Techno-economic performance comparison of crystalline and thin film PV panels under varying meteorological conditions: A high solar resource southern hemisphere case

• Published in: Applied energy Vol. 275; p. 115041
• Main Authors: Thopil, George Alex, Sachse, Christiaan Eddie, Lalk, Jörg, Thopil, Miriam Sara
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Elsevier Ltd 01.10.2020
• Subjects: Crystalline; Photovoltaic; South Africa; Southern hemisphere; Techno-economics; Thin film; Techno-economics; South Africa; Photovoltaic; Southern hemisphere; Crystalline; Thin film
• ISSN: 0306-2619; 1872-9118
• DOI: 10.1016/j.apenergy.2020.115041

•Financial performance comparison of 3 PV technologies are performed.•Panel types include monocrystalline, polycrystalline and thin film CIGS.•Comparison incorporates yield and meteorological data over two year period.•CIGS panels outperform crystalline technologies across all financial indicators.•CIGS perform better across all temperatures and are less sensitive to irradiation. Photovoltaic panel technologies have evolved considerably over a limited period. The most popular PV panel technologies can be divided into two main groups, the first being crystalline technologies and second, thin film technologies. This investigation compares the financial performance of three different photovoltaic (PV) panel technologies, namely, monocrystalline, polycrystalline and thin film copper indium gallium selenide (CIGS), based on measurements from a test facility and for varying meteorological conditions. The yield measurements of the panels from the site over a two-year period are used to develop the techno-economic indicator performance, for a proposed commercial installation. Measurements of solar irradiation and temperature are incorporated into a regression model for yield sensitivity analysis, which in turn is used to investigative the sensitivity of financial performance. It was seen that CIGS panels delivered on average 11.6% more yield when compared to monocrystalline technologies per kWp, with sustained outputs even during relatively colder periods. The improved financial performance of CIGS panels over monocrystalline panels was seen via a 24% increase in discounted return on investment, 7.8% reduction in payback period and 21% improvement in net present value. The regression model indicates that CIGS panel yields are less sensitive to lower solar irradiation and more sensitive towards higher temperatures. Overall variation of financial indicators for a range of yield outputs, is lowest for CIGS panels compared to both types of crystalline panels. CIGS panels show lower variability in financial returns particularly in conditions with higher temperatures that makes the results valid in geographical locations with higher temperatures and higher solar irradiation. The findings are useful for multiple stakeholders within the PV industry who have an interest in sub-Saharan Africa and the southern hemisphere, where such investigations are limited though solar resource is abundant.