Embodied Energy and Cost Assessments of a Concentrating Photovoltaic Module

Daria Freier Raine, Firdaus Muhammad-Sukki, Roberto Ramirez-Iniguez, Jorge Alfredo Ardila-Rey, Tahseen Jafry and Carlos Gamio
Additional contact information
Daria Freier Raine: School of Computing, Engineering and Built Environment, Glasgow Caledonian University, 70 Cowcaddens Road, Glasgow G4 0BA, UK
Firdaus Muhammad-Sukki: School of Engineering & the Built Environment, Edinburgh Napier University, Merchiston Campus, 10 Colinton Road, Edinburgh EH10 5DT, UK
Roberto Ramirez-Iniguez: School of Computing, Engineering and Built Environment, Glasgow Caledonian University, 70 Cowcaddens Road, Glasgow G4 0BA, UK
Jorge Alfredo Ardila-Rey: Department of Electrical Engineering, Universidad Técnica Federico Santa María, Santiago 8940000, Chile
Tahseen Jafry: School of Computing, Engineering and Built Environment, Glasgow Caledonian University, 70 Cowcaddens Road, Glasgow G4 0BA, UK
Carlos Gamio: School of Computing, Engineering and Built Environment, Glasgow Caledonian University, 70 Cowcaddens Road, Glasgow G4 0BA, UK

Sustainability, 2021, vol. 13, issue 24, 1-15

Abstract: This paper focuses on the embodied energy and cost assessments of a static concentrating photovoltaic (CPV) module in comparison to the flat photovoltaic (PV) module. The CPV module employs a specific concentrator design from the Genetically Optimised Circular Rotational Square Hyperboloid (GOCRSH) concentrators, labelled as GOCRSH_A. Firstly, it discussed previous research on life cycle analyses for PV and CPV modules. Next, it compared the energy embodied in the materials of the GOCRSH_A module to the energy embodied in the materials of a flat PV module of the same electrical output. Lastly, a comparison in terms of cost is presented between the analysed GOCRSH_A module and the flat PV module. It was found that the GOCRSH_A module showed a reduction in embodied energy of 17% which indicates a reduction in embodied carbon. In terms of cost, the costs for the GOCRSH_A module were calculated to be 1.71 times higher than the flat PV module of the same electrical output. It is concluded that a trade-off is required between the embodied energy and cost impacts in order to bring this CPV technology into the market.

Keywords: GOCRSH; life cycle analysis; energy embodiment; cost analysis (search for similar items in EconPapers)
JEL-codes: O13 Q Q0 Q2 Q3 Q5 Q56 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2021
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/24/13916/pdf (application/pdf)
https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/24/13916/ (text/html)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:13:y:2021:i:24:p:13916-:d:704019

Access Statistics for this article

Sustainability is currently edited by Ms. Alexandra Wu

More articles in Sustainability from MDPI
Bibliographic data for series maintained by MDPI Indexing Manager ().