receiver rugosity (m) 4.6·10-5
proposed solar thermal power plant. Length of the connection pipe between the 11
collectors (m)
Table 1 Set Data for the Solar Thermal Power Plant Number of 90º elbows between collectors 11
Power capacity of the solar thermal power plant 10 MW
The inlet temperature in the solar field 293ºC The next step is the determination of the optimum design for
The outlet temperature from the solar field 393ºC the plant. The useful energy gain of the collector is
The selection of inlet and outlet temperatures are based on calculated using eqn(1) [18]:
heat transfer fluid (HTF) which is Therminol VP-1. The VP-1
operates on two phases, liquid phase lies between (12ºC -
400ºC) and vapor phase lies between (260ºC - 400ºC) [16]. In
this paper, the vapor phase has been selected as one of
operating conditions of this solar thermal power plant (STPP). Where FR is the collector heat removal factor, Aa is aperture
area of concentrator 817.5 m2, Ar is the receiver area =
To select the suitable temperature of the fluid at the solar field 3.85·10-3 m2, Ti is the fluid inlet temperature 293 ºC, Ta is
outlet, it must be at least 15 ºC higher than the demanded ambient temperature 35 ºC, UL is the heat loss coefficient 5.5
steam temperature by the process to be supplied to compensate W/m2· ºC and S is absorbed solar radiation which can be
the thermal loss between the solar field outlet and steam calculated using eqn(2).
generator inlet which is 5-7 ºC [6]. In this paper a superheated
steam has been selected as a working fluid for the block power
at 378 ºC.
Optical parameters comprise absorbance (α = 0.94),
The selected solar collector model is EUROTROUGH because transmittance (τ = 0.945), reflectance ( = 0.92), intercept
of its high-performance and flexibility as it can work for both (
utility scale and industrial process applications. Operating factor ( = 0.92) and incident angle modifier = 1) are
temperatures over 500°C may be reached with optical considered in the calculation of absorbed radiation [19].
concentration of 82:1[17]. The structure geometry is
compatible with the standard receiver tubes and mirror panels Literature survey reveals that the design point for parabolic
of the market [17]. Table2 summarizes the characteristics of trough solar field is June, 12 'o'clock in the noon. The incident
the proposed solar field. radiation ( ) on the selected site at design point is 730 W/m2-
Table 2 Data of the Solar Field day. Solving eqn. (1) for the design point gives the useful heat
Type of collector EUROTROUGH gain (Qu) to be 432 kW per collector.
Thermal fluid Therminol VP-1
The output temperature of a collector To is found to be 25ºC
Limit temperature of the fluid 398ºC using eqn. (3).:
Specific heat of the fluid at 343ºC 2.436 kJ/kgºC
Orientation of the collector axis (of the E-W
field)
Configuration of the supply pipes Central feeding Where To is outlet temperature, Ti is inlet temperature, m is
Nominal mass flow per collector loop 7 kg/s mass flow rate of HTF and cp is specific heat capacity of HTF.
The values of these parameters are shown in Table 2. The
number of collectors per loop is 4 as the desired outlet
temperature of 393 ºC (total rise is 100 ºC). Figure 3 shows
the collector loop configuration to give a total rise of 100 ºC in
the HTF temperature.

Figure 4 Direct-return Piping Layout

The reverse-return layout is shown in Figure 5. It has an

Figure 3 A collector loop raising the temperature of HTF by
100 ºC.
The thermal energy required from the solar field is 33MW and
it is estimated using eqn.(4).
inherently more balanced flow. While balancing valves
may still be required, the pressure loss is much lower than
in a direct-return configuration. Additional heat loss due to
The extra length of piping at the solar field inle, although
this greatly depends on the solar field inlet temperature. If
this temperature is low, additional heat loss is negligible
[22].

Where the proposed STPP net power is 10 MW, electrical

generator efficiency = 0.96 (nominal), boiler efficiency = 0.90
[20], turbine efficiency = 0.37 [20], electrical parasitics = 0.65
MW [11].

The total number of collector loops required to provide this

thermal energy is 19 and this given by the following relation.
Number of loops required = (Pth / Output power per collector) /
No. of collectors per loop
V. PIPES LAYOUT
After sizing the solar field, the layout of piping must be taken
into account. Three basic layouts are used in solar fields with
PTCs. In the three layouts, the hot outlet piping is shorter than
the cold inlet piping to minimize thermal losses [22].
The common piping layouts are the direct-return piping
layout, reverse-return piping layout and the center-feed piping
Layout.
Figure 5 Reverse-return Piping Layout
The center-feed configuration is shown in Figure 6. It is the
most widely used layout for large solar fields. The pressure
loss also in the solar field is greater which requires
installaitions of balancing valves at the row inlets.
This layout minimizes the total amount of piping because
there is no pipe running the length of the collector row. There
is also direct access to each collector row without buried
pipes.

The Direct-return piping layout configuration is shown in

Figure 4. It is considered the simplest and probably the most
widely used in small solar field scales. Its main disadvantage
is that there is a greater difference in the pressure between the
inlets in parallel rows. Balancing valves must be used to keep
flow rates the same in each row. These valves cause a
significant pressure drop at the beginning of the array, which
in turn will contribute to the total system loss pressure. The
result is higher parasitic energy consumption than for the
reverse-return layout, where the fluid enters the collector array
at the opposite end [22].
Figure 6 Center-feed Piping Layout
In this paper, the central feeding piping configuration has
been selected for its characteristics and a “T” field layout is
selected for the collector field [12] which requires an equal
number of collector distribution to ensure uniform hydraulic
balance in the system. Hence the number of collector loops is
modified to 20. Calculating the output power generated with VI. FINANCIAL EVALUATION OF CSP TECHNOLOGIES
20 loops gives 11 MW net. The “I” layout of the solar
collector field is shown in Figure 7.
In the previous sections of the paper, the metrological data and
technical details of the proposed STPP in Jericho are
described. The annual electricity generation (AEG) by the
proposed STPP can be estimated using eqn.(6):

Where Pcsp represents the capacity of the CSP system and

CFcsp the capacity factor of the CSP system which is found to
be 0.36.
The levelized cost of energy (LCOE) is the most commonly
used parameter for the feasibility study of the solar thermal
power plant, it can be estimated using eqn.(7)[24]. LCOE can
be significantly affected by the inputs and assumptions
proposed [24].

Where Ccsp represents the capital cost of CSP system,

the annual operational and maintenance cost, and CRF the
capital recovery factor which can be estimated as shown in
Figure 7 Solar field layout of the proposed design
eqn.(8).
Table 4 shows the average of monthly electrical power
generated of the proposed parabolic trough solar thermal
power plant (PTSTPP) based on average direct normal
irradiation [8] and average sun hours [14] via equation (5):- Where d is the discount rate and tcsp the useful lifetime of the
CSP system.
Pavg_load = Qth_col*total collectors* ηelect.gen * ηturbine * ηBoiler
To evaluate numbers of years needed for the investment to be
paid back, discount payback period (DPP) in a CSP project
Table 4 Average Monthly Output Power
Month Average Direct Average Average can be determined using eqn.(9) [25].
Normal Irradiation Sun Pout
[kWh/m2] hours [MW]
January 116 5.9 9.60
February 118 6.5 9.64
Where Bi represents the annual benefit accrued to the investor
March 152 7.0 10.6
=
April 156 9.0 8.80 by selling the electricity generated by CSP system, Ci ( )
May 212 9.8 10.6 represents the annual cost of operation and maintenance of the
June 256 11.0 11.74 CSP project. Bi can be estimated using eqn.(10).
July 251 11.3 10.85
August 228 10.8 10.30
September 189 9.1 10.48
October 144 8.5 8.30
Where is the purchase price of electricity delivered by the
November 127 8.2 7.82 CSP system. The benefit to cost (B/C) ratio of the CSP system
December 121 6.0 9.84 has been determined eqn.(11).
Total 2071 8.6 9.98
The net annual benefit accrued to the investor (Bi-Ci) assumed The discounted payback period (DPP), annual benefit accrued
to be uniform over the useful life of the CSP project. to the investor (Bi), benefit to cost ratio (B/C), and net present
value (NPV) are affected by purchase price of electricity
The following expression has been used to determine Net delivered by the STPP (Pe) which in turn leads to viability of
present value (NPV) of the CSP system. scenario 2 and C due to given incentives rather than scenario
3.
VII. CONCLUSION
This paper discusses sizing and design characteristics of a
solar thermal power plant in Jericho (Palestine) using
parabolic trough collectors. It is found that 20 collector loops
The salvage value of the CSP system at the end of its useful with 4 parabolic trough collectors per loop are needed to
life has been assumed to be negligibly small. Therefore, it has generate 10MW. The central feeding piping configuration has
been omitted from the NPV equation.
been selected for its characteristics and a “T” field layout is
Table 5 shows the input parameters used in the techno- selected for the collector field.
economic evaluation of the proposed STPP.
The average of monthly electrical power generated of the
Table 5 Techno-economic evaluation parameters of STPP proposed parabolic trough solar thermal power plant is
Parameters Symbol Value estimated to 31.5 GWh and the capacity factor is found to be
Capital cost of CSP [26] Ccsp 4000 $/kW 36% based on 8.6 hours of daily operation. The levelized cost
Capacity of CSP Pcsp 10MW of electricity generation by the proposed solar thermal power
plant (LCOE) is found to be 0.16 $/kWh.
Annual repair and maintenance
cost of CSP as a fraction 0.02
Different scenarios have been studied for the purchase price of
Discount rate d 0.1 electricity generated by the proposed plant and it is found that
Useful lifetime of CSP system Tcsp 30 years 5% increase on the LCOE makes the investment feasible.
Capacity factor of CSP system CFcsp 0.36
The annual electricity generation AEG 31536 MWh The economic benefits from emission reductions caused by
Capital Recovery Factor CRF 0.106 applying solar thermal power technology is not taken in the
Levelized Cost of Energy LCOE 0.16 $/KWh financial analysis of this study. Better LCOE will be obtained
in case of benefiting from emission reductions.
Three scenarios have been proposed for the purchase price of
the electricity generated by the proposed STPP. In each The parabolic trough solar thermal power technology is one of
scenario financial evaluation is performed. the best solutions to meet the energy shortage and achieve the
The first scenario proposed the purchase price the same as green energy goals for Palestine. This is approved by the
LCOE which is 0.16 $/kWh. The second scenario proposed economic analysis together with social benefits and stable
purchase price of 0.168 $/kWh (5% incentive). The third price of the supplied energy as well as the reduced impact on
scenario proposed purchase price of 0.178 $/kWh (10% the environment.
incentive).
REFERENCES
Table 6 shows financial evaluation of STPP for different
Scenarios. [1] Countery Report of Palstine- Solaterm Project,
Palestinian Energy and Environment Research Center-
Table 6 Financial Evaluation of STPP for different Scenarios PEC, February 2007
Bi DPP NPV [2] Paving the way for MSP- country report of Palestine,
M$ years (B/C) M$ Palestinian Energy and Environment Research Center-
PEC, 2012
Scenario 1 (purchase [3] Renewable Energy Strategy in Palestine, Palestinian
2.06 7.1 1.61 19.404
price 0.16 $/kWh) Energy Authority, 2012.
Scenario 2 (purchase [4] EU (European Union), 2009. Article 9 of Directive
2.40 6.7 1.71 22.287
price 0.168 $/kWh) 2009/28/EC of the European Parliament and of the
Scenario 3 (purchase Council of 23 April 2009 on the promotion of the use of
2.80 6.3 1.81 28.890 energy from renewable sources and amending and
price 0.178 $/kWh) subsequently repealing Directives 2001/77/EC and
2003/30/EC.
The levelized cost of energy LCOE is constant in all three [5] Vallentin, D., Viebahn, P., 2009. Economic Opportunities
for the German Industry Resulting from a Global
scenario and it can be decreased by considering emission Deployment of CSP (Concentrated Solar Power)
reduction cost. Technologies. Study on behalf of Greenpeace Germany
and DESERTEC foundation (in German)
 [6] Keith Lovegrove and Wes Stein, Concentrating solar [22] Yogi Goswami, Frank Kreith, Energy Conversion, CRC
power technology Principles - developments and Press, Taylor & Francis Group, Boca Raton & London &
applications book, first edition, Woodhead Publishing New York.
Limited, 2012. [23] B. Kelly, D. Kearney, Parabolic Trough Solar System
[7] S. Saleem and A. ul Asar, 2014.Analysis & Design of Piping Model, Subcontract Report NREL/SR-550-40165
Parabolic Trough Solar Thermal Power Plant for Typical July 2006
Sites of Pakistan, IOSR Journal of Electrical and [24] J. Dersch, et al., “Trough integration in to power plants-a
Electronics Engineering.9(3).pp 2320-3331 study on the performance and economy of integrated solar
[8] Marcel Suri, Nada Suriova, Juraj Betak, Branislav combined cycle systems,” Energy. vol. 29, pp. 947–959,
Schnierer, Tomas Cebecauer, Artur Skoczek, Ivona 2004.
Ferechova, Veronika Madlenakova,Atlas of Solar [25] Kandpal, T.C., Garg, H.P., 2003. Financial Evaluation of
Resources, Palestinian Territories, Reference No 126- Renewable Energy Technologies. Macmillan India Ltd.,
01/2014, Date 4 August 2014. New Delhi.
[9] Mingzhi Zhao; Zhizhang Liu; Qingzhu Zhang; Feasibility [26] IRENA working paper, Concentrating solar power, cost
Analysis of Constructing Parabolic Trough Solar Thermal analysis series, Volume 1:Power sector, Issue 2/5, link:
Power Plant in Inner Mongolia of China, APPEEC 2009, http://www.irena.org/Publications.
Asia-Pacific Power and Energy Engineering Conference,
2009.
[10] Nusrat Kamal Raja, M. Shahid Khalil, Syed Athar
Masood, Muhammad Shaheen, Design and
Manufacturing of Parabolic Trough Solar Collector
System for a Developing Country Pakistan, Journal of
American Science, 2011.
[11] Bin Yang; Jun Zhao; Wenbin Yao; Qiang Zhu; Hang Qu,
Feasibility and Potential of Parabolic Trough Solar
Thermal Power Plants in Tibet of China, APPEEC 2010,
Asia-Pacific Power and Energy Engineering Conference
2010
[12] Richard G. Allen, Ricardo Trezza, Masahiro Tasumi,
Analytical integrated functions for daily solar radiation on
slopes, Agricultural and Forest Meteorology 139 (2006)
55–73
[13] Nusrat Kamal Raja, M. Shahid Khalil, Syed Athar
Masood, Muhammad Shaheen, Design and
Manufacturing of Parabolic Trough Solar Collector
System for a Developing Country Pakistan, Journal of
American Science, 2011.

[14] PCBS- Palestinian Central Bureau of Statistics, link:

http://www.pcbs.gov.ps/Portals/_Rainbow/Documents/M
et-AN-2010-A-15.htm.
[15] I.L. Garcia, J.L. Alvarez, and D. Blanco, “Performance
model for parabolic trough solar thermal power plants
with thermal storage: Comparison to operating plant
data,” Sol. Energy. vol. 85, pp. 2443–2460, 2011.
[16] Heat Transfer Fluid THERMINOL VP-1
.http://www.therminol.com/products/Therminol-VP1, june 2015
[17] Michael Geyer, Eckhard Lüpfert, Rafael Osuna,
EUROTROUGH - Parabolic Trough Collector Developed
for Cost Efficient Solar Power Generation, 11th
SolarPACES International Symposium on Concentrated
Solar Power and Chemical Energy Technologies, Sept 4-
6, 2002, Zurich, Switzerland.
[18] Spiru PARASCHIV, Simona Lizica PARASCHIV, Ion V.
ION, Nicuşor VATACHI, Design and sizing
Characteristics of a Solar Thermal Power Plant with
Cylindrical Parabolic Concentrators in Dobrogea Region,
DUNĂREA DE JOS“ UNIVERSITY OF GALAŢI,
Romania
[19] Duffie, J.A. and Beckman, W.A, Solar Engineering of
Thermal Processes, 3rd Edition New York, USA 2005.
[20] Al-Nasser, A.M, Performance and Economics of a Solar
Thermal Power Generation Plant in Jubail, Saudi Arabia:
Parabolic Trough Collector, IEEE International Energy
Conference and Exhibition (EnergyCon), 2010
[21] Neha Jain, Reduction in Parasitic Load in a Solar Thermal
Power Plant to Improve its Efficiency, International
Journal of Scientific Research and Reviews, 24-29
(2013), link: http://www.ijsrr.org.

View publication stats