David F. Taggart presents data and examples of how through design optimization, thin film fixed tilt PV plants can beat the financials of tracking crystalline plants, even in TOU markets
3. • Belectric/Beck Energy is now the largest
PV systems integrator in the world
• Belectric USA focuses on the North
American market
• 330MW of PV generation in 2010
• $700M combined annual revenue
• 1500 combined employees
• Largest user of thin film technology
worldwide
Confidential: Not for External Distribution
5. Interdependence of site and system parameters
1200000
► Module technology 1000000
Energy Output (Whr)
800000
Temperature 600000
Irradiance 400000
200000
Efficiency 0
3 6 9 12 15 18
Cost Hours (in one day)
► Structural solution
Fixed tilt vs. tracking
There are a lot of knobs that we
Installation rate and cost
can turn to directly impact
► System design
project financials!
Row to row spacing
Azimuth
DC/AC ratio
Tilt
System losses
O&M costs
Confidential: Not for External Distribution
6. Two key North American markets
► Las Vegas vs. Baltimore Southwest
► Module technologies
XSi, 285W, 14.8%
CIGS/CIS, 130W, 12.1%
CdTe, 80W, 11.2%
DJ‐ASi, 125W, 8.8%
► Structural solutions
Fixed tilt (20o for TF, 25o for XSi) at zero azimuth
Single axis tracker, NS axis, zero azimuth, +45/‐45, backtrack
Northeast
Confidential: Not for External Distribution
7. Designing for temperature
► Nameplate efficiencies are based on 25C module temperature
Module temperatures vary widely by site
Modules typically operate at higher temperatures
Losses at higher temperatures vary by module technology and mounting
Annual Daylight Temperature Distributions
for Las Vegas ‐ fixed & tracked
60%
% annual daylight hours
50%
T‐ambient
40%
30% T‐module Fixed
20%
T‐module
10% Tracked
0%
Temperature bin (C)
Confidential: Not for External Distribution
9. Designing for irradiance
► Module efficiencies quoted at 1000 W/m2
Actual time a plant spends at 1000 W/m2 is small
Orientation of module helps, but still not much time at 1000 W/m2
We need good performance at the lower irradiance levels too!
Annual Irradiance for Las Vegas,
horizontal vs. in‐plane tracked and fixed tilt
% of daylight hours
12%
Horizontal
9% Irradiance
6% Fixed In‐plane
Irradiance
3% Tracked In‐plane
0% Irradiance
Irradiance Bin (W/m2)
Confidential: Not for External Distribution
11. Designing for combined effects
► Effect of efficiency, irradiance, and temperature combined
Difference in efficiency gets smaller as irradiance drops and/or module
temperature increases
XSi Module Efficiency Advantage
4.0%
∆ Efficiency (XSi ‐ CdTe)
3.5%
3.0%
Module @ 25C
2.5%
Module @ 55C
2.0%
1.5%
1.0%
100 300 500 700 900 1100
Irradiance (W/m2)
Confidential: Not for External Distribution
12. Optimizing the project financials
► Model the financials of projects at each location, selecting the best
parameters for each site using fixed and tracking design solutions
► Consider for each system/location:
Optimizing for system yield
Unlevered financial returns analysis
► Assumptions
PPA agreement: 1 MWAC, $0.13/kWh
Land Use: closest match to 5 acres
DC/AC ratio: fixed to 1.25
PVsyst parameters per standard practice
Confidential: Not for External Distribution
13. System yields
► No surprise, tracked systems have higher yields
Deltas are higher in Las Vegas than in Baltimore
Are they high enough to offset install and O&M costs?
Annual Yield: Various Systems WRT Fixed CdTe
12%
Yield WRT to Fixed CdTe
Tracked XSi
9%
Fixed XSi
6%
Fixed DJ‐ASi
3%
Fixed CIGS/CIS
0%
‐3%
‐6%
Las Vegas Baltimore
Site Location
Confidential: Not for External Distribution
14. Financial analysis
► Unlevered Financial Returns
48% Tax Equity Investor, Return = 15%
52% Sponsor Equity
► Benchmark for comparison is:
Base Case Install Costs O&M Costs
Fixed CdTe System $2.75/Wp $0.02/Wp
► Then compare to the other module/mounting approach via:
Install Price
O&M cost
Confidential: Not for External Distribution
15. Financial analysis
► Las Vegas IRR matching: Picking module technology and mounting
approach, any combination of installed cost and O&M below the line
represents a higher IRR compared to the fixed CdTe benchmark
Equivalent Rate of Return Lines
to Fixed CdTe Benchmark
$0.04
O&M Price ($/Wp)
Tracked XSi
Fixed DJ‐ASi Tracking O&M
$0.03
Fixed XSi Fixed O&M
$0.02
Fixed CIGS/CIS
$0.01
Turnkey Install Price ($/Wp)
Confidential: Not for External Distribution
16. Conclusions
► Module nameplate efficiency and module price is simply
misleading when it comes to project financials
► Numerous parameters available for optimizing a “fixed” system
including azimuth, DC/AC ratio, tilt, row spacing, module
technology…
► Fixed thin film systems can beat the economics of trackers even in
the most challenging Southwest markets in the USA
► This becomes more true as commodity prices continue to rise, and
TF efficiency continues to improve
► Fixed systems are the path to the “commodity floor”
► Similar results for TOU or non‐TOU markets
Fixed thin film plants can beat contemporary
project financials via system‐level optimization
Confidential: Not for External Distribution