Page 84 - RSE - Results of the Apollon Project

Results of the APolloN PRoject ANd coNceNtRAtiNg PhotovoltAic PeRsPective

GIZA % losses for giza, Egypt
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 3.5% 2.7% 2.0% 9.4% 2.1% 0.0% 2.5% 1.2% 1.5% 3.6% 2,371 1,747 10.0% 74.6%
cSi tracked 1 14.5% 0.1% 1.2% 10,9% 2.1% 0.0% 2.5% 1.2% 1.5% 3.6% 1,845 2,166 9.0% 67.3%
HCPV 30% 1 6.2% 0.0% 1.8% 3.4% 0.5% 4.1% 3.5% 1.2% 1.5% 3.6% 3,363 1,750 22.6% 76.8%
HCPV 32% 1 6.2% 0.0% 1.8% 3.3% 0.5% 4.0% 3.5% 1.2% 1.5% 3.6% 3,598 1,753 24.1% 77.0%
HCPV 34% 1 6.2% 0.0% 1.8% 3.2% 0.5% 4.0% 3.5% 1.2% 1.5% 3.6% 3,825 1,751 25.7% 77.1%
cSi tracked 2 7.0% 0.1% 1.0% 11,1% 2.1% 0.0% 2.5% 1.2% 1.5% 3.6% 1,213 2,356 9.8% 73.1%
HCPV 30% 2 2.6% 0.0% 1.8% 3.4% 0.5% 4.9% 3.5% 1.2% 1.5% 3.6% 2,091 1,800 23.2% 79.1%
HCPV 32% 2 2.6% 0.0% 1.7% 3.3% 0.5% 4.9% 3.5% 1.2% 1.5% 3.6% 2,238 1,804 24.8% 79.2%
HCPV 34% 2 2.6% 0.0% 1.7% 3.2% 0.5% 4.9% 3.5% 1.2% 1.5% 3.6% 2,380 1,803 26.4% 79.3%

TUCSON % losses for tucson, Arizona
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 3.8% 2.6% 2.1% 7.8% 2.1% 0.0% 2.5% 1.2% 1.5% 3.6% 2,285 1,684 10.1% 75.7%
cSi tracked 1 16.7% 0.1% 1.4% 9,4% 2.1% 0.0% 2.5% 1.2% 1.5% 3.6% 1,793 2,105 8.9% 66.6%
HCPV 30% 1 7.1% 0.0% 1.5% 3.3% 0.5% 3.6% 3.5% 1.2% 1.5% 3.6% 3,697 1,924 22.6% 76.8%
HCPV 32% 1 7.1% 0.0% 1.5% 3.2% 0.5% 3.6% 3.5% 1.2% 1.5% 3.6% 3,953 1,925 24.1% 76.9%
HCPV 34% 1 7.1% 0.0% 1.5% 3.0% 0.5% 3.6% 3.5% 1.2% 1.5% 3.6% 4,203 1,924 25.6% 77.0%
cSi tracked 2 7.9% 0.1% 1.0% 1.1% 2.1% 0.0% 2.5% 1.2% 1.5% 3.6% 1,199 2,329 9.9% 73.6%
HCPV 30% 2 2.9% 0.0% 1.4% 3.3% 0.5% 4.4% 3.5% 1.2% 1.5% 3.6% 2,319 1,997 23.4% 79.7%
HCPV 32% 2 2.9% 0.0% 1.4% 3.2% 0.5% 4.4% 3.5% 1.2% 1.5% 3.6% 2,480 1,999 25.0% 79.8%
HCPV 34% 2 2.9% 0.0% 1.4% 3.1% 0.5% 4.4% 3.5% 1.2% 1.5% 3.6% 2,636 1,997 26.6% 79.9%

Note: the kWh/kWp values for HCPV are based on a power defned in the recently adopted CSTC conditions using
2
DNI=1,000 W/m as a reference. Using 850 W/m instead, the HCPV-values (for AC, in the dense layout) would be
2
1,766 kWh/kWp/year for Ragusa, 2,060 kWh/kWp/year for Giza and 2,264 kWh/kWp/year for Tucson
Figure 89 provides a graphical survey of the various types of losses for Tucson. For losses in Giza and Ragusa, see
Table 16. Some remarks on losses follow below.

FiguRE 89. Comparison of losses for the various confgurations for Tucson Arizona. For losses in Ragusa and Giza,
see Table 16. For each type of loss the graph shows the % loss for each type of confguration. Green-like bars are for
c-Si; blue-like bars are for HCPV in dense layout, red-like bars for HCPV in sparse layout. Inverter losses (not shown)
have been assumed 3.6% for all

83