Page 88 - RSE - Results of the Apollon Project
P. 88
Results of the APolloN PRoject ANd coNceNtRAtiNg PhotovoltAic PeRsPective
tABLE 17. Assumptions made for the LCOE calculations
10% VAT applies to the installation costs.
No costs for the terrain.
Assumed end-of-life is after 20 years.
No scrap value or removal cost.
Annual degradation of energy production is 0.5% for all technologies.
No incentives. Price for sold energy is € 0.10 / kWh.
Cost of consumed energy is € 0.12 / kWh.
No bank loan.
Revenue tax 25%, Italian IRES rules. No other taxes.
Annual Price variation zero (increases due to infation assumed compensated by actualization of costs to the frst year).
Cost of Insurance is € 10 / kWp for fxed c-Si, but slightly higher for the other technologies because of the presence
of the tracker and because less historical data exist: € 12 for tracked c-Si and € 13 for HCPV.
Maintenance & Operation: For all technologies inverter substitution after 10 years is assumed with an associated cost
of € 286 / kWp distributed over 20 years for € 14.3 / kWp / year. In addition 0.5% of Installed Cost is assumed for fxed c-Si,
0.8% for tracked c-Si and 1.0% for HCPV (the latter two are higher because of the presence of the tracker and maybe
of a dry-air supply system).
Consumables: this is the self-consumption of electricity by the generation plant. It is diffcult to estimate and uncertain.
For HCPV it is estimated as 1.5 kWh /day /tracker, including not only the tracker consumption. Tracked c-Si needs
less frequent tracker movements and has no dry air supply system: 1.0 kWh /day /tracker. For fxed c-Si 0.5% of AC generated
power is assumed.
Conclusions from LCOE calculations (see table 18)
All conclusions are valid only under the energetic and economic assumptions made above and for the sites
chosen, by considering the reported irradiances and ambient temperatures. In addition, the conclusions are valid
only for the chosen (constant) price of energy, without incentives:
p tracked c-Si and HCPV in the dense layout (1) always have a slightly higher LCOE than in the sparse layout (2)
because shading losses are higher in the frst case. For a fxed-size terrain however the dense layout leads to a
higher energy production. The choice of the density of the trackers on a given terrain is a compromise between
lower LCOE and higher energy production;
p fxed c-Si with installation costs of X euros/Wp and Tracked c-Si with installationd costs of (X+0.30) euros/Wp
will have approximately the same LCOE;
p For c-Si (either fxed or tracked) the calculated LCOE’s for Ragusa vary from 0.091 to 0.104 euros/kWh. For HCPV
the LCOE’s for the same site vary from 0.120 to 0.128 euros/kWh. Consequently, HCPV has diffculties in being
competitive in Ragusa, which is a zone with DNI = 5.4 kWh/m /day and near 29% of diffuse light;
2
2
p For Giza, which is a zone with DNI = 6.2 kWh/m /day and over 29% of diffuse light, the calculated LCOE’s are
lower than for Ragusa, because more energy can be produced with the same installation, thanks to the fact that
more sunlight is available. The decrease in LCOE is however similar for all technologies, ranging from 11% to
14%. Therefore the competitiveness of HCPV with respect to c-Si is more or less the same in Ragusa and in Giza.
2
When evaluating sites for HCPV installation, a DNI-value >6 kWh/m /day alone is not suffcient: in addition the
percentage of diffuse light should be low;
2
p for Tucson, which is a zone with DNI = 6.9 kWh/m /day and only 21% of diffuse light, the calculated LCOE’s chan-
ge in favour of HCPV with respect to c-Si. In particular for HCPV-modules with 34% effciency and system install
costs of 1.90 euros/Wp the LCOE are 0.099 euros/kWh which is close to being competitive with fxed and tracked
c-Si systems, depending on the installation costs of the latter;
p the total costs in 20 years are often close to the income from energy sold in the same period (without incentives
and at current energy prices). Consequently any investment should be carefully evaluated.
87
