What a CST project costs, what it saves, and how long it takes to return — using figures from the project's own detailed project reports rather than generic estimates.
| Fuel being displaced | No support | At 30% | At 50% |
|---|---|---|---|
| Furnace oil, diesel or piped natural gas | 8–10 yr | 4–5 yr | 3–4 yr |
| Coal, biomass or firewood | 10–12 yr | 5–7 yr | 3–5 yr |
| Cooling applications | 10–12 yr | 5–7 yr | 4–5 yr |
Ranges from project sensitivity analysis and detailed project reports. Actual returns depend on local fuel price, solar resource and process operating hours.
A pharmaceutical unit in Sangareddy, Telangana, assessed under the project for boiler feed-water pre-heating using a non-imaging concentrator system:
The system raises make-up water from ambient to 70 °C before it enters the boiler, for about seven hours a day across roughly 300 sunny days. At the 30% incentive level the payback was 7.1 years; with accelerated depreciation applied, 5.3 years. At the current 50% incentive the same project falls within the four-year range.
CST competes against whatever fuel an enterprise currently buys. Where that fuel is already cheap — subsidised biomass, low-cost agricultural residue, captive husk — the saving is small and no reasonable incentive will produce an attractive return. The project's assessment of the Vellore rice-milling cluster reached exactly that conclusion. An honest feasibility study that recommends against CST is a useful result, and costs an enterprise nothing.