integrating solar pv systems into residential buildings … · integrating solar pv systems into...
TRANSCRIPT
INTEGRATING SOLAR PV SYSTEMS INTO
RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS IN COLD-CLIMATE
REGIONS
GOING SOLAR? HOW TO DETERMINE
THE VALUE OF A SOLAR INVESTMENT
January 19, 2017
Hadia Awad
Dr. Mustafa Gül
Dr. Mohamed Al-Hussein
Civil & Environmental Engineering
University of Alberta
Our Team
Supervisors Dr. Mustafa Gül
Dr. Mohamed Al-Hussein
Students Hadia Awad
K M Emtiaz Salim
Landmark Group of Companies Dr. Haitao Yu
Mr. Kyle Kasawski
2
Funding Source Natural Sciences and Engineering Research
Council of Canada (NSERC)
Outline 3
Introduction & background
Three years of monitored data. What have we learned
so far?
Commercially available prediction tools: A comparison
between actual and predicted values.
Case study: High Energy-Efficiency Home
In-house design-assistance tools
List of publications
Introduction…Around the World 4
Cumulative installed PV capacity around the world
Alberta Germany
http://www.greenenergyfutures.ca/blog/sunny-days-
ahead-solar-alberta
High: 5 kWh/m2/day
Low: 3 kWh/m2/day
World’s highest: 8 kWh/m2/day Source: (NRCan, 2016; Statista, 2015)
43.5
39.7
34.4
25.6
18.9
9.1
6.6
5.4
5.2
5.1
1.843
0 10 20 30 40 50
China
Germany
Japan
United States
Italy
United Kingdom
france
Spain
India
Australia
Canada (2014)
Cumulative Installed PV Capacity (GW)
Introduction…Canada
City Hours
Calgary (Alberta) 2,396
Winnipeg (Manitoba) 2,353
Edmonton (Alberta) 2,345
Regina (Saskatchewan) 2,318
Saskatoon (Saskatchewan) 2,268
Thunder Bay (Ontario) 2,121
Hamilton (Ontario) 2,111
Victoria (British Columbia) 2,109
Ottawa (Ontario) 2,084
Toronto (Ontario) 2,066
City (kWh/kW)
Regina (Saskatchewan) 1,361
Calgary (Alberta) 1,292
Winnipeg (Manitoba) 1,277
Edmonton (Alberta) 1,245
Ottawa (Ontario) 1,198
Montréal (Québec) 1,185
Toronto (Ontario) 1,161
Fredericton (New Brunswick) 1,145
Québec City (Québec) 1,134
Charlottetown (PEI) 1,095
5
10 Sunniest Cities in Canada Yearly PV potential (kWh/kW)
Source: http://pv.nrcan.gc.ca/index.php?lang=e&m=r
Introduction...What is Solar Photovoltaic? 6
Light
(Photons)
Electricity
(Voltage) PhotoVoltaic
http://dailysolar.net/how-solar-works/
PV Array
AC/DC Inverter
Fusebox
AC Loads Grid
Monitored PV Systems 7
Alberta, Canada
2010 to date
113 houses
City Houses Area
Lakeland
County 1 1
Lakeland
County
Edmonton 58
66 Edmonton
Sherwood
Park 5
Leduc 1
Beaumont 2
Red Deer 7 8 Red Deer
Sylvan Lake 1
Calgary 12
28 Calgary Cochrane 15
Airdrie 1
50.5
51
51.5
52
52.5
53
53.5
54
54.5
55
-115 -114.5 -114 -113.5 -113 -112.5 -112 -111.5
Latitu
de ˚
Longitude ˚
House Locations
Lakeland County
Monitored PV Systems 8
Latitude
Longitude
Edmonton
Red Deer
Calgary
Insolation vs. PV Energy Output 9
Example: Edmonton
Tilt = 30˚, Azimuth = 180˚
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
kW
h/m
2/d
ay
Solar Insolation Incident on a Surface (kWh/m2/day)
Generation Average Insolation Incident On A Horizontal Surface Average Top-of-atmosphere Insolation
11%- 15% 50%
100%
What have we learned so far? Same system in different locations
Same location with different tilt angles
Comparison between actual and estimates (PVWatts and RETScreen)
Three years of monitored data: 10
Location vs. PV Energy Output 11
Example: Different locations
Tilt = 27˚, Azimuth = 180˚
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
180
200
kWh/kW
Airdrie Red Deer Edmonton
Sherwood Park Cochrane Calgary
0
200
400
600
800
1,000
1,200
1,400
1,600
kW
h/k
W
January February March April
May June July August
Tilt Angle vs. PV Energy Output 12
Example: Different Tilts
Location: Edmonton, Azimuth = 180˚
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0:0
1:0
2:0
3:0
4:0
5:0
6:0
7:0
8:0
9:0
10
:01
1:0
12
:01
3:0
14
:01
5:0
16
:01
7:0
18
:01
9:0
20
:02
1:0
22
:02
3:0
kWh/
kW
TimeStamp
Jan Feb Mar Apr
May Jun Jul Aug
Sep Oct Nov Dec
Tilt = 60°
Azimuth = 180°
Location:
Edmonton
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0:0
1:0
2:0
3:0
4:0
5:0
6:0
7:0
8:0
9:0
10
:01
1:0
12
:01
3:0
14
:01
5:0
16
:01
7:0
18
:01
9:0
20
:02
1:0
22
:02
3:0
kWh/
kW
TimeStamp
Jan Feb Mar Apr
May Jun Jul Aug
Sep Oct Nov Dec
Tilt = 27°
Azimuth =
180°
Location:
Edmonton
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0:0
1:0
2:0
3:0
4:0
5:0
6:0
7:0
8:0
9:0
10
:01
1:0
12
:01
3:0
14
:01
5:0
16
:01
7:0
18
:01
9:0
20
:02
1:0
22
:02
3:0
kWh/
kW
TimeStamp
Jan Feb Mar Apr
May Jun Jul Aug
Sep Oct Nov Dec
Tilt = 18°
Azimuth = 180°
Location: Edmonton
Tilt = 18° Tilt = 27° Tilt = 60°
Tilt Angle vs. PV Energy Output 13
Example: Different Tilt Angles
Location: Edmonton, Azimuth = 180˚
Jan
Feb
Mar
Ap
r
May
Jun
Jul
Aug
Sep
Oct
Nov
Dec
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
%
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
Jan
Feb
Mar
Ap
r
May
Jun
Jul
Aug
Sep
Oct
Nov
Dec
%
Jan
Feb
Mar
Ap
r
May
Jun
Jul
Aug
Sep
Oct
Nov
Dec
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
%
Tilt = 18°
Azimuth = 180°
Tilt = 27°
Azimuth = 180°
Tilt = 60°
Azimuth = 180°
Actual Vs. PVWatts and RETScreen 14
0
200
400
600
800
1,000
1,200
1,400
1,600
1,800
1 11 21 31 41 51 61 71 81
kW
h/k
W
PV system ID
Annual measured Annual PVWatts prediction Annual RETScreen prediction
Edmonton Red Deer Calgary
Over-estimate: 5%-10%
Summary: PV Layout Efficiency Factors 15
Orientation Tilt Angle 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90
0 N 0.759 0.659 0.563 0.476 0.398 0.335 0.298 0.283 0.271 0.261
22.5 NNE 0.759 0.667 0.579 0.499 0.428 0.373 0.341 0.320 0.304 0.289
45 NE 0.759 0.690 0.621 0.559 0.506 0.465 0.433 0.406 0.380 0.355
67.5 ENE 0.759 0.723 0.685 0.648 0.614 0.582 0.550 0.517 0.483 0.445
90 E 0.759 0.760 0.756 0.746 0.729 0.706 0.677 0.640 0.597 0.548
112.5 ESE 0.759 0.797 0.823 0.836 0.835 0.823 0.797 0.756 0.708 0.646
135 SE 0.759 0.827 0.878 0.911 0.923 0.918 0.896 0.854 0.798 0.726
157.5 SSE 0.759 0.845 0.913 0.958 0.980 0.980 0.959 0.916 0.853 0.773
180 S 0.759 0.851 0.924 0.973 0.998 1.000 0.979 0.937 0.872 0.787
202.5 SSW 0.759 0.844 0.910 0.954 0.975 0.976 0.955 0.912 0.850 0.770
225 SW 0.759 0.824 0.871 0.902 0.915 0.910 0.886 0.845 0.789 0.719
247.5 WSW 0.759 0.792 0.814 0.826 0.824 0.811 0.784 0.745 0.696 0.637
270 W 0.759 0.755 0.747 0.733 0.715 0.691 0.661 0.625 0.583 0.536
292.5 WNW 0.759 0.718 0.675 0.635 0.599 0.565 0.534 0.502 0.468 0.432
315 NW 0.759 0.686 0.613 0.547 0.493 0.452 0.420 0.393 0.368 0.344
337.5 NNW 0.759 0.665 0.574 0.491 0.419 0.364 0.331 0.312 0.297 0.283
Case Study: High Energy-Efficiency
Home 16
Location: Edmonton (Lottery home)
Tilt Angle = 27° (7:12)
Azimuth =152° (near-south)
System size = 14.7 kWp
45 panels * 327 W
PV potential = 1,050 kWh/kW
Yearly generation = 15,500 kWh
Yearly demand = 23,000 kWh
Case Study: High Energy-Efficiency
Home 17
-2,000
-1,000
0
1,000
2,000
3,000
4,000
Sep
Oct
No
v
Dec Jan
Feb
Mar
Ap
r
May Jun
Jul
Au
g
kWh
Monthly Profile
Export Delivered use Gen
-0.1
-0.05
0
0.05
0.1
0.15
0:0
2:0
4:0
6:0
8:0
10
:0
12
:0
14
:0
16
:0
18
:0
20
:0
22
:0
kWh
Daily Profile (1-minute resolution)
Delivered Exported Use
Gen Grid Interaction
18
23,006
-9,932
17,474 15,464
-15,000
-10,000
-5,000
0
5,000
10,000
15,000
20,000
25,000
use Export Delivered Gen
kWh
Annual
use
Export
Delivered
Gen
Uses: 23,006 kWh
Generates: 15,464 kWh
Buys: 17,474 kWh
Sells: (-)9,932 kWh
Saves:
5,531 kWh * electricity rate+
9,932 kWh* incentive rate
Case Study: High Energy-Efficiency Home
Case Study: Net-Zero Balance 19
-
4,000
8,000
12,000
16,000
20,000
24,000
0 4,000 8,000 12,000 16,000 20,000 24,000
Genera
tion k
Wh
Consumption kWh
Measured NetZero
Yearly Generation
Yearly Exported
Monthly
Generation
Monthly
Load
Yea
rly Lo
ad
Yea
rly
Delive
red
In-house Design-assistance Tools
1. Residential Multiple-
sub-array Design
Tool
2. Commercial Flat-rooftop
Optimization Tool
21
1. Residential Multiple-sub-array Design
22
PV Panel Capacity 305 W/panel 4,340
Based on PVWatts 1,180
Annual Generation Factor 1,350 kWh/kW
Number of panels 9 Number of panels 3 Number of panels 0
Orientation SE Orientation SW Orientation S
Tilt Angle 20 Tilt Angle 20 Tilt Angle 20
Capacity Factor 0.88 Capacity Factor 0.87 Capacity Factor 0.92
User Input:
Number of Panels
Tilt Angle
Orientation
PV Panel Capacity
2. Commercial Flat-rooftop Optimization Tool
23
User Input:
• Roof dimensions
• Exact location (latitude)
• Building block orientation
• PV panel capacity and dimensions
• Incentives, panel cost, electricity cost, etc.
Objective:
• Maximum annual generation
• Minimum payback period
Criteria:
• Shading analysis
• Snow effect on different tilt angles
• Tilt angle and orientation effect on annual generation
• Effect of all above on payback period
Output:
• Inter-row spacing
• Number of panels
• Capital cost
• Payback period
Optimization Engine
2. Commercial Flat-rooftop Optimization Tool
24
PV layout efficiency factors in Edmonton
Tilt angle
Azi
mut
h A
ngle
0° 45-50° 90°
S
W
E
2. Commercial Flat-rooftop Optimization Tool
25
Enter Latitude within Edmonton 53.5 Orientation Op#1 140
Enter Hour (24-hour) (Default is 12 PM) 12 Orientation Op#2 230
Enter Year 2016 Output from Op#1 1182
Enter building's deviation from south (Due South = 180°) -39 Output from Op#2 1135
Calculations based on PV potential of (kWh/kW) 1349 Preferred Orientation 140
Parameters L (Landscape) W (Portrait) Thickness
Panel Size (m) 0.99 1.65 0.044
Panel Capacity (W) 260
Panel Weight (Kg) 20
Roof Information
Parameters W L
Roof Size (m) 30.1 20.62
Parapet height (m) 0.56
First row distance from parapet 2.63
Allowable Space (m) 28.28 17.08 Do not Change
Buffer (Roof Edge) 0.91
Minimum inter-row spacing (m) 0.6
walkway for maintenance (m) 1.8
Number of walkways 0
Energy Cost ($/kWh) 0.0835
Delivery Cost ($/kWh) 0.0284
Local Access Fee ($/kWh) 0.0124
Total Consumption Cost ($/kWh) 0.1243 Do Not Change
Export Revenue ($/kWh) 0.08
Installation Cost ($/W) 2.96
Location & Date/Time
Financials/Variable Charges for Grid Energy
Panel Information
2. Commercial Flat-rooftop Optimization Tool
26
Maximum Generation
Maximum Generation per panel/Minimum Payback
Criterion
With Shade
Criterion
Orientation Landscape Portrait Landscape Portrait Orientation Landscape Portrait Landscape Portrait
(yrs) 29 29 44 63 (yrs) 29 29 34 38
Tilt Angle 53.5 53.5 70 90 Tilt Angle 53.5 53.5 10 0
Inter-row Spacing 3.75 6.75 1.245 1.245 Inter-row Spacing 4.02 6.70 1.72 2.29
Number of Panels 68 56 221 364 Number of Panels 68 56 170 196
Capital Cost 52,333$ 43,098$ 170,082$ 280,134$ Capital Cost 52,333$ 43,098$ 130,832$ 150,842$
Unit Cost ($/kWh) 2.38$ 2.38$ 3.13$ 5.20$ Unit Cost ($/kWh) 2.38$ 2.38$ 2.80$ 3.10$
Energy Generation (MWh) 21.99 18.11 55.70 57.08 Energy Generation (MWh) 22.03 18.14 42.75 48.63
Generation/unit area (kWh/m^2) 52.26 48.39 122.68 127.22 Generation/unit area (kWh/m^2) 48.85 48.85 88.82 109.25
Objectives
Lowest Payback
Period/ Maximum per
panel generation
Maximum Annual
Generation
Lowest Payback Period/
Maximum per panel generationMaximum Annual Generation
0.00
0.50
1.00
1.50
2.00
2.50
3.00
3.50
4.00
4.50
5.00
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
0 10 20 25.5 30 40 46 50 53.5 60 70 80 90
Tilt Angle
Preliminary Results Annual Generation (MWh)
Per Panel Generation (kWh)
Number of Panels (Qty)
Capital Cost (K$)
Payback (yrs)
Generation per unit area(kWh/m^2)
Cost ($/m^2)
Inter-row Spacing (m)
Annual Savings (K$)
Unit Cost ($/kWh)
Min Payback
2. Commercial Flat-rooftop Optimization Tool
27
Max Overall
Generation
List of Publications 28
Journal papers:
Li, H.X., Gül, M., Yu, H., Awad, H., and Al-Hussein, M. (2016). “An energy performance monitoring, analysis and modelling
framework for NetZero Energy Homes (NZEHs).” Energy and Buildings, 126, 353-364.
Li, Y., Yu, H., Sharmin, T., Awad, H., and Gül, M. (2016). “Towards energy-efficient homes: Evaluating the hygrothermal
performance of different wall assemblies through long-term field monitoring. Energy and Buildings, 121, 43-56.
Awad, H., Gul, M., Zaman, H., Yu, H., and Al-Hussein, M. (2014) “Evaluation of the thermal and structural performance of
potential energy efficient wall systems for mid-rise wood-frame buildings.” Energy and Buildings, 82, 416-427.
Conference papers:
Awad, H., Gül, M., Ritter, C., Verma, P., Chen, Y., Yu, H., Kasawski, K., Salim, K. E., and Al-Hussein, M. (2016). “Solar
photovoltaic optimization for commercial flat rooftops in cold regions.” Proceedings, IEEE Conference on Technologies for
Sustainability, Phoenix, AZ, USA, Oct. 9-11.
Salim, K.M.E., Awad, H., Gül, M., Knudson, R., and Al-Hussein, M. (2016). “An experimental framework for investigating the
hygrothermal properties of multi-functional wood fibre and XPS panels for residential buildings.” Proceedings, Modular and
Offsite Construction (MOC) Summit, Edmonton, AB, Canada, Sep. 29-Oct. 1, pp. 266-273.
Awad, H., Gul, M., Zaman, H., Yu, H., and Al-Hussein, M. (2014) “Evaluation of the thermal and structural performance of
potential energy efficient wall systems for mid-rise wood-frame buildings.” Proceedings, Construction Research Congress,
2255-2265.
Awad, H., Farag, H., Taha, D., and Hanafi, M. (2012). "Architectural acoustics in educational facilities: An empirical study
on university classrooms in Egypt." Proceedings, 164th Meeting of the Acoustical Society of America.