Advertisement

Energy and environmental life cycle assessment of a high concentration photovoltaic power plant in Morocco

  • Blanca Corona
  • Lidia Escudero
  • Goulven Quéméré
  • Ignacio Luque-Heredia
  • Guillermo San MiguelEmail author
LCA FOR ENERGY SYSTEMS AND FOOD PRODUCTS

Abstract

Purpose

High concentrated photovoltaic (HCPV) technology transforms solar radiation into electricity at efficiencies far higher than conventional PV cells. The aim of this paper is to evaluate the environmental impact of a commercial HCPV plant located in Morocco by determining the impact of this technology on a wide range of environmental categories. The results are expected to contribute to a better environmental design and performance of the power plant.

Methods

A complete life cycle inventory was gathered for a 1.008 MW HCPV power plant located in Casablanca (Morocco). The system was evaluated using a cradle to gate approach, considering 1 MWh as functional unit. ReCiPe Midpoint (World) evaluation method and Simapro Software were used for calculations. A sensitivity analysis on the life expectancy for 20, 25 and 30 years was also performed. Cumulative energy demand and energy payback time were determined for each scenario.

Results and discussion

The results showed an EPBT of 1.457 years and the following main environmental impacts: climate change 53.3 kg CO2 eq/MWh, freshwater eutrophication 28.3 g P eq/MWh, human toxicity 44.1 kg 1.4-DB eq/MWh, freshwater ecotoxicity 1.20 kg 1.4-DB eq/MWh and marine ecotoxicity 1.20 g 1.4-DB eq/kWh. Most of the impacts were associated with the extraction of raw materials and manufacturing of components, being aluminum and steel the materials with higher impacts. Normalization assigned the highest impacts to the toxicity categories, due mainly to the materials employed in the electronic devices and the aluminum used in the module manufacturing. The end-of-life stage had a significant positive effect on the performance of the plant, reducing the impact on each category by between 8 % (in ozone depletion) and 43 % (in particulate matter formation), due mainly to the recycling of steel and aluminum.

Conclusions

The power plant components manufacturing and the electricity consumption from the grid presented a high impact in the life cycle of the plant, implying a significant importance of the local electricity mix. An adequate recycling of the materials is recommendable, since it reduces considerably the impact of the system. The sensitivity analysis revealed a significant improvement in the environmental performance when increasing lifetime expectancy from 20 to 30 years.

Keywords

Cumulative energy demand (CED) Energy payback time (EPBT) High concentration photovoltaic (HCPV) Lifetime expectancy 

Notes

Acknowledgments

Thanks are due to BSQ Solar for providing the data. Thanks are also due to the European Commission for funding under HYSOL Project (Innovative Configuration for a Fully Renewable Hybrid CSP Plant, FP7-ENERGY-2012-1 CP 308912).

References

  1. Aparicio D (2014) El mercado de las energías renovables en Marruecos. ICEX, Market StudiesGoogle Scholar
  2. Araújo GL, Martí A (1994) Absolute limiting efficiencies for photovoltaic energy conversion. Solar Energy Mater Sol Cells 33:213–240CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bravi M, Parisi ML, Tiezzi E, Basosi R (2011) Life cycle assessment of a micromorph photovoltaic system. Energy 36:4297–4306CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Colthorpe A (2014) Soitec-Fraunhofer ISE multi-junction CPV cell hits world record 46% conversion efficiency. In: PV Tech. http://www.pv-tech.org/news/soitec_fraunhofer_ise_multi_junction_cpv_cell_hits_world_record_46_conversi
  5. de Wild-Scholten M, Sturm M, Butturi MA, Noack M, Heasman K, Timò G (2010) Environmental sustainability of concentrator PV systems: Preliminary LCA results of the Apollon ProjectGoogle Scholar
  6. EIA (2014) International energy outlook 2014. U.S. Energy information administrationGoogle Scholar
  7. Fthenakis VM, Kim HC (2011) Photovoltaics: life-cycle analyses. Sol Energy 85:1609–1628CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Fthenakis VM, Kim HC (2013) Life cycle assessment of high‐concentration photovoltaic systems. Prog Photovolt Res Appl 21:379–388CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Fthenakis V, Frischknecht R, Raugei M, Kim H, Alsema E, Held M, de Wild-Scholten M (2011) Methodology guidelines on life cycle assessment of photovoltaic electricity. IEA PVPS Task 12Google Scholar
  10. Fthenakis V, Kim H, Frischknecht R, Raugei M, Sinha P, Stucki M (2011) Life cycle inventories and life cycle assessment of photovoltaic systems. International Energy Agency (IEA) PVPS Task 12Google Scholar
  11. Hischier R, Weidema B, Althaus H, Bauer C, Doka G, Dones R, Frischknecht R, Hellweg S, Humbert S, Jungbluth N (2010) Implementation of life cycle impact assessment methods. Ecoinvent reportGoogle Scholar
  12. IEA, NEA (2010) Projected costs of generating electricity: edition 2010. International Energy Agency (IEA) and Nuclear Energy Agency (NEA)Google Scholar
  13. International Energy Agency (IEA) (2015) World energy outlook 2015Google Scholar
  14. Jungbluth N (2005) Life cycle assessment of crystalline photovoltaics in the Swiss ecoinvent database. Prog Photovolt Res Appl 13:429–446CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Kammen D, Nelson J, Mileva A, Johnston J (2011) An assessment of the environmental impacts of concentrator photovoltaics and modeling of concentrator photovoltaic deployment using the SWITCH model. Renewable and Appropriate Energy Laboratory, Energy and Resources Group, University of California, Berkeley, Berkeley (CA)Google Scholar
  16. Law DC, King RR, Yoon H, Archer MJ, Boca A, Fetzer CM, Mesropian S, Isshiki T, Haddad M, Edmondson KM, Bhusari D, Yen J, Sherif RA, Atwater HA, Karam NH (2010) Future technology pathways of terrestrial III–V multijunction solar cells for concentrator photovoltaic systems. Solar Energy Mater Sol Cells 94:1314–1318CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Luque A, Hegedus S (2011) Handbook of photovoltaic science and engineering. John Wiley & SonsGoogle Scholar
  18. Meijer A, Huijbregts M, Schermer J, Reijnders L (2003) Life‐cycle assessment of photovoltaic modules: comparison of mc‐Si, InGaP and InGaP/mc‐Si solar modules. Prog Photovolt Res Appl 11:275–287CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Min C, Nuofu C, Xiaoli Y, Yu W, Yiming B, Xingwang Z (2009) Thermal analysis and test for single concentrator solar cells. J Semicond 30:044011CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Nishimura A, Hayashi Y, Tanaka K, Hirota M, Kato S, Ito M, Araki K, Hu EJ (2010) Life cycle assessment and evaluation of energy payback time on high-concentration photovoltaic power generation system. Appl Energy 87:2797–2807CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Padovani S, Del Negro A, Antonipieri M, Sinesi S, Campesato R, Casale M, Gabetta G, Gori G (2010) Triple junction InGaP/InGaAs/Ge solar cells for high concentration photovoltaics application: degradation tests of solar receivers. Microelectron Reliab 50:1894–1898CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Peharz G, Dimroth F (2005) Energy payback time of the high‐concentration PV system FLATCON®. Prog Photovolt Res Appl 13:627–634CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Peng J, Lu L, Yang H (2013) Review on life cycle assessment of energy payback and greenhouse gas emission of solar photovoltaic systems. Renew Sust Energ Rev 19:255–274CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Polman A, Atwater HA (2012) Photonic design principles for ultrahigh-efficiency photovoltaics. Nat Mater 11:174–177CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Raugei M, Bargigli S, Ulgiati S (2007) Life cycle assessment and energy pay-back time of advanced photovoltaic modules: CdTe and CIS compared to poly-Si. Energy 32:1310–1318CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Turconi R, Boldrin A, Astrup T (2013) Life cycle assessment (LCA) of electricity generation technologies: overview, comparability and limitations. Renew Sust Energ Rev 28:555–565CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Varun BIK, Prakash R (2009) LCA of renewable energy for electricity generation systems—a review. Renew Sust Energ Rev 13:1067–1073CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Xie WT, Dai YJ, Wang RZ, Sumathy K (2011) Concentrated solar energy applications using Fresnel lenses: a review. Renew Sust Energ Rev 15:2588–2606CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Blanca Corona
    • 1
  • Lidia Escudero
    • 1
  • Goulven Quéméré
    • 2
  • Ignacio Luque-Heredia
    • 2
  • Guillermo San Miguel
    • 1
    Email author
  1. 1.ETSII, Department of Chemical and Environmental EngineeringUniversidad Politécnica de MadridMadridSpain
  2. 2.Compañía Española de Alta Eficiencia Fotovoltaica BSQ SolarMadridSpain

Personalised recommendations