Energy payback and life‐cycle CO<sub>2</sub> emissions of the BOS in an optimized 3·5 MW PV installation

Mason, James; Fthenakis, Vasilis; Hansen, T.; Kim, Hyung Chul

doi:10.1002/pip.652

Cited by 149 publications

(106 citation statements)

References 5 publications

(6 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

102

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Updated GHG emissions from the life cycle photovoltaic electricity production for average southern European insolation (1700 kWh/m 2 /yr), 30 years lifetime, 75% performance ratio for roof-top installations, 80% performance ratio for utility ground-mount installations. [4][5][6][7] The place of production is indicated because CO 2 emissions of the average US electricity supply are higher than those of the average European supply, resulting in relatively higher CO 2 emissions for US produced modules Note: The damage factor (in s/ton) gives an economic valuation of the total health and environmental damages caused by a certain emission. Multiplication of the damage factor with the corresponding life-cycle emission factor for modules and BOS (in kg/kWh) results in the external costs (in s-cents/kWh) of that specific emission.…”

Section: Balance Of System For Ground Installationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…5 Actual 3-year performance data from the 3Á5 MW crystalline silicon section of the plant were used, along with detailed mass and energy inventories. A Performance Ratio 11 of 83Á5% was measured at the grid connection on the 480 V side of the isolation transformer; this performance efficiency accounts for all the losses of the PV module-wiring-inverter-transformer system.…”

Section: Balance Of System For Ground Installationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Photovoltaics energy payback times, greenhouse gas emissions and external costs: 2004–early 2005 status

Fthenakis

Alsema

2006

Progress in Photovoltaics

262

135

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Life cycle assessments and external cost estimates of photovoltaics have been often based on old data that do not reflect the extensive technological progress made over the past decade. Our assessment uses current (2004-early 2005) manufacturing data, from twelve European and US photovoltaic companies, and establishes the Energy Payback Times (EPBT), Greenhouse Gas (GHG) emissions and external environmental costs of current commercial PV technologies. Estimates of external costs are about 70% lower than those in recent high-impact publications which were derived from the old data. Copyright # 2006 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. INTRODUCTIONI t is well understood that production of energy by burning of fossil fuels generates a number of pollutants and carbon dioxide. What is less known is that any anthropogenic means of energy production, including solar, generate pollutants when their entire life cycle is accounted for. A life cycle starts from the mining and processing of materials that comprise solar cells, modules and balance of system, and ends to their final decommissioning, disposal and/or recycling. Costs associated with the environmental, health and societal impacts that are not included in the direct cost of electricity, are called external costs of electricity production. While societal external costs are difficult to quantify, external costs associated with environmental and health protection or damage have been quantified in monetary terms. Perhaps the most well-known effort to quantify environmental and health damages due to electricity production, is the European Union's series of ExternE (External Costs of Energy) projects. The ExternE methodology starts from emissions generated at specific sources and follows their impact to receptors through atmospheric dispersion and dose-response functions. In general, this type of environmental impact assessment is well accepted, although assumptions related to Broader Perspectives the monetary valuation of estimated impacts, especially green-house related impacts, are debateable. 'The ExternE methodology has been applied in a large number of European and national studies to give advice for environmental, energy and transport policies.' 1 Photovoltaic installations in Germany were presented in the latest ExternE report to the European Commission 1 as having 30% higher health impacts than natural gas and GHG emissions of 180 g CO 2 -eq./kWh which would be 10 times higher than those for the nuclear fuel cycle (Figure 1). These results were based on 15-years old PV systems and even older data on module production technology. z Also based on outdated PV technology data a life cycle-based comparison of energy technologies in Australia 2 showed that PV emits about 100 g CO 2 /kWh during its life cycle (Figure 1). The results from these two studies were widely circulated and especially the ExternE publication with its official status is likely to have influenced policy decisions with regard to energy technology. More recent (i.e., 2000) data are included in the Ecoinvent...

show abstract

Section: Balance Of System For Ground Installationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Balance Of System For Ground Installationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Photovoltaics energy payback times, greenhouse gas emissions and external costs: 2004–early 2005 status

Fthenakis

Alsema

2006

Progress in Photovoltaics

262

135

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…For example, the EPB times calculated in the present study for the northeastern U.S. and Poland are significantly shorter than the EPBs surveyed for systems of similar or greater productivity that were installed between 2003 and 2006 [9]. Furthermore, the EBOS estimated for the ground-mounted array at Hubbard Brook, pictured in Figure 1, was 319 kWh/m 2 , small in comparison to previously published estimates of ground mounting balance of system embodied energies [10,11]. However, it is unlikely that continuing technological advancement will decrease the EPB below certain physical thresholds due to constraints such as resource scarcity, transportation and mobilization costs, and labor costs of installation.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 49%

Comparing energy payback and simple payback period for solar photovoltaic systems

Kessler¹

2017

E3S Web Conf.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. Installing a solar photovoltaic (PV) array is both an environmental and a financial decision. The financial arguments often take priority over the environmental because installing solar is capital-intensive. The Simple Payback period (SPB) is often assessed prior to the adoption of solar PV at a residence or a business. Although it better describes the value of solar PV electricity in terms of sustainability, the Energy Payback period (EPB) is seldom used to gauge the merits of an installation. Using published estimates of embodied energies, EPB was calculated for four solar PV plants utilizing crystalline-Si technology: three being actual commercial installations located in the northeastern U.S., and a fourth installation based on a simulated 20-kilowatt roof-mounted system, in Wrocław, Poland. Simple Payback was calculated based on initial capital cost, and on the availability of avoided electricity costs based on netmetering tariffs, which at present in the U.S. are 1:1 credit ratio, and in Poland is 1:0.7 credit ratio. For all projects, the EPB time was estimated at between 1.9 and 2.6 years. In contrast, the SPB for installed systems in the northeastern U.S. ranged from 13.3 to 14.6 years, and was estimated at 13.5 years for the example system in Lower Silesia, Poland. The comparison between SPB and EPB shows a disparity between motivational time frames, in which the wait for financial return is considerably longer than the wait for net energy harvest and the start of sustainable power production.

show abstract

“…13,20,21,22 Recycling credits are allocated to the material production life cycle estimation parameters on the basis that 80% of materials are recycled at their end-oflife. The GHG emissions estimation parameters are generated with the energy software GREET1.6.…”

Section: Life Cycle Analysis Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…A multi-MWp PV installation demonstrating the potential to achieve $50/m 2 BOS costs, which includes land preparation, wiring conduit, electrical connection stations, PV system grounding, PV mounting hardware and installation, and union-scale labor, has been documented. 13 † The cost for dc/dc power conditioning equipment is categorized separately.…”

Section: Description Of a Pv Electrolytic Hproduction And Distributiomentioning

confidence: 99%

Centralized Production of Hydrogen using a Coupled Water Electrolyzer-Solar Photovoltaic System

Mason¹,

Zweibel²

Solar Hydrogen Generation

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Energy payback and life‐cycle CO₂ emissions of the BOS in an optimized 3·5 MW PV installation

Cited by 149 publications

References 5 publications

Photovoltaics energy payback times, greenhouse gas emissions and external costs: 2004–early 2005 status

Photovoltaics energy payback times, greenhouse gas emissions and external costs: 2004–early 2005 status

Comparing energy payback and simple payback period for solar photovoltaic systems

Centralized Production of Hydrogen using a Coupled Water Electrolyzer-Solar Photovoltaic System

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About

Energy payback and life‐cycle CO2 emissions of the BOS in an optimized 3·5 MW PV installation

Cited by 149 publications

References 5 publications

Photovoltaics energy payback times, greenhouse gas emissions and external costs: 2004–early 2005 status

Photovoltaics energy payback times, greenhouse gas emissions and external costs: 2004–early 2005 status

Comparing energy payback and simple payback period for solar photovoltaic systems

Centralized Production of Hydrogen using a Coupled Water Electrolyzer-Solar Photovoltaic System

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About

Energy payback and life‐cycle CO₂ emissions of the BOS in an optimized 3·5 MW PV installation