A1 Refereed original research article in a scientific journal
Techno-economic analysis on optimizing the value of photovoltaic electricity in a high-latitude location
Authors: Jouttijärvi Sami, Karttunen Lauri, Ranta Samuli, Miettunen Kati
Publisher: Elsevier
Publication year: 2024
Journal: Applied Energy
Journal name in source: Applied Energy
Article number: 122924
Volume: 361
ISSN: 0306-2619
eISSN: 1872-9118
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2024.122924
Web address : https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2024.122924
Self-archived copy’s web address: https://research.utu.fi/converis/portal/detail/Publication/387105923
This study performs a techno-economic analysis of different photovoltaic (PV) systems suitable for detached houses in high-latitude locations and quantifies the key economic indicators affecting their competitiveness. Residential PV systems providing different temporal power production profiles are compared, accounting for the electricity price variations in the day-ahead market and the possibility of self-consuming the produced electricity. The procedure allows novel and comprehensive case study analysis that captures PV production, self-consumption, and dynamic electricity pricing, ultimately revealing the value of the produced PV electricity. This procedure is applied to a hundred case studies representing single-family houses with different PV systems, electricity load profiles, and electricity contracts. Vertical East-West mounted bifacial panels (VBPV) reached superior performance, with 9.1% higher overall production (with 2019 weather data) and 7.4%–10.9% higher economic value (with 2019 and 2022 electricity price data) for the produced PV electricity compared with monofacial PV. Thus, VBPV is an excellent choice for households economically, but the availability of suitable installation sites in the urban environment limits the possibility of its utilization. The economic value of PV electricity strongly correlates with self-consumed electricity due to avoided transmission fees and taxes, and a significant drop in total production causes only a minor reduction in value if the amount of self-consumed electricity remains similar. Thus, for a small-scale producer who orients the panels toward the East and the West instead of the South with a 45° tilt, the economic loss is significantly smaller (even as low as 12.6%) than the production loss (23.2%).
Downloadable publication This is an electronic reprint of the original article. |  |
