Page 83 - RSE - Results of the Apollon Project

Results of the APolloN PRoject ANd coNceNtRAtiNg PhotovoltAic PeRsPective

tABLE 15. Terrain layout, installed powers and gross- and net-module areas, valid for each of the three sites. For
tracked systems there are two layouts, dense (1) and sparse (2). For HCPV there are 3 module qualities: 30, 32 , 34%

type Pitch Pitch Num Num Num Power Power gross Net
and EO NS rows rows towers of Num Num StC per StC Area Area
Confg [m] [m] EO NS supports strings modules Module installed Modules Modules
[Wp] [kWp] [m ] [m ]
2
2
cSi fxed 7.0 5 29 145 290 5,220 260 1,357.2 10,129 8,930
cSi tracked 1 14.3 14.9 7 13 91 182 3,276 260 851.8 6,357 5,604
HCPV 30% 1 14.3 14.9 7 13 91 910 7,280 264 1,921.9 6,552 6,416
HCPV 32% 1 14.3 14.9 7 13 91 910 7,280 282 2,053.0 6,552 6,416
HCPV 34% 1 14.3 14.9 7 13 91 910 7,280 300 2,184.0 6,552 6,416
cSi tracked 2 21.5 17.7 5 11 55 110 1,980 260 514.8 3,842 3,387
HCPV 30% 2 21.5 17.7 5 11 55 550 4,400 264 1,161.6 3,960 3,878
HCPV 32% 2 21.5 17.7 5 11 55 550 4,400 260 1,240.8 3,960 3,878
HCPV 34% 2 21.5 17.7 5 11 55 550 4,400 300 1,320.0 3,960 3,878

The tracked c-Si solutions have the lowest energy production in terms of MWh/year (Table 16). This technology
has a high kWh/kWp value, but the power (kWp) that can be installed on the given terrain with this technology is
very low (Table 15). This does not rule out that this technology may become interesting if terrain costs are low or if
obtaining the lowest LCOE is the main goal.
The highest energy production on the given terrain is obtained by the HCPV modules in the dense layout. The
dense layout has higher self-shading losses (6.2-7.1%) than the sparse layout (2.6-3.0%), but this is more than
compensated for by the much higher installed power of the dense layout.
For Ragusa and for Giza the AC-energy generation for HCPV in the dense layout is from 42% to 63% higher
(depending on module quality) than that for the fxed c-Si solution while kWh/kWp values are relatively close, 1,479
vs. 1,501 for Ragusa and 1,747 vs. 1,751 for Giza (see Table 16).
For Tucson the AC-energy generation for HCPV in the dense layout is from 62% to 84% higher (depending on
module quality) than that for the fxed c-Si solution while kWh/kWp values are more distant, 1,684 for fxed c-Si vs.
1,924 for HCPV. Tucson is a better site for HCPV than Ragusa and Giza.

tABLE 16. Losses and AC-energy production from the comparison between fxed PV, 2-axis tracked PV and HCPV,
according to PVSyST simulations for a fxed-size terrain. Top part is for the site Ragusa, Italy; middle part is for
Giza, Egypt; bottom part is for Tucson, Arizona. For tracked systems, two layouts are analyzed: dense (1) and sparse
(2). For HCPV there are 3 module qualities (30, 32 and 34%)

RAGUSA % losses for Ragusa, italy
type self incid. irrad. cell mis spectrum soiling quality ohmic % Energy Energy Effciency Perform.
and shade angle level temp. match loss AC AC AC [%] Ratio AC
Confg for produced [kWh (gross [%]
inverter [MWh /kWp area) (gross
(dC->AC) /year] /year] area)
cSi fxed 4.0% 2.7% 2.5% 8.0% 2.1% 0.0% 2.5% 1.2% 1.5% 3.6% 2,007 1,479 10.0% 74.9%
cSi tracked 1 16.2% 0.1% 1.7% 9,4% 2.1% 0.0% 2.5% 1.2% 1.5% 3.6% 1,549 1,819 8.9% 66.6%
HCPV 30% 1 7.1% 0.0% 1.9% 3.3% 0.5% 4.2% 3.5% 1.2% 1.5% 3.6% 2,884 1,500 22.3% 76.0%
HCPV 32% 1 7.1% 0.0% 1.9% 3.2% 0.5% 4.2% 3.5% 1.2% 1.5% 3.6% 3,083 1,502 23.9% 76.1%
HCPV 34% 1 7.1% 0.0% 1.9% 3.1% 0.5% 4.2% 3.5% 1.2% 1.5% 3.6% 3,278 1,501 25.4% 76.2%
cSi tracked 2 7.9% 0.1% 1.4% 9,7% 2.1% 0.0% 2.5% 1.2% 1.5% 3.6% 1,029 1,999 9.8% 73.2%
HCPV 30% 2 3.0% 0.0% 1.8% 3.3% 0.5% 5.1% 3.5% 1.2% 1.5% 3.6% 1,804 1,553 23.1% 78.7%
HCPV 32% 2 3.0% 0.0% 1.8% 3.2% 0.5% 5.1% 3.5% 1.2% 1.5% 3.6% 1,929 1,555 24.7% 78.8%
HCPV 34% 2 3.0% 0.0% 1.8% 3.1% 0.5% 5.1% 3.5% 1.2% 1.5% 3.6% 2,051 1,554 26.3% 78.9%

82