Preliminary Evaluation of a Rooftop Grid-Connected Photovoltaic System Installation under the Climatic Conditions of Texas (USA)
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. General Description
2.1. Site and Meteorological Data
2.2. PV System
3. Performance Analysis Methodologies
3.1. Technical Analysis
3.1.1. Calculation of Utilizable Rooftop Area
3.1.2. Calculation of PV Modules Number Considering Shading Effect and Air Circulation
3.1.3. Calculation of Total Solar Radiation on Tilted PV Modules
3.1.4. Calculation of Operating Temperature Effect on PV Modules Efficiency
3.1.5. Calculations of PV System Energy Output
3.1.6. Performance Analysis of PV System
3.2. Economic and Environmental Analysis
4. Results and Discussion
4.1. Total Number of Modules
4.2. Estimation of Various Solar Irradiances
4.3. Temperature Effect on PV Module Performance
4.4. Energy Output
4.5. Technical Assessment Results
4.6. Economic Assessment Results
4.7. Environmental Assessment Results
5. Comparison with Existing Roof-Mounted and Grid-Connected PV Systems
6. Conclusions
- The prospects of the implementation of a PV system on rooftop buildings in Texas was investigated for the first time in this study to overcome the lack of performance behavior data of this technology, specifically for the selected location.
- With the lack of abundant studies for evaluating the rooftop grid-tied PV systems in the existing literature over a few decades ago, the potential of the proposed PV system in this study has been evaluated by comparing its technical, economic, and environmental indicators to other PV solar systems in the existing literature that are fairly similar to the proposed system.
- The simplicity and precision of the followed performance analysis and models in the study over a broad range of climatic conditions would provide confidence that the analysis can be easily generalized to other regions in Texas or around the world.
- The major challenge of installing PV modules is the availability of sufficient area for this purpose. The number of PV modules was calculated to be 9601 along with considering sufficient space for shadow avoidance, maintenance service, and other facilities. According to the utilization factor of 50% for the rooftop, the utilized area can be exploited to install the PV system avoiding the land cost of 18,573.0673 m2 that may be used for other purposes such as agricultural and urban activities.
- It seems that the performance of the solar PV system, which is used the mode of horizontal N–S axis with E–W tracking, is more effective for capturing more amount of the beam, diffuse, and ground-reflected irradiance falling on the PV modules surface than the mode of horizontal E–W axis with N–S tracking in proportion to the cosine of the incidence angle, especially for months of February to October. While the mode of horizontal E–W axis with N–S tracking provides the higher performance during the winter season including November, December, and January.
- The amount of contribution of each type of solar irradiance in the total energy amount that may be received by PV modules at the selected site has been estimated.
- The obtained values for minimum and maximum of the PV cell efficiency have indicated fairly good performance compared to available PV systems in the current literature. The variation of cell temperature and the total absorbed solar irradiance on its surface has been considered to calculate efficiencies that are 15.05 and 20.65 % respectively using horizontal N–S axis with E–W tracking, while 15.26 and 20.67% respectively using horizontal E–W axis with N–S tracking.
- The amount of electricity generated is fine to mitigate adopting fossil fuels. The predicted DC energy outputs of the PV system varies from 13.12 MWh/day in December to 36.24 MWh/day in June with using a horizontal N–S axis with E–W tracking, and from 14.53 MWh/day to 32.08 MWh/day with using a horizontal E–W axis with N–S tracking. The predicted AC energy injected into the grid for each month varies from 12.46 MWh/day in December to 34.43 MWh/day in June with using a horizontal N–S axis with E–W tracking, and from 13.80 MWh/day to 30.48 MWh/day with using a horizontal E–W axis with N–S tracking.
- It is obvious that the high value of for the proposed system in Texas will make it has the best performance in comparison with PV systems installed in other countries around the world. The highest, average, and lowest final yield (), which is used to measure the productivity of the system, were found to being in the range of 4.139–10.247 kWh/kWp/day, 3.855–8.364 kWh/kWp/day, and 3.710–7.925 kWh/kWp/day, respectively for horizontal N–S axis with E–W tracking, while 4.776–9.071 kWh/kWp/day, 4.375–7.584 kW h/kWp/day, and 4.108–7.072 kWh/kWp/day respectively for horizontal E–W axis with N–S tracking.
- The capacity factor (CF) was found to vary between 16.1% in December and 34.85% in June for a horizontal N–S axis with E–W tracking, 18.23% in December, and 31.60% in June for a horizontal E–W axis with N–S tracking. While the performance ratio (PR) was between 82–98.91%, which is higher than PR values of existing roof-mounted and grid-connected PV systems around the world.
- The economic evaluation has been performed using technical results and three economic criteria. The estimated values of LCOE, ROI, and PBP were 5.38 c/kWh, 22.64%, and 3.75 years for the proposed system (without subsidy). These three economic indicators values refer that the system is worthy of investment compared to existing roof-mounted and grid-connected PV systems and traditional power plants.
- The proposed PV system can result in a harmful emission reduction of 20,077 metric tonCO2/year using a horizontal N–S axis with E–W tracking, and 18,217 metric tonCO2/year using a horizontal E–W axis with N–S tracking.
- The result of the comparison for the proposed PV system with other PV systems located in different sites around the world showed that their performance does not only depend on solar radiation intensity, but the operational and climatic conditions should be considered for any site which is selected to install the PV system.
Author Contributions
Funding
Conflicts of Interest
Nomenclature
Area of a PV module (m2) | |
AFC | Annualized fixed cost (Annual FCI depreciation) ($/year) |
AOC | Annualized operating cost ($/year) |
CE | Carbon emission (metric tonCO2/year) |
CF | Capacity factor |
E | Electrical energy production of PV system (kWh/day) |
Electrical energy generated in the year t (kWh) | |
EC | Avoided cost of purchasing electricity ($) |
FC | Avoided cost of a fuel needed during the production of electric energy |
Fuel cost in the year t ($) | |
($) | |
FCIo | Initial value of the depreciable FCI |
FCIs | Salvage or scrap value of the FCI at the end of the service life ($) |
Monthly average hourly diffuse irradiance on a tilted surface (Wh/m2) | |
Monthly average hourly diffuse irradiance for normal incidence (Wh/m2) | |
Monthly average hourly ground-reflected irradiance on a tilted surface (Wh/m2) | |
Investment cost in the year ($) | |
Monthly average hourly beam irradiance on a tilted surface (Wh/m2) | |
Monthly average hourly beam irradiance for normal incidence (Wh/m2) | |
Absorbed solar irradiance on a tilted surface | |
LCOE | Levelized cost of energy ($/kWh) |
Array capture losses | |
System captures losses | |
Service life of the property in years | |
Number of sunny days | |
Ground albedo (based on surface type) | |
Operating and maintenance cost in the year t ($) | |
PBP | Payback period (year) |
PR | Performance ratio |
ROI | Return on investment |
TAC | Annualized cost ($/year) |
Total capital investment ($) | |
Module operating temperature | |
Air temperature | |
Normal operating cell temperature | |
Working capital investment | |
Include array yield | |
Reference yield | |
Array yield | |
Final yield | |
Reference yield | |
Greek Symbols | - |
Module efficiency | |
Fractional decrease of module efficiency per unit temperature increase | |
θ | Incident angle (°) |
β | Tilt angle (°) |
Inverter efficiency | |
Distribution losses | |
Grid absorption rate | |
Solar altitude angle | |
ϕ | Solar zenith angle |
Declination |
Appendix A
Month | ||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Hour | January | February | March | April | May | June | July | August | September | October | November | December |
0.5 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
1.5 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
2.5 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
3.5 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
4.5 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
5.5 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
6.5 | 0 | 0 | 1.5 | 21.4 | 167.6 | 243.9 | 200.5 | 164.6 | 78.5 | 6 | 0 | 0 |
7.5 | 20.7 | 161.8 | 239.4 | 114.4 | 267.9 | 341.6 | 325.9 | 393.2 | 300.8 | 308.7 | 265.7 | 108.9 |
8.5 | 289.4 | 340.9 | 357.9 | 236.4 | 373.6 | 514.7 | 470.2 | 546.2 | 470.9 | 453.3 | 444.2 | 329.4 |
9.5 | 338.1 | 389.0 | 453.7 | 328.7 | 416.0 | 581.5 | 523.9 | 612.8 | 531 | 535.7 | 515.4 | 394.2 |
10.5 | 434.4 | 421.4 | 477.4 | 383.9 | 473.7 | 628.9 | 543.7 | 711.1 | 621.3 | 583.5 | 531.2 | 444.5 |
11.5 | 479.7 | 449.1 | 510.5 | 450.8 | 467.1 | 552 | 560.2 | 590.5 | 626.2 | 643.9 | 603.1 | 523.7 |
12.5 | 491.9 | 438.7 | 482.5 | 483.0 | 466.1 | 593.8 | 590.1 | 659.0 | 572.8 | 653.6 | 575.4 | 483.0 |
13.5 | 576.8 | 463.5 | 496.4 | 447.9 | 468.1 | 553.7 | 504.3 | 580 | 554.3 | 544.3 | 560.5 | 445.6 |
14.5 | 551.0 | 506.0 | 505.5 | 405.3 | 460.4 | 431.7 | 534.4 | 522.5 | 509.8 | 545.5 | 556.1 | 499.0 |
15.5 | 448.8 | 460.8 | 461.7 | 326.7 | 499.8 | 544.3 | 537.2 | 462.7 | 442.5 | 523.4 | 462.4 | 461.8 |
16.5 | 418.7 | 417.9 | 422.2 | 183.1 | 491.5 | 458.0 | 484.9 | 473.2 | 426.0 | 417.0 | 340.8 | 276.7 |
17.5 | 144.2 | 285.8 | 280.2 | 75.2 | 380.8 | 359.0 | 362.8 | 380.8 | 233.8 | 136.4 | 0 | 0 |
18.5 | 0 | 0 | 5.2 | 16.6 | 180.2 | 199.3 | 238.5 | 146.0 | 1.4 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
19.5 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
20.5 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
21.5 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
22.5 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
23.5 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
Month | ||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Hour | January | February | March | April | May | June | July | August | September | October | November | December |
0.5 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
1.5 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
2.5 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
3.5 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
4.5 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
5.5 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0.03 | 0.25 | 24.5 | 3.1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
6.5 | 0 | 0 | 0.8 | 28.4 | 80.7 | 113.2 | 55.8 | 46.7 | 1.1 | 0.7 | 0 | 0 |
7.5 | 7.5 | 8.3 | 79.5 | 84.4 | 144.8 | 220.4 | 115.9 | 113.3 | 88.4 | 72.7 | 30.2 | 1.8 |
8.5 | 45.3 | 89.7 | 113.3 | 119.4 | 197.7 | 166.0 | 175.9 | 157.6 | 134.6 | 116.6 | 79.4 | 78.8 |
9.5 | 85.4 | 134.5 | 158.6 | 169.5 | 231.2 | 260.5 | 231.5 | 203.2 | 174.2 | 172 | 123.7 | 103.3 |
10.5 | 101.2 | 158.8 | 189.4 | 209.6 | 276.7 | 320.2 | 282.3 | 232.5 | 184.5 | 186.4 | 125.8 | 115.7 |
11.5 | 120.5 | 176.7 | 189.9 | 208.8 | 314.3 | 359.1 | 307.7 | 250.4 | 255.4 | 196.3 | 152.2 | 147.7 |
12.5 | 143.4 | 169.6 | 198.2 | 217.9 | 309.9 | 342.2 | 333.2 | 242.8 | 256.2 | 207.7 | 150.4 | 151.7 |
13.5 | 140.0 | 184.0 | 206.5 | 221.3 | 290.0 | 412.2 | 315.1 | 250.6 | 243.8 | 193.4 | 152.0 | 136.0 |
14.5 | 124.7 | 178.7 | 190.0 | 200.5 | 304.6 | 361.8 | 334.6 | 216.0 | 189.9 | 170.9 | 129.7 | 118.3 |
15.5 | 88.4 | 146.0 | 163.1 | 161.3 | 236.9 | 393.4 | 248.4 | 190.8 | 157.9 | 132.0 | 87.9 | 86.9 |
16.5 | 57.2 | 95.4 | 118.1 | 122.2 | 172.4 | 249.6 | 171.5 | 166.1 | 127.6 | 72.2 | 43.8 | 44.1 |
17.5 | 13.9 | 34.1 | 54.7 | 66.5 | 102.0 | 208.9 | 119.1 | 92 | 59.2 | 19.5 | 0.2 | 0.06 |
18.5 | 0 | 0 | 2.2 | 21.3 | 40.6 | 131.6 | 57.1 | 28.7 | 2.4 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
19.5 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 4.3 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
20.5 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
21.5 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
22.5 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
23.5 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
Month | January | February | March | April | May | June | July | August | September | October | November | December |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Monthly mean humidity (%) | 69 | 69 | 67 | 68 | 70 | 69 | 66 | 63 | 65 | 66 | 69 | 71 |
Monthly mean wind speed (mph) | 7 | 8 | 8 | 8 | 8 | 7 | 6 | 5 | 6 | 6 | 7 | 7 |
Appendix B
Building | Total Roof Area (m2) |
---|---|
Emerging Technologies (ETB) | 3834.04 |
Zachry Engineering Education Complex | 6927.69 |
WEB | 4560.84 |
Dwight Look Engineering | 1334.13 |
Zachry Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering | 1746.86 |
Haynes Engineering (HEB) | 869.86 |
Ernest Langford Architecture Center & Department of Visualization | 1513.35 |
Preston Geren Auditorium & Architecture Building B | 835.99 |
Department of Computer Science & Engineering | 1800.44 |
Department of Biological and Agricultural Engineering | 744.43 |
Department of Architecture | 2546.32 |
Liberal Arts and Humanities & Department of Performance studies | 2395.16 |
Help Desk Central | 1673.69 |
Texas A&M University Press | 2181.61 |
Music Activities Center | 1982.1793 |
John J Koldus | 4052.84 |
Rudder Complex | 4654.47 |
Memorial Student Center | 4483.33 |
Corps of Cadets & Trigon | 1024.62 |
Psychology | 1739.6 |
Department of Biology | 679.2 |
Heldenfels Hall | 2252 |
Student Computing Center | 4104.82 |
Evans Library | 10,604.67 |
Department of History | 981.92 |
Department of Construction Science | 995.35 |
College of Liberal Arts | 694.8 |
Department of Philosophy (YMCA) | 678.77 |
Student Health Services | 1681.66 |
Hullabaloo Hall | 4616.19 |
Department of Communication | 847.7 |
Cushing Memorial Library and Archives | 1147.61 |
KANM | 2844.87 |
Department of Mechanical Engineering | 1005.76 |
Blocker | 4905.11 |
Mitchell Physics | 1009.14 |
Artie McFerrin Department of Chemical Engineering | 938 |
Parameter | Specifications |
---|---|
PV Brand | AstroHalo |
Model No. | CHSM6612M Series |
Type | Monocrystalline |
Nominal power (Wp) | 350 |
Module efficiency (%) | 18.1 |
Rated voltage (Vmpp) at STC | 38.58 V |
Rated current (lmpp) at STC | 9.08 A |
Open circuit voltage, Voc (V) at STC | 47.01 V |
Short circuit current, Isc (A) at STC | 9.53 A |
Maximum system voltage (V) | 1000 VDC |
Normal operating cell temperature (NOCT) (°C) | 46 ± 2 °C |
Temperature coefficient (Pmpp) (%/°C) | −0.376 |
Temperature coefficient (ISC) (%/°C) | +0.043 |
Temperature coefficient (Voc) (%/°C) | −0.282 |
Module Area (m2) | 1.934 |
Module weight (Kg) | 21.8 |
Parameter | Specifications |
---|---|
Model | ATO-LTC25000 |
Input data (DC) | |
Recommended PV power (kW) | 27 |
Voltage range (V) | 200–820 |
Nominal input voltage (V) | 850 |
Output data (AC) | |
Maximum output power (kW) | 25 |
Maximum continuous output current (A) | 38 |
Max. Efficiency (%) | 98.6 |
MPPT Efficiency (%) | 99.5 |
References
- International Energy Agency. Technology Roadmap: Solar Photovoltaic Energy; International Energy Agency: Paris, France, 2014. [Google Scholar]
- Al-Aboosi, F.Y. Models and hierarchical methodologies for evaluating solar energy availability under different sky con-ditions toward enhancing concentrating solar collectors use: Texas as a case study. Int. J. Energy Environ. Eng. 2020, 11, 177–205. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Díez-Mediavilla, M.; Alonso-Tristán, C.; Rodríguez-Amigo, M.; García-Calderón, T.; Dieste-Velasco, M. Performance analysis of PV plants: Optimization for improving profitability. Energy Convers. Manag. 2012, 54, 17–23. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Mertens, K. Photovoltaics: Fundamentals, Technology, and Practice; John Wiley & Sons: Chichester, UK, 2018. [Google Scholar]
- Ayompe, L.; Duffy, A.H.B.; McCormack, S.; Conlon, M. Measured performance of a 1.72kW rooftop grid connected photovoltaic system in Ireland. Energy Convers. Manag. 2011, 52, 816–825. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Kumar, N.M.; Gupta, R.P.; Mathew, M.; Jayakumar, A.; Singh, N.K. Performance, energy loss, and degradation prediction of roof-integrated crystalline solar PV system installed in Northern India. Case Stud. Therm. Eng. 2019, 13, 100409. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Adaramola, M.S.; Vågnes, E.E. Preliminary assessment of a small-scale rooftop PV-grid tied in Norwegian climatic conditions. Energy Convers. Manag. 2015, 90, 458–465. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Attari, K.; Elyaakoubi, A.; Asselman, A. Performance analysis and investigation of a grid-connected photovoltaic installation in Morocco. Energy Rep. 2016, 2, 261–266. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Sharma, R.; Goel, S. Performance analysis of a 11.2 kWp roof top grid-connected PV system in Eastern India. Energy Rep. 2017, 3, 76–84. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kumar, S.S. Performance-economic and energy loss analysis of 80 KWp grid connected roof top transformer less photovoltaic power plant. Circuits Syst. 2016, 7, 662–679. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Ibrik, I.H.; Cruz, S. Techno-economic assessment of on-grid solar PV system in Palestine. Cogent Eng. 2020, 7, 1727131. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Skoplaki, E.; Palyvos, J. On the temperature dependence of photovoltaic module electrical performance: A review of efficiency/power correlations. Sol. Energy 2009, 83, 614–624. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chander, S.; Purohit, A.; Sharma, A.; Arvind; Nehra, S.; Dhaka, M. A study on photovoltaic parameters of mono-crystalline silicon solar cell with cell temperature. Energy Rep. 2015, 1, 104–109. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Congedo, M.; Malvoni, M.; Mele, M.; De Giorgi, M.G. Performance measurements of monocrystalline silicon PV modules in South-eastern Italy. Energy Convers. Manag. 2013, 68, 1–10. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Al-Otaibi, A.; Al-Qattan, A.; Fairouz, F.; Al-Mulla, A. Performance evaluation of photovoltaic systems on Kuwaiti schools’ rooftop. Energy Convers. Manag. 2015, 95, 110–119. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Drif, M.; Pérez, P.J.; Aguilera, J.; Almonacid, G.; Gomez, P.; de la Casa, J.; Aguilar, J.D. Univer Project. A grid connected photovoltaic system of 200kWp at Jaén University. Overview and per-formance analysis. Sol. Energy Mater. Sol. Cells 2007, 91, 670–683. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Asif, M.; Hassanain, M.A.; Nahiduzzaman, K.M.; Sawalha, H. Techno-economic assessment of application of solar PV in building sector. Smart Sustain. Built Environ. 2019, 8, 34–52. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Romero-Fiances, I.; Muñoz-Cerón, E.; Espinoza, R.; Nofuentes, G.; De La Casa, J. Analysis of the Performance of Various PV Module Technologies in Peru. Energies 2019, 12, 186. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Asif, M. Urban Scale Application of Solar PV to Improve Sustainability in the Building and the Energy Sectors of KSA. Sustainability 2016, 8, 1127. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Melo, E.G.; Almeida, M.; Zilles, R.; Grimoni, J. Using a shading matrix to estimate the shading factor and the irradiation in a three-dimensional model of a receiving surface in an urban environment. Sol. Energy 2013, 92, 15–25. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Groumpos, P.P.; Khouzam, K. A generic approach to the shadow effect of large solar power systems. Sol. Cells 1987, 22, 29–46. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kalogirou, S.A. Solar Energy Engineering: Processes and Systems; Academic Press: San Diego, CA, USA, 2013. [Google Scholar]
- Evans, D.; Florschuetz, L. Cost studies on terrestrial photovoltaic power systems with sunlight concentration. Sol. Energy 1977, 19, 255–262. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ozden, T.; Akinoglu, B.G.; Turan, R. Long term outdoor performances of three different on-grid PV arrays in central Anatolia—An extended analysis. Renew. Energy 2017, 101, 182–195. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Vasisht, M.S.; Srinivasan, J.; Ramasesha, S.K. Performance of solar photovoltaic installations: Effect of seasonal variations. Sol. Energy 2016, 131, 39–46. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Solar Electricity Cost vs. Regular Electricity Cost. Available online: solarcellcentral.com/cost_page.html (accessed on 18 December 2020).
- El-Halwagi, M.M. Sustainable Design through Process Integration: Fundamentals and Applications to Industrial Pollution Prevention, Resource Conservation, and Profitability Enhancement; Butterworth-Heinemann: New York, NY, USA, 2017. [Google Scholar]
- Al-Aboosi, F.Y.M. An Integrated Approach to Water-Energy Nexus with Multiple Energy Sources. Ph.D. Thesis, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX, USA, 2019. [Google Scholar]
- Gulaliyev, M.G.; Mustafayev, E.R.; Mehdiyeva, G.Y. Assessment of Solar Energy Potential and Its Ecologi-cal-Economic Efficiency: Azerbaijan Case. Sustainability 2020, 12, 1116. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Dubey, S.; Sarvaiya, J.N.; Seshadri, B. Temperature dependent photovoltaic (PV) efficiency and its effect on PV pro-duction in the world–A review. Energy Procedia 2013, 33, 311–321. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- McEvoy, A.; Markvart, T.; Castañer, L. Practical Handbook of Photovoltaics: Fundamentals and Applications; Elsevier: London, UK, 2003. [Google Scholar]
- Chouder, A.; Silvestre, S. Automatic supervision and fault detection of PV systems based on power losses analysis. Energy Convers. Manag. 2010, 51, 1929–1937. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Padmavathi, K.; Daniel, S.A. Performance analysis of a 3MWp grid connected solar photovoltaic power plant in India. Energy Sustain. Dev. 2013, 17, 615–625. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Vignola, F.; Mavromatakis, F.; Krumsick, J. Performance of PV inverters. In Proceedings of the 37th ASES Annual Conference, San Diego, CA, USA, 3–8 May 2008. [Google Scholar]
- Kazem, H.A.; Khatib, T.; Sopian, K.; Elmenreich, W. Performance and feasibility assessment of a 1.4 kW roof top grid-connected photovoltaic power system under desertic weather conditions. Energy Build. 2014, 82, 123–129. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fu, R.; Feldman, D.J.; Margolis, R.M. US Solar Photovoltaic System Cost Benchmark: Q1 2018; National Renewable Energy Lab. (NREL): Golden, CO, USA, 2018. [Google Scholar]
- Ericson, S.J.; Olis, D.R. A Comparison of Fuel Choice for Backup Generators; National Renewable Energy Lab. (NREL): Golden, CO, USA, 2019. [Google Scholar]
- APEC. Economic and Life Cycle Analysis of Photovoltaic System in APEC Region. 2019. Available online: https://www.apec.org/Publications/2019/04/Life-Cycle-Assessment-of-Photovoltaic-Systems-in-the-APEC-Region (accessed on 24 January 2021).
- Jones-Albertus, R.; Feldman, D.; Fu, R.; Horowitz, K.; Woodhouse, M. Technology advances needed for photovoltaics to achieve widespread grid price parity. Prog. Photovolt. Res. Appl. 2016, 24, 1272–1283. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- US Energy Information Administration. Frequently Asked Questions. 2018. Available online: https://www.eia.gov/tools/faqs/ (accessed on 15 December 2020).
- Mondol, J.D.; Yohanis, Y.; Smyth, M.; Norton, B. Long term performance analysis of a grid connected photovoltaic system in Northern Ireland. Energy Convers. Manag. 2006, 47, 2925–2947. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wittkopf, S.K.; Valliappan, S.; Liu, L.; Ang, K.S.; Cheng, S.C.J. Analytical performance monitoring of a 142.5kWp grid-connected rooftop BIPV system in Singapore. Renew. Energy 2012, 47, 9–20. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Al Ali, M.; Emziane, M. Performance Analysis of Rooftop PV Systems in Abu Dhabi. Energy Procedia 2013, 42, 689–697. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Shukla, A.K.; Sudhakar, K.; Baredar, P. Simulation and performance analysis of 110 kWp grid-connected photovoltaic system for residential building in India: A comparative analysis of various PV technology. Energy Rep. 2016, 2, 82–88. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Pietruszko, S.; Gradzki, M. Performance of a grid connected small PV system in Poland. Appl. Energy 2003, 74, 177–184. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ubertini, S.; Desideri, U. Performance estimation and experimental measurements of a photovoltaic roof. Renew. Energy 2003, 28, 1833–1850. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Area | 132.87 km2 |
---|---|
Altitude | 100 m |
Latitude | 30.6280° N |
Longitude | 96.3344° W |
Building | Total Roof Area (m2) | Utilization Factor (%) | Total PV Utilized Area (m2) | Number of Modules | Total Area of Modules (m2) |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Emerging Technologies (ETB) | 3834.04 | 50 | 1917.02 | 405 | 783.48 |
Zachry Engineering Education Complex | 6927.69 | 50 | 3463.84 | 731 | 1415.66 |
WEB | 4560.84 | 50 | 2280.42 | 481 | 932.00 |
Dwight Look Engineering | 1334.13 | 50 | 667.06 | 140 | 272.62 |
Zachry Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering | 1746.86 | 50 | 873.43 | 184 | 356.96 |
Haynes Engineering (HEB) | 869.86 | 50 | 434.93 | 91 | 177.75 |
Ernest Langford Architecture Center Department of Visualization | 1513.35 | 50 | 756.67 | 159 | 309.25 |
Preston Geren Auditorium Architecture Building B | 835.99 | 50 | 417.99 | 88 | 170.83 |
Department of Computer Science Engineering | 1800.44 | 50 | 900.22 | 190 | 367.91 |
Department of Biological and Agricultural Engineering | 744.43 | 50 | 372.21 | 78 | 152.12 |
Department of Architecture | 2546.32 | 50 | 1273.16 | 268 | 520.33 |
Liberal Arts and Humanities Department of Performance studies | 2395.16 | 50 | 1197.58 | 253 | 489.44 |
Help Desk Central | 1673.69 | 50 | 836.84 | 176 | 342.01 |
Texas A&M University Press | 2181.61 | 50 | 1090.80 | 230 | 445.80 |
Music Activities Center | 1982.1793 | 50 | 991.08 | 209 | 405.05 |
John J Koldus | 4052.84 | 50 | 2026.42 | 428 | 828.19 |
Rudder Complex | 4654.47 | 50 | 2327.23 | 491 | 951.13 |
Memorial Student Center | 4483.33 | 50 | 2241.66 | 473 | 916.16 |
Corps of Cadets &Trigon | 1024.62 | 50 | 512.31 | 108 | 209.37 |
Psychology | 1739.6 | 50 | 869.8 | 183 | 355.48 |
Department of Biology | 679.2 | 50 | 339.6 | 71 | 138.79 |
Heldenfels Hall | 2252 | 50 | 1126 | 237 | 460.19 |
Student Computing Center | 4104.82 | 50 | 2052.41 | 433 | 838.81 |
Evans Library | 10,604.67 | 50 | 5302.33 | 1120 | 2167.05 |
Department of History | 981.92 | 50 | 490.96 | 103 | 200.65 |
Department of Construction Science | 995.35 | 50 | 497.67 | 105 | 203.39 |
College of Liberal Arts | 694.8 | 50 | 347.4 | 73 | 141.98 |
Department of Philosophy (YMCA) | 678.77 | 50 | 339.38 | 71 | 138.70 |
Student Health Services | 1681.66 | 50 | 840.83 | 177 | 343.64 |
Hullabaloo Hall | 4616.19 | 50 | 2308.095 | 487 | 943.31 |
Department of Communication | 847.7 | 50 | 423.85 | 89 | 173.22 |
Cushing Memorial Library and Archives | 1147.61 | 50 | 573.80 | 121 | 234.51 |
KANM | 2844.87 | 50 | 1422.43 | 300 | 581.34 |
Department of Mechanical Engineering | 1005.76 | 50 | 502.88 | 106 | 205.52 |
Blocker | 4905.11 | 50 | 2452.55 | 518 | 1002.35 |
Mitchell Physics | 1009.14 | 50 | 504.57 | 106 | 206.21 |
Artie McFerrin Department of Chemical Engineering | 938 | 50 | 469 | 99 | 191.67 |
Total | - | - | - | 9601 | 18,573.06 |
Economic Indictor Type | Economic Indictor Value |
---|---|
LCOE | 5.38 c/kWh |
ROI | 22.64% |
PBP | 3.75 years |
PV System Type | Avoided Amount of Carbon Emissions |
---|---|
Horizontal N–S axis with E–W tracking | 20,077 metric tonCO2/year |
Horizontal E–W axis with N–S tracking | 18,217 metric tonCO2/year |
Location | PV Type | Tracking System | PV Module Efficiency (%) | Inverter Efficiency (%) | PV System Size (kWp) | Final Yield (kWh/kWp-day) | Performance Ratio (%) | Reference |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Ballymena, Ireland | Monocrystalline silicon | Fixed | 7.5–10 | 87 | 13 | 1.7 | 60–62 | [41] |
Dublin, Ireland | Monocrystalline silicon | Fixed | 14.9 | 89.2 | 1.27 | 2.40 | 81.50 | [5] |
Singapore | Polycrystalline silicon | - | 11.80 | - | - | 3.12 | 81.00 | [42] |
Abu Dhabi-UAE | Amorphous silicon and Polycrystalline silicon | - | - | 94.80 | 142.5 | - | - | [43] |
Bangalore, India | Polycrystalline silicon | Fixed | 13.71 | - | 20 | 4.1 | 85.00 | [25] |
India | Multicrystalline Silicon | Fixed | 15.53 | - | 80 | 4.45 | 83.2 | [10] |
Bhopal, India | Crystalline silicon, Amorphous silicon | Fixed | - | 93.5–97.5 | 110 | 2.67–3.36 | 71.6–79.5 | [44] |
College Station, Texas | Monocrystalline silicon | E-W Tracking, N-S Tracking | 17.63–18.83 | 95 | 3360.35 | 3.71–10.24 | 82–98.91 | Present study |
Jaén, Spain | Polycrystalline silicon | Fixed | 8.9 | 88.1 | 200 | 2.4 | 62.7 | [16] |
Warsaw, Poland | Amorphous silicon | Fixed | 4.5–5.5 | 92–93 | 1 | 2.3 | 60–80 | [45] |
Umbertide, Italy | Polycrystalline silicon | Fixed | 9 | - | 15 | - | - | [46] |
Chandig, India | Monocrystalline silicon | Fixed | - | - | 200 | - | 77.27 | [6] |
Dhahran, KSA | Monocrystalline silicon | Fixed | 15.38 | 97.7 | 4800 | 4.82 | 78.9 | [19] |
Nablus, Palestine | Polycrystalline silicon | Fixed | 16.49 | 98–98.5 | 40.96 | 4.6 | 78.4 | [11] |
Norway | Multicrystalline Silicon and Polycrystalline silicon | Fixed | 14 | 53–94 | 2.07 | 2.55 | 83.03 | |
Tangier, Morocco | - | Fixed | 15.2 | 96.7–96.8 | 5 | 4.45 | 58–98 | [8] |
Sohar, Oman | - | Fixed | 13.9 | 94.1 | 1.4 | 5.2 | 84.6 | [35] |
Bhubaneswar, India | Polycrystalline silicon | Fixed | 13.42 | 89.83 | 11.2 | 3.67 | 78 | [9] |
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. |
© 2021 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Al-Aboosi, F.Y.; Al-Aboosi, A.F. Preliminary Evaluation of a Rooftop Grid-Connected Photovoltaic System Installation under the Climatic Conditions of Texas (USA). Energies 2021, 14, 586. https://doi.org/10.3390/en14030586
Al-Aboosi FY, Al-Aboosi AF. Preliminary Evaluation of a Rooftop Grid-Connected Photovoltaic System Installation under the Climatic Conditions of Texas (USA). Energies. 2021; 14(3):586. https://doi.org/10.3390/en14030586
Chicago/Turabian StyleAl-Aboosi, Fadhil Y., and Abdullah F. Al-Aboosi. 2021. "Preliminary Evaluation of a Rooftop Grid-Connected Photovoltaic System Installation under the Climatic Conditions of Texas (USA)" Energies 14, no. 3: 586. https://doi.org/10.3390/en14030586