The Use of Renewable Energy Sources in the Food Industry and the Reduction of CO₂ Emissions: A Case Study of a Simulated PV Installation

Abstract

This study includes a simulation of two variants of a 1 MW photovoltaic farm, differing in the types of photovoltaic modules used in the PVSyst program. The first uses monofacial modules, and the second uses bifacial. The studies showed an 8% increase in the energy obtained in the variant with bifacial modules, under the assumed simulation conditions. In the next stage, an environmental analysis was carried out using the Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) method with a “gate-to-gate” approach for the mass packaging process in three different variants, differing in the source of energy powering the machines in the SimaPro program. In the first variant, electricity from the national energy mix was used. In the second, in addition to energy from the same mix, natural gas was additionally used in the shrinking stage of the film. In the third variant, energy obtained from a previously designed photovoltaic farm was considered. The results showed an about 80% reduction in the carbon footprint of the tested process in the case of changing the energy source to energy from a PV installation.

1. Introduction

Packaging processes in the food industry play a significant role in the proper storage and transportation of products. Although they are necessary, they are also characterized by high energy consumption, which has an adverse effect on the environment [1]. Higher electricity consumption, especially from national energy mixes based on traditional sources, means higher greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. According to Kumar and Chakabarti [2] the carbon footprint of the food industry is an estimate of energy consumption and GHG emissions caused by processing, packaging and delivering food products to the end user, as well as post-consumer packaging management. The available literature contains many examples of research on energy efficiency in households, industry and transport [3,4,5,6,7,8].

Solar energy, like wind energy, plays a key role in the energy transition process, providing significant support to existing energy technologies and contributing to reducing the use of fossil fuels [9,10]. Its effective implementation not only promotes the creation of new jobs but also stimulates the development of the local economy and industry [11,12]. An increasing number of renewable energy installations are being built around the world to produce energy that is less harmful to the environment and to provide energy close to the recipient. The decentralization of energy production allows for increased energy security and stability of the supply while supporting the development of local communities and the economy [13,14].

By analyzing the available literature sources, one can find a number of examples of work in the field of photovoltaic installation (PV) design, as well as research on the impact of changing the raw materials used in processes to those derived from recycling and changing the energy source that powers individual technological processes. Walichnowska et al. [15] designed a 1 MW farm, for which they conducted an analysis of the impact of changing the angle, azimuth and distance between rows on energy yields. The authors showed that directing the farm towards the south for climatic conditions in Poland significantly improves yields from the designed PV farm. They also showed that maintaining an appropriate distance between rows increases the amount of energy obtained from the installation. Yakubu et al. [16] compared the energy efficiency of different PV configurations differing in azimuth and module type. The study used an analytical model, field data and computer simulations to assess the energy efficiency of each configuration. The study showed that the model predicted energy production well, especially for single-sided systems, where the differences between measured and modeled data range from just 0.08% to 1.41%. For bifacial systems, the deviations were slightly larger (up to 4.06%), and for vertical bifacial systems, the differences were as high as 9.61%. Bifacial systems tilted to the south generated, on average, 9–10% more energy than single-sided systems, but when the albedo was 0.25, the single-sided system tilted to the south proved to be more efficient than the vertical bifacial system. Ali et al. [17] designed and evaluated a 1874 kW installation with an annual yield of 3375 MWh using the PVSyst program. The authors showed that 25 years of operation of such an installation could prevent emissions of 37,647.82 tCO₂. Średziński et al. [18] assessed the possibility of using energy from a PV installation to power water pumping systems. The authors conducted tests on an existing installation connected to a monitoring system. The results showed that the PV installation allowed for a reduction in water pumping costs by over 77.8%, and for 167 days a year, it provided full coverage of the energy demand for the pumping station. Smiles et al. [19] carried out a cost-effectiveness assessment of a rooftop PV installation on the historic Bath Abbey building. Using PVSyst, they simulated the PV system, which showed that a system with a capacity of 45 ± 2 MWh per year would become profitable after approximately 13.3 years and would generate a profit of GBP 139,000 ± 12,000 over 25 years of operation. The results demonstrated the cost effectiveness of the designed installation. In their article, Anang et al. [20] assessed the actual performance of a 7.8 kWp home PV installation monitored for two years. They analyzed energy production data, power derate factor and economic parameters for a 21-year period of operation. The simulations showed that the optimal angle for the analyzed installation is 5°, which increases annual energy production by almost 5% and reduces CO₂ emissions by 7.45 tons per year. Elbadawi et al. [21] analyzed the energy consumption and carbon dioxide emissions of six 3D printers used to produce solid dosage forms of drugs, comparing their environmental impact with traditional pharmaceutical methods. The study provides preliminary information on the environmental impact of 3D printing as a potentially revolutionary technology for pharmaceutical production. The results indicate that a properly optimized printing process can enable the production of high-quality drugs with minimal environmental impact. Sousa and Bogas [22] compared energy consumption and carbon dioxide emissions during the production of recycled cement and traditional clinker production. The studies showed that recycled cement can generate only 58–74% of CO₂ emissions compared to clinker, and in an optimal scenario, emissions can be reduced by up to 13%. The authors showed that eliminating the washing and drying stages by developing a dry process can significantly improve the ecological efficiency of the studied process. Analyzing the available literature, the need for further considerations in the field of mass packaging of bottles was noted in the context of proposing variants of a photovoltaic farm, the energy of which would be used to power the machines necessary for the proper conduct of the process. As can be seen, despite the extensive list of articles referring to the analysis of photovoltaic installations and the assessment of the environmental effects of technological processes, there is a lack of research that would combine both the concept of a PV installation project for a given company with an environmental analysis of changing the energy source in the processes implemented in it. The analyses to date have not considered the potential benefits resulting from the use of energy from the photovoltaic farm operating at the company. The approach presented in this paper fills this gap by proposing an integrated analysis of the impact of the power source on the environmental efficiency of the technological process under study. Thus, this study brings new value to the discussion on the decarbonization of industry using renewable energy.

So far, in the context of the process of mass packaging of bottles in thermo-shrinkable film, the impact of changing the type of thermo-shrinkable film has been considered, the impact of the post-consumption development scenario [23], as well as various energy sources used to power the process [24] and their potential impact on the environment. The novelty of this article is the supplementation of existing analyses with a comprehensive photovoltaic farm project, considering both the selection of PV module technology and a detailed simulation of its energy efficiency. The article designs and compares two variants of a 1 MW photovoltaic farm, the energy of which would be used to power the technological process: packaging bottles in heat-shrinkable film. The main goal was to compare energy yields from installations differing in the type of modules used: in the first variant, these were single-sided monocrystalline modules, while in the second, bifacial monocrystalline modules (BF) with the same unit power were used. Designing and analyzing the results will allow for answering the following questions:

• How did the change in the type of PV module affect the energy yields from the installation?
• To what extent can the designed installation meet the energy demand of the technological process in question?
• Does the use of BF bring measurable benefits in the context of increasing energy production and are these differences significant enough to justify their selection?

Additionally, an environmental analysis was conducted to compare the carbon footprint of the process in question depending on the power source. The analysis included various power supply scenarios, including the domestic energy mix, gas supply for the most energy-intensive packaging stage (welding shrink films around bottles) and energy obtained from the designed PV installation. The research conducted allowed for determining the impact of individual energy sources on the total greenhouse gas emissions and assessing the potential benefits resulting from the use of more sustainable energy solutions. The scientific novelty of the proposed approach consists in integrating the technical simulation of the photovoltaic system with the environmental assessment of the real industrial process. In the study, a detailed analysis of two variants of the PV farm (monofacial and bifacial modules) was carried out in the PVSyst 7.4 program, and then the obtained data were used as a real energy source in the Life Cycle Assessment of the mass packaging process. Such a combination of technical modeling of energy generation with the assessment of its environmental impact in a specific industrial application is a significant added value compared to classical analyses conducted separately.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Design of Two Variants of a 1 MW Photovoltaic Farm

One of the main goals of this work was to design a photovoltaic installation to cover the energy demand of an exemplary packaging process in a food industry enterprise. The 1 MW photovoltaic installation project was developed with the potential of implementation on the premises of the company, which has an appropriate, unshaded area with high solar potential. The analyzed plot with an area of more than 1.5 ha allows for the effective arrangement of PV modules while maintaining the recommended spacing between rows and a convenient orientation to the sun. When selecting the installation size, we considered not only the reflection of the company’s plans but also the fact that 1 MW installations are currently a common choice among industrial enterprises in Poland, constituting a typical example of use in this type of facilities. A 1 MW photovoltaic farm was designed in the PVSyst 7.4 program under two variants. In Variant I, the designed farm consists of 2275 monofacial monocrystalline modules with a unit power of 440 Wp, and in Variant II, of 2275 bifacial monocrystalline modules (BMs) with the same unit power (Figure 1). This program was selected for the study due to its high accuracy in simulating photovoltaic systems, supported by recognition in the scientific and industry communities. It offers wide possibilities for energy analysis, considering system losses, shading and local climatic conditions. The intuitive interface and extensive component database enable comprehensive and realistic simulations.

In both cases, the photovoltaic modules were placed on a fixed structure. The fixed structure affects the specific angle of inclination of the modules, which was selected in such a way as to maximize the energy yield in local conditions. For both farms, the same modulus inclination angle was used: 25°.

Table 1. System configurations.

System Configuration
Type of variant	Variant I	Variant II
Type of module	Monofacial	Bifacial
Power of installation	1 MW
Module orientation	South
Angle	25°
Number of modules	2275
Nominal power of module	440 Wp
Connection of modules	91 strings × 25 in series
Amount of inverter	1
Power of inverter	1000 kW

presents a detailed comparison of the key parameters of the photovoltaic installations. It considers the types of modules used, their nominal power, inclination angle and azimuth. In addition, the list also includes the types and models of the selected inverters, which play a key role in converting direct current generated by PV modules into alternating current used in the grid.

The planned installation will be located in Poland. The location is situated at 53.110° N, 18.32° E. The main factor influencing the efficiency of the PV installation is the weather conditions for the assumed location. This study is based on meteorological data available in the PVSyst program. Although this program is widely used in the analysis of photovoltaic systems and allows for accurate simulations of insolation and efficiency of solar installations, the use of its data may pose some limitations. This is primarily due to the fact that meteorological data in PVSyst are modeled based on historical measurements and spatial interpolation, which may not reflect current atmospheric conditions with full accuracy. In addition, local conditions, such as the microclimate, shading or short-term weather changes, may cause discrepancies between the simulation results and the actual efficiency of the photovoltaic system.

Table 2. Monthly meteorological data reports for the location situated at 53.110° N, 18.32° E (source PVSyst).

	Horizontal Global Irradiation [kWh/m2/mth]	Horizontal Diffuse Irradiation [kWh/m2/mth]	Temperature [°C]	Wind Velocity [m/s]
January	18.6	13.7	−2.0	2.89
February	35.5	22.5	−0.8	2.79
March	78.8	45.8	3.2	2.80
April	123.1	61.7	8.9	2.70
May	158.3	78.2	14.4	2.50
June	161.8	81.0	17.3	2.50
July	159.1	84.4	20.0	2.40
August	139.8	73.4	19.3	2.20
September	94.2	42.4	13.9	2.30
October	54.3	34.2	8.9	2.39
November	20.8	13.6	4.5	2.71
December	13.4	9.7	0.5	2.80
Year	1057.7	560.6	9.0	2.60

presents monthly meteorological data reports from PVSyst. Horizontal global irradiation is one of the important parameters that have a real impact on energy yields. Depending on the geographical location, its value may vary. The horizontal global irradiation value is given in kWh/m². In Poland, the average annual value of radiation on a horizontal surface ranges from 950 to 1150 kWh/m². Peak insolation occurs in June, when the average monthly radiation in Warsaw reaches 160 kWh/m². In winter months, such as December, it is the lowest and amounts to only 10–13 kWh/m² [25]. For the assumed location, the occurrence of winds with a speed not exceeding 3 m/s is noticeable. The relatively constant and low wind speed affects the small but still occurring cooling of the modules.

2.2. Environmental Analysis: Carbon Footprint Determination

In the next step, an environmental analysis was carried out to indicate which of the variants of the mass packaging process, differing in the source of energy powering the given process, is characterized by the potentially highest value of the carbon footprint. For this purpose, the SimaPro 9.6.0.1 program was used, comparing three variants of the mass packaging process differing in the source of energy. The data related to the mass packaging process (film and energy consumption) come from a company located in Poland, which is involved, among other things, in carrying out this type of process. Data that could not be obtained directly from the industry were supplemented with information from the Ecoinvent v3 database used in this program. The selected data from this database corresponded to the geographical area of Poland or the European Union (EU), allowing for contextual consistency and ensuring the credibility of environmental analyses. The Ecoinvent database is one of the most widely used data sources in life cycle analyses (LCAs). It contains detailed environmental information on thousands of industrial, energy, transport and agricultural processes from different regions of the world. The data contained in it enable reliable assessments of the environmental impact of products and services. In variant A, the energy powering the technological line came from the Polish energy mix (Emix); in variant B, it came from a combination of energy from the domestic mix and gas (powering the most energy-intensive stage of production, i.e., welding of heat-shrinkable film); and in variant C, the energy obtained from the designed photovoltaic farm was considered. The system boundaries excluded the production of PET bottles and film, the distribution of the final product, the use phase and the end-of-life stage of the packaging (e.g., recycling or disposal). In addition, the environmental impact associated with the construction of infrastructure, such as the technological lines or the photovoltaic farm, was not considered. The IPCC 2013 GWP 100a method was used to determine the carbon footprint value, which is one of the methods for assessing the impact of greenhouse gas emissions on global warming. The IPCC 2013 GWP 100a method, which converts emissions of various greenhouse gases into CO₂ equivalents (kg CO₂eq), assesses their impact on the climate over a 100-year period. This method is not limited to carbon dioxide but also includes other substances that contribute to global warming. The Global Warming Potential (GWP), developed by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, allows for a comparison of the effects of different gases emitted into the atmosphere. This indicator includes methane (CH₄), nitrous oxide (N₂O), chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs), hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs) and other halogenated compounds, providing a more comprehensive view of the environmental impact of emissions [26,27]. The environmental analysis was carried out using data obtained from a company that, among other things, carries out the process of mass packaging of bottles in heat-shrinkable film. The analysis assumed a functional unit of 10,000 packs in a 6 × 1.5 L format. The adopted functional unit reflects the typical production scale in the analyzed packaging process. This choice allows for a proportional and realistic comparison of different energy variants, corresponding to actual industrial conditions. The unit also enables precise calculation of energy and material consumption, as well as the carbon footprint assigned to a specific number of finished products.

Table 3. Input data of the tested process.

Parameter/Type of Variant	Variant A	Variant B	Variant C
Source of energy	Emix	Gas + Emix	PV installation
Energy [kWh]	678	881.4	678
rLDPE for film [kg]	315
rPET for bottles [kg]	2400

presents the amounts of energy and raw materials used for the assumed functional unit. It is worth noting that the actual data indicate a 30% higher energy consumption by the process carried out using gas supplying the process of shrinking the film around the bottles (variant B).

3. Results and Discussion

3.1. Analysis of Designed Variants of a Photovoltaic Farm

As part of the analysis, monthly energy yields for two types of installations were obtained and compared. Based on the data (

Table 4. Energy yields for two tested PV installations.

Month	Energy Injected into the Grid [kWh]		Percentage Difference Variant I vs. Variant II
	Variant I	Variant II	%
January	27,347	25,482	−6.82
February	48,348	49,838	+3.08
March	93,779	100,417	+7.08
April	129,677	140,630	+8.45
May	145,987	159,850	+9.50
June	140,510	155,051	+10.35
July	140,742	154,561	+9.82
August	133,320	145,216	+8.92
September	105,683	113,627	+7.52
October	67,801	70,948	+4.64
November	29,573	28,713	−2.91
December	20,417	18,101	−11.34
Year	1,083,184	1,162,434	+7.32

), a 7% higher production is noticeable on a yearly basis for the installation using BF. These yields differ over the months. For example, in the period from November to January, the installation with monofacial modules is characterized by a higher production, from 3% to 12%. This is mainly due to the limited access of reflected light (albedo), which is much smaller in the winter due to the low angle of incidence of solar radiation and the lack of snow noticeable in recent years in Poland. During the winter months, the sun is low in the sky, meaning that direct radiation reaches the module at a low angle. In the case of bifacial modules, the back side receives significantly less reflected light. In countries where there is significant snow cover in the winter, the albedo coefficient increases, as a result of which the installation with BF is able to produce much more energy than the traditional one. Hayibo et al. [28] compared winter energy losses in photovoltaic systems using monofacial and bifacial modules. The study showed that BF for the studied location (in Escanaba, Michigan (USA) located in the northern United States) cope better in winter conditions. This region is characterized by severe winter conditions. The authors showed that the average winter losses for monofacial systems were 33%, and annual losses were 16%, while for bifacial systems, they were 16% and only 2%, respectively. Additionally, in winter conditions, bifacial systems obtained 19% more energy than single-sided systems. Considering the results for Polish conditions, the installation with BF is characterized by over 7% higher electricity production. This value is only a simulation result of the study. Studies analyzing real facilities in Poland indicate that the profits from bifacial installations in Poland can be much higher. For example, Olczak et al. [29] showed that a photovoltaic installation with BF located in Poland can generate from 10% to 28% more energy than an installation with monofacial modules.

As part of the simulation in the PVSyst program, the coefficient of performance (RP) was determined. In photovoltaics, this indicator refers to the efficiency of the PV system in real conditions compared to its theoretical rated power. It is an indicator of how well the photovoltaic installation uses available resources. In both analyzed variants, the highest values of the coefficient of performance were obtained in the winter and early spring months (January–March), while in the summer months (June–August), a decrease in the value of this indicator was noted (Figure 2). In the studied variants, the highest PR values were obtained in February for Variant I (0.946) and in March for Variant II (0.995) and the lowest 0.853 in July (Variant I) and 0.811 in December (Variant II).

As part of the simulation, a loss graph was also obtained for both farms designed. In Variant I, the total global horizontal radiation, as can be seen in Figure 3, is 1058 kWh/m², while the radiation on the module plane is 1193 kWh/m². An increase in this value indicates the correct selection of the module inclination angle in the designed PV installation. The main source of losses in the analyzed case are temperature losses of −3.68% and inverter loss during operation (−2.15%). In the case of a smaller installation for this level of losses, the use of power optimizers could be considered, which reduced the potential losses. Power optimizers allow for local management of output power from the level of a single PV module [30,31]. These devices are mounted on the back of the module and reduce the impact of partial shading before sending DC current to the inverter. Additionally, the optimizers enable the continuous monitoring of a given photovoltaic installation while providing access to real-time operational data and diagnostics at the level of individual modules [32]. In the case of such large investments as the designed 1 MW farm, power optimizers are not used due to the lack of financial justification for such a solution.

In Variant II, the analysis showed that the gain from bifaciality (back side) is about 13% of additional yield (Figure 4). In the analyzed variant, a small gain in light reflection from the substrate to the front of the modules can be seen, which amounted to 0.31%. A significant source of losses are temperature losses, which, in this case, amounted to −3.63%. In Variant II, the diagram also shows characteristics of the bifacial effect. The average radiation on the ground amounted to 536 kWh/m²; however, due to the low albedo value of 0.3 (characteristic of the substrate for large-scale farms located in fields), only part of this energy effectively reached the rear surface. The final irradiance of the rear side amounted to 151 kWh/m². Noticeable losses around module heating constitute the basis for further considerations in the field of effective cooling of PV modules. Szukla et al. [33] described a number of methods for cooling photovoltaic modules, including both passive and active systems. The solutions analyzed included natural and forced air cooling, liquid cooling, the use of heat pipes, technologies using phase-change materials (PCMs) and thermoelectric cooling; each of these methods aimed to improve the efficiency of PV modules by reducing their operating temperature.

The simulation carried out, showing that the use of BF increases energy yields, shows that the planned installation can provide the company with 1,162,434 kWh per year. The table below presents the energy consumption of the packaging process in individual months along with the simulated energy coverage of the proposed farm (

Table 5. Energy coverage of the process by a simulated PV farm.

Month	Energy Consumption by the Process [kWh]	Energy Production by Simulated System PV with BF [kWh]	Energy Coverage [%]
January	31,107	25,482	81.92
February	49,230	49,838	101.24
March	43,325	100,417	231.78
April	66,374	140,630	211.88
May	76,253	159,850	209.63
June	68,541	155,051	226.22
July	48,052	154,561	321.65
August	51,710	145,216	280.83
September	66,596	113,627	170.62
October	51,376	70,948	138.10
November	19,720	28,713	145.60
December	38,132	18,101	47.47

). The analysis carried out with data on energy consumption by the tested process showed that the designed installation is not able to cover the energy demand only in two months of the year (January 81.92% energy coverage and December 47.47%). In the remaining months, energy production exceeds consumption, making it possible to use the surplus from production to power other processes in this company.

3.2. Carbon Footprint of Individual Variants of the Analyzed Technological Process

In the next stage of the research, an environmental analysis of the technological process consisting in packaging bottles with beverages in heat-shrinkable film was carried out. The analysis was carried out in the gate-to-gate limitation (Figure 5) without considering stages such as obtaining raw materials and transporting raw materials to the company. The end-of-life stage for the plastics used in the process was also not considered. To determine and compare the carbon footprint of individual variants of the processes differing in the power source, the IPCC 2013 GWP 100a method was used. In the analyzed cases, three energy sources were adopted to power the process in question. In the first one, energy from the Polish energy mix was used, in the second, one of the packaging stages (film welding) was powered by gas, while the remaining stages were powered by energy obtained from the domestic mix. In variant C, this energy comes from the designed PV installation. Among the analyzed cases, variant C is characterized by the smallest carbon footprint. Compared to the other variants, a more than 50% decrease in the value of this indicator is noticeable.

Further analysis of the environmental impact also determined the gas emissions accompanying each of the process variants within the adopted system boundaries within this framework, and the results of carbon dioxide, methane and nitrogen oxide emissions were obtained (

Table 6. Determined emissions for the tested variants.

Emission	Unit	Variant A	Variant B	Variant C
Carbon dioxide	kg/FU	16.7	16.7	1.94
Methane	kg/FU	1.55	1.57	0.487
Nitrogen oxides	kg/FU	2.58	2.73	1.31
Total	kg/FU	20.83	21.0	3.74

). In the case of carbon dioxide emissions, supplying the welding stage with gas does not affect the level of emissions. In the case of methane and nitrogen oxides, a small increase in emissions by 2–5% is noticeable. Large changes are noticeable for variant C. Changing the power source to a photovoltaic farm causes significantly lower emissions of all three analyzed gases. After summing up, the total emission of the three gases for variant C is 3.74 kg/FU. Compared to variants A and B, this value is almost 80% lower.

According to Duan et al. [34], converting energy from coal-fired power plants to solar energy from photovoltaic modules can reduce emissions by up to 64.67%, giving a chance to limit the temperature increase by up to 11.05% by 2050, in accordance with the current emission allocation plan. The results obtained are consistent with the findings of other analyses on greenhouse gas emissions. In accordance with the study conducted by Hamed et al. [35], the level of greenhouse gas emissions is closely dependent on the energy source used. In the case of energy obtained from coal, emissions reach an average of about 950 g CO₂ for each kilowatt-hour produced, and for photovoltaic installations with monocrystalline modules, they are about 50 g CO₂/kWh [35]. Also, Osman et al. [36] showed a significant advantage of renewable energy sources over traditional ones in terms of their impact on the environment. The authors indicate that appropriate design decisions and skillful use of available technologies can significantly reduce these negative effects. For example, the installation of photovoltaic installations on building roofs allows for minimizing land occupation and the related impact on ecosystems.

Unlike many other energy technologies, the vast majority of carbon dioxide emissions from PV occur during the production phase of the system components, while during the operational phase emissions, they are minimal or even zero. According to Alsema [37], emissions associated with the use of energy generated by photovoltaic farms amount to about 40–50 g of CO₂ for every kilowatt-hour produced. However, as indicated by the forecasts indicated by Guo et al. [38] in the example of China, through the modernization of PV components and improvements in technology, CO₂ emissions will decrease over the next few years. It follows that the photovoltaic industry may be key in achieving neutrality of technological processes. According Maka and Alabid [39], as the shift to greener energy sources intensifies, solar energy and other clean energy technologies are expected to continue to grow rapidly in the coming years. One of the most significant challenges related to the development of photovoltaic technology is the intensive use of rare and hard-to-find minerals, such as selenium, in the production of modules [40]. It should be noted that in the future, there may be a problem with access to these products, which is why the development of their recycling process is so important in the case of photovoltaic modules. Current methods of recovering raw materials are limited in terms of effectiveness and scale of operation, which means that not all materials, especially those with high environmental and energy value, can be reused [41,42].

To reduce the harmfulness of technological processes, it is advisable to increase the share or completely power machines with energy obtained from renewable sources. In the long term, a complete transition to renewable energy sources, such as solar, wind or biomass, can significantly reduce greenhouse gas emissions, limit the use of fossil fuels and contribute to the sustainable development of the industrial sector. Such changes not only have a positive impact on the environment but also increase the energy independence of enterprises and can lead to high savings. However, it should be emphasized that for the PV installation to bring the expected benefits, the appropriate installation parameters must be selected. In addition to the selection of BF, it is worth considering additional possibilities of increasing energy production by, for example, using a tracking structure, which increases the amount of energy obtained from this source [39,43,44]. The research presented in the article, however, has certain limitations. First, the prepared simulation refers to a specific location. Depending on the location where the photovoltaic installation is designed and installed, climate conditions, sunlight, ambient temperature or terrain can significantly affect the energy yield and efficiency of the system.

4. Conclusions

The results of the conducted research indicate the potential of using electricity obtained from a photovoltaic installation using BF in the mass packaging process. Relating the results to industrial packaging processes, which are characterized by a large and continuous demand for energy, the use of a photovoltaic installation with BF can bring real benefits not only in terms of efficiency but also in the context of environmental impact. The conducted environmental analysis showed that out of the three analyzed energy sources powering the industrial process, the variant based on energy from a PV installation potentially generates the lowest carbon footprint value. The conducted research allowed us to show the following:

• The designed PV farm can cover the annual energy demand of the tested process (608,000 kWh/year) and can additionally power other processes carried out within a given enterprise.
• The use of BF in the simulation allowed for an increase in potential yields by approx. 8%.
• In times of small price differences between monofacial and bifacial modules, the use of BF has a significant advantage in the analyzed case.
• Except for January and December, the proposed installation equipped with BF is sufficient to support the remaining processes conducted within the enterprise.
• The analysis of energy coverage showed that the simulated farm is not able to cover the energy demand of the process throughout the year in only two months of the year.
• Changing the power source to a photovoltaic installation causes a decrease in the carbon footprint of the process in question by over 50%.
• Supplying the shrinking stage with gas does not significantly affect the amount of carbon dioxide emissions; in the case of methane and nitrogen oxide emissions, it increases emissions by 2–5% compared to the variant powered by energy from the national energy mix.
• Supplying the mass packaging process with energy obtained from a PV installation reduces the emission of carbon dioxide, methane and nitrogen oxides by approx. 80% compared to traditional sources.

In this article, the intended goals were achieved by developing a photovoltaic installation project adapted to specific assumptions and conducting an environmental analysis of the considered variants of the technological process. The conducted research and the obtained results made it possible to provide exhaustive answers to the research questions posed, thus confirming the validity of the proposed solutions. In subsequent studies, it is worth including an analysis of the investment profitability, considering the variability of energy prices and the operating costs of PV installations in the longer term.

The results obtained allow us to clearly state that in the processes of mass packaging of bottles—especially in the stages of film welding, which are characterized by the highest energy consumption—the implementation of ecological solutions in the scope of power supply is of key importance. Changing the energy source from conventional to renewable, such as energy from a PV installation, contributes not only to reducing the negative impact on the environment (among others by reducing CO₂ emissions) but also allows the company to build a more sustainable market image. This type of energy transformation is in line with the growing requirements of both regulatory bodies and consumers regarding sustainable production and environmental responsibility. In the context of the competitiveness of the food industry, the adaptation of green technologies can be a significant advantage, not only in terms of the environment but also in marketing, strengthening the position of the brand as modern and socially responsible.