Technoeconomic assessments of hybrid photovoltaic-thermal vs. conventional solar-energy systems: Case studies in heat and power provision to sports centres

Abstract

This paper presents a comprehensive analysis of the energy, economic and environmental potentials of hybrid photovoltaicthermal (PVT) and conventional solar energy systems for combined heat and power provision. A solar combined heat and power (S-CHP) system based on PVT collectors, a solar-power system based on PV panels, a solar-thermal system based on evacuated tube collectors (ETCs), and a S-CHP system based on a combination of side-by-side PV panels and ETCs (PV-ETC) are assessed and compared. A natural gas fired internal combustion engine (ICE) CHP system is also analysed as a competing fossil-fuel based solution. Annual simulations are conducted for the provision of electricity, along with space heating, swimming pool heating and hot water to the University Sports Centre of Bari, Italy. The results show that, based on a total installation area of 4000 m 2 in all cases, the PVT S-CHP system outperforms the other systems in terms of total energy output, with annual electrical and thermal energy yields reaching 82.3 % and 51.3 % of the centre's demands respectively. As a booming solar technology, the PV system is the most profitable solar solution with the shortest payback time (9.4 years) and lowest levelised cost of energy (0.089 €/kWh). Conversely, the ETC solar-thermal system is economically inviable for the sports centre application and increasing the ETC area share in the combined PV-ETC S-CHP system is unfavourable due to the low natural gas price. Although the PVT S-CHP system has the highest investment cost, the high annual revenue from the avoided energy bills elevates its economic performance to between those of the conventional PV and ETC-based energy systems, with a payback time of 13.7 years and a levelised cost of energy of 0.109 €/kWh. At 445 tCO 2 /year, the CO 2 emission reduction potential of the PVT S-CHP system is considerably higher than those of the all other solar systems (254-317 tCO 2 /year). Compared to the solar energy systems, the ICE CHP system has the shortest payback time (6.2 years), but its CO 2 emission reduction (25 tCO 2 /year) is significantly lower. A high carbon price is beneficial for improving the cost-competitiveness of the solar energy systems, in particular the PVT S-CHP system, which would further boost its market penetration, helping to meet the carbon emission targets.

Thermal Energy Storage for Solar Energy Utilization: Fundamentals and Applications

“…One of the most important applications of solar energy is to generate electricity, which can be realized by either solar photovoltaic (PV) panels or solar-thermal driven power cycles [65]. To mitigate the intermittence of solar energy, PV systems usually use batteries to store energy in terms of electricity, while solar-thermal driven power cycles often store energy in terms of heat via thermal energy storage technologies.…”

“…Solar radiation is absorbed in terms of heat by the solar collectors, e.g. evacuated tube collectors, flat-plate collectors, or hybrid photovoltaic-thermal collectors [65]. A circulating HTF loop is used to collect heat from the solar collectors and store it in the water tank when the fluid temperature from the collectors is higher than the water temperature in the tank.…”

Digital Mapping of Techno-Economic Performance of a Water-Based Solar Photovoltaic/Thermal (PVT) System for Buildings over Large Geographical Cities

“…There are several studies concerning the techno-economic analysis of PVT collectors with a focus on the component and system design [4,[9][10][11][12]. The most common way is to assess the energetic performance firstly and then carry out an economic evaluation based on dependent variables [4,9,10,[12][13][14][15][16].…”

Efficiency limits of concentrating spectral-splitting hybrid photovoltaic-thermal (PV-T) solar collectors and systems

“…The thermal absorber cools the PV cells but also harvests waste heat from the cells as useful thermal energy, which can be utilized downstream for domestic hot water or space heating 15 , 16 . This makes PVT collectors significantly more efficient overall than standalone PV modules 17 , 18 . However, in these arrangements, the thermal absorber is designed to be in good thermal contact with the PV cells, leading to similar PV cell and absorber operating temperatures and compromising the PV efficiency if a higher-temperature thermal output is pursued.…”