Potential of solar electricity generation in the European Union member states and candidate countries

Šúri, Marcel; Huld, Thomas; Dunlop, Ewan D.; Ossenbrink, H.

doi:10.1016/j.solener.2006.12.007

Cited by 590 publications

(200 citation statements)

References 2 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

192

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Mean solar production for U.S. locations was modelled using the American National Renewable Energy Laboratory's typical meteorological year data sets (TMY2, TMY3) [6]. Mean solar production for the Polish site was modelled from the Photovoltaic Solar Electricity Potential in European Countries data set [1]. The simulated SPB for the Lower Silesian PV system also assumed solar production was consumed behind the meter 50% of the time for 1:1 cost offset, and exported 50% of the time for 1:0.7 cost offset based on the recently enacted Odnawialne Źródła Energii (Renewable Energy Sources) laws.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…where csystem is the un-subsidized installed system cost, Qyear is the total annual irradiation for an optimally-inclined array at the location [1], PR is the system's annual DC to AC performance ratio [2], P is the system DC capacity in Watts, and celec is the cost of electricity that is avoided by the system's local production. The usefulness of the SPB calculation is that it is an intuitive expression of expenses and returns.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

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

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparing energy payback and simple payback period for solar photovoltaic systems

Kessler¹

2017

E3S Web Conf.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Therefore, any available information results either from empirical surveys or approximate calculations based on the analysis Figure 1. Average monthly global irradiation received on a horizontal plane in Romania [12].…”

Section: Solar Water Heating Systemsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…These systems Figure 1. Average monthly global irradiation received on a horizontal plane in Romania [12].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Economic and Environmental Analysis of Investing in Solar Water Heating Systems

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Solar water heating (SWH) systems can provide a significant part of the heat energy that is required in the residential sector. The use of SWH systems is motivated by the desire to reduce energy consumption and especially to reduce a major source of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. The purposes of the present paper consist in: assessing the solar potential; analysing the possibility of using solar energy to heat water for residential applications in Romania; investigating the economic potential of SWH systems; and their contribution to saving energy and reducing CO 2 emissions. The results showed that if solar systems are used, the annual energy savings amount to approximately 71%, and the reduction of GHG emissions into the atmosphere are of 18.5 tonnes of CO 2 over the lifespan of the system, with a discounted payback period of 6.8-8.6 years, in accordance with the savings achieved depending on system characteristics, the solar radiation available, ambient air temperature and on heating load characteristics. Financially, the installation of SWH systems determines net savings of 805-1151 Euro in a 25-year period in the absence of governmental subsidies. According to the sensitivity analysis, installing a SWH system with subsidies of up to 50% determines the reduction of the discounted payback period to 3.1-3.9 years and the increase of net savings to 1570-1916 Euro. These results indicate that investing in these systems is cost-effective for Romanian households as long as the governmental subsidies increase.

show abstract

“…Greece has a strong potential of solar electricity generation, especially during cloudless summer days. For example, a typical crystalline silicon PV system established in an urban residential area in Greece can produce annually between 1100 and 1330 kWh/m 2 peak [10,11]. Lebanon also has very high solar irradiance throughout the year.…”

Section: Trend Of On Grid Solar Power Systems With Netmentioning

confidence: 99%