Comparative Analysis of Photovoltaic Simulation Software with Actual Conditions of 93.6 kWp On-Grid Photovoltaic System

Abstract

The Indonesian government encourages an increase in the energy mix, especially renewable energy such as on-grid rooftop PV, which has an intermittent nature and high investment costs, so the development of rooftop PV must be carefully calculated by considering system reliability. Thus, PV systems can be optimised in terms of tilt angle, number of PV modules, module type, module support structure, and inverter. Many simulation tools are currently used to design PV systems using climate data. These simulation tools estimate energy production and provide corresponding economic data. However, the reliability of these data varies because the system productivity of the photovoltaic system productivity depends on the climatic conditions of the photovoltaic system depends on the climatic conditions. Therefore, in this study, two simulation tools, namely helioscope and RETScreen, will be evaluated in comparison with the actual conditions in the field of 93.6 kWP on-grid PV system. Based on the comparison results, Helioscope and RETScreen are reliable simulation tools because the results obtained are closest to the actual energy value.

Country : Indonesia

1 Zulramadhanie2 Jaka Windarta3 Cahyadi

  1. Master Program of Energy, School of Postgraduate Studies, Diponegoro University, Indonesia & The National Research and Innovation Agency, Indonesia
  2. Master Program of Energy, School of Postgraduate Studies, Diponegoro University, Indonesia
  3. The National Research and Innovation Agency, Indonesia

IRJIET, Volume 8, Issue 5, May 2024 pp. 112-117

doi.org/10.47001/IRJIET/2024.805017

References

  1. P. A. Owusu and S. Asumadu-sarkodie, “sustainability issues and climate change mitigation A review of renewable energy sources , sustainability issues and climate change mitigation,” Cogent Eng., vol. 15, no. 1, 2016, doi: 10.1080/23311916.2016.1167990.
  2. IEA, “Net Zero by 2050: A Roadmap for the Global Energy Sector,” Int. Energy Agency, p. 224, 2021, [Online]. Available: https://www.iea.org/reports/net-zero-by-2050
  3. International Renewable Energy Agency (IRENA), Tripling Renewable Power and Doubling Energy Efficiency by 2030 Crucial Steps Towards 1.5 oC. 2023. [Online]. Available: https://mc-cd8320d4-36a1-40ac-83cc-3389-cdn-endpoint.azureedge.net/-/media/Files/IRENA/Agency/Publication/2023/Oct/COP28_IRENA_GRA_Tripling_renewables_doubling_efficiency_2023.pdf?rev=9831037db9e44aa5976b582af19a90da
  4. COP 28, “Global Renewables and Energy Efficiency Pledge We, Heads of State and Governments as the Participants in the COP28 Global Renewables and Energy Efficiency Pledge,” no. September, 2023.
  5. S. Comello, S. Reichelstein, and A. Sahoo, “The road ahead for solar PV power ,” Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev., vol. 92, no. April, pp. 744–756, 2018, doi: 10.1016/j.rser.2018.04.098.
  6. IESR, “Indonesia Solar Energy Outlook 2023 Indonesia Solar Energy Outlook 2023,” 2023. [Online]. Available: https://iesr.or.id/wp-content/uploads/2022/12/Indonesia-Energy-Transition-Outlook_2023.pdf
  7. IEA, “An Energy Sector Roadmap to Net Zero Emissions in Indonesia,” An Energy Sect. Roadmap to Net Zero Emiss. Indones., 2022, doi: 10.1787/4a9e9439-en.
  8. Solargis, “Solar resource maps of Indonesia,” 2019. https://solargis.com/maps-and-gis-data/download/indonesia
  9. DEN, “Neraca Energi Nasional 2020,” Lap. Kaji. Penelahaan Neraca Energi Nas. 2020, p. 14, 2020.
  10. D. Renne, R. George, S. Wilcox, T. Stoffel, D. Myers, and D. Heimiller, “Solar resource assessment,” Renew. Energy Grid Integr. Build. Assess., pp. 218–252, 2010.
  11. P. Tozzi and J. H. Jo, “A comparative analysis of renewable energy simulation tools: Performance simulation model vs. system optimization,” Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev., vol. 80, pp. 390–398, 2017, doi: 10.1016/j.rser.2017.05.153.
  12. D. Connolly, H. Lund, B. V. Mathiesen, and M. Leahy, “A review of computer tools for analysing the integration of renewable energy into various energy systems,” Appl. Energy, vol. 87, no. 4, pp. 1059–1082, 2010, doi: 10.1016/j.apenergy.2009.09.026.
  13. N. Blair et al., “System advisor model, sam 2014.1. 14: General description,” NREL Rep. No. TP-6A20-61019, Natl. Renew. Energy Lab. Golden, CO, no. February, p. 13, 2014, doi: 10.2172/1126294.
  14. A.Heydari and A. Askarzadeh, “Techno-economic analysis of a PV/biomass/fuel cell energy system considering different fuel cell system initial capital costs,” Sol. Energy, vol. 133, pp. 409–420, 2016, doi: 10.1016/j.solener.2016.04.018.
  15. H. Masrur, K. V. Konneh, M. Ahmadi, K. R. Khan, M. L. Othman, and T. Senjyu, “Assessing the techno-economic impact of derating factors on optimally tilted grid-tied photovoltaic systems,” Energies, vol. 14, no. 4, pp. 1–21, 2021, doi: 10.3390/en14041044.
  16. F. Umer, M. S. Aslam, M. S. Rabbani, M. J. Hanif, N. Naeem, and M. T. Abbas, “Design and optimization of solar carport canopies for maximum power generation and efficiency at Bahawalpur,” Int. J. Photoenergy, vol. 2019, 2019, doi: 10.1155/2019/6372503.
  17. V. Kumar Vashishtha, A. Yadav, A. Kumar, and V. Kumar Shukla, “An overview of software tools for the photovoltaic industry,” Mater. Today Proc., vol. 64, pp. 1450–1454, 2022, doi: 10.1016/j.matpr.2022.04.737.
  18. RETScreen, RETScreen Software Online User Manual ®: Biomass Heating. 2005. [Online]. Available: https://publications.gc.ca/site/archivee-archived.html?url=https://publications.gc.ca/collections/Collection/M39-114-2005E.pdf
  19. A.P. Dobos, “PVWatts Version 5 Manual - Technical Report NREL/TP-6A20-62641,” Natl. Renew. Energy Lab., no. September, p. 20, 2014, [Online]. Available: https://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy14osti/62641.pdf
  20. W. C. L. Kamuyu, J. R. Lim, C. S. Won, and H. K. Ahn, “Prediction model of photovoltaic module temperature for power performance of floating PVs,” Energies, vol. 11, no. 2, 2018, doi: 10.3390/en11020447.