Photovoltaics: Research Data

[emlaurent]

Criticize, criticize, it's good Christophe but what do you propose as a concrete solution for developing solar electricity and which is economically acceptable ??

The important thing is not the source (solar, biomass ...) but the actual cost price / redemption of the kwhe to fix the profitability and the essort of a technology not?

Not quite ... all the studies show that to get by energetically in the future, it will be necessary to diversify the sources of energy and to call on all the possibilities (solar, biomass, wind, ...). In addition, each energy source can be used for certain given uses.

I agree that this purchase price / cost price ratio must be brought into play. This is tantamount to saying that energy must be bought at its real cost (involving all direct and indirect costs) and not at an artificially low cost as for nuclear electricity.

Here, we are talking about technologies which are, for some, still immature and / or insufficiently developed (such as BtL, biomass, biogas, etc.). Any technology that has to be developed will have a high cost price at the beginning because it will be necessary to amortize the costs of R&D. In addition, it takes time for the number of products sold to be sufficient to be able to mass-produce and further reduce costs.

So, from the point of view of a "manager" (normally this is the role of the state), the more a type of energy must be developed and the more there should be high purchase prices to encourage them to develop. For example, the purchase prices for electricity from cogeneration (in particular for biogas) are a little too low and the amortization of the installation takes too long for a farmer (at least 7-10 years ).
Now 55 ct / kWh, it may be an exaggeration for PV while other energies are purchased at 5 ct / kWh. For the PV, it seems that the purchase price will only be 30cts if the sensor is not "architecturally integrated". Let's wait to see the decree to know the real meaning of this term

For the record, the ADEME subsidies for solar water heaters are not seen as eternal solutions. It is an incentive for a few years to develop a market for solar collectors by creating demand on the part of users and by encouraging manufacturers to mass produce to reduce costs. I had seen a table somewhere that gave the tax credit rate for solar water heaters for the next few years. This rate was decreasing (I think we arrived at the maximum rate). Too bad, I do not put my hand on this table ...

[Castor]

Bonjour.

Indeed the choice of a strategy to develop profitable and respectful energy seems quite delicate.
No doubt a bet that was partly lost for nuclear power, because I imagine that certain questions were dismissed at the start. It would be silly to do the same with photovoltaics. However, it seems that the manufacturing costs and the capacities of photovoltaics are constantly improving.

[Live products]

As an example, consider a house equipped with 20 m² of photovoltaic sensors, ie with a power of 2 kWp.
By taking a theoretical sunshine of 3,83 kWh / m² / d for the summer and 1,62 kWh / m² / d for the winter, we can calculate a power supplied by the sensors of 1400 kWh for the summer and 590 kWh for winter.
We arrive at an average power of 2 kWh / year.

By reselling entirely to EDF at a rate of € 15c / kWh, we can get € 300.

The cost of a system with installation and connection is € 15 HT, including € 000 HT for the equipment.

The amount of aid amounts to € 2 on the basis of € 000 / Wp plus production aid over a forecast over 1 years, we can calculate the production aid amount of around € 5.
Or an amount of aid of € 6.

Calculation of the tax credit amount:

Percentage of aid for equipment: 12 / 280 = 15%
Part of the grant to be deducted: 6 x 800% = € 82
Equipment including tax: 14 686,88 €
Base tax incl. From tax credit: 14 - 686,88 = € 5
Tax credit amount: 9 x 110,88% = € 50

Final installation cost: 15 - 000 - 6 = € 800

For a resale of € 300 per year, do not forget to deduct € 40 per year from rental of the inverter, this amounts to € 260 per year for 20 m² of sensors.

Return on investment time = 3 / 644,56 = 260 years
Or a time of approximately 14 years.

I wanted to have my article checked, the calculations, the misspellings at a pinch, it's for a project for my internship.
Finally if you find errors, otherwise I find it interesting to know the result and especially that I took the current cost of redemption of 15 c € / kWh.

[Live products]

Otherwise here is an address where you can find 2-3 interesting information
http://lp-verte.bbactif.com/viewforum.forum?f=32
you can also visit the rest of the forum, complemented by your diverse experiences and vary

[emlaurent]

Indeed the choice of a strategy to develop profitable and respectful energy seems quite delicate.
No doubt a bet that was partly lost for nuclear power, because I imagine that certain questions were dismissed at the start. It would be silly to do the same with photovoltaics. However, it seems that the manufacturing costs and the capacities of photovoltaics are constantly improving.

Thank you Beaver for this comment !!
This is what I wanted to make clear: the development, the diffusion then the trivialization of a technology (new or not) requires a carefully studied strategy and necessarily goes through the wallet.
A+

[emlaurent]

As an example, consider a house equipped with 20 m² of photovoltaic sensors, ie with a power of 2 kWp.
By taking a theoretical sunshine of 3,83 kWh / m² / d for the summer and 1,62 kWh / m² / d for the winter, we can calculate a power supplied by the sensors of 1400 kWh for the summer and 590 kWh for winter.
We arrive at an average power of 2 kWh / year. [
By reselling entirely to EDF at a rate of € 15c / kWh, we can get € 300.

In this technical part, the performance data of the panels is missing !!

In your calculations, the annual sunshine is 1950 kWh / m ^ 2 / year.
If the annual power produced by your 20m ^ 2 of panel is 2000kWh / year, then the yield is on average, over the year, is:
(2000/20) / 1950 = 5%

Isn't that a bit low for PV output?
I have no precise values ​​in mind but I rather thought of a yield of 10 or 15%. Unless this 5% includes the fact that the panels are fixed and that the yield drops with the orientation / sun.
In any case, it misses the indication of the yield and how you arrive at these 2000 kWh / year

[Live products]

I just understood your calculation.
It seems to me that you made a mistake, you calculate the percentage of the loss. Let me explain, in my calculation on a 2kWp system, I find an energy supplied at the end of the year of around 2000 kWh, or 1950 kWh if you want to be pressed in the calculation.
When you calculate (2000/20) / 1950 = 0.05
this corresponds to the percentage of the power transmitted by the sun that is not used by the sensors.

But it is true that my article is ugly !!! when I reread it I asked myself what I had marked so i will take it back
Thank you for your comment emlaurent

[Live products]

for info 'ai price but data on sunshine on:
http://www.solargie.com/download/france_ete.pdf
http://www.solargie.com/download/france_hiver.pdf

Then is it a valid source

[Live products]

put ** n but I'm really a big dick on my feet !!! excuse me for the terms used but i realize my dumplings and am in the process of correcting all that, thanks again emlaurent for your remark, in fact my thing is really not clear !!!!

[Castor]

Bonjour.

In addition, the influence of temperature must be taken into account:
-the average "meteorological" temperature is not good, since at night the temperature "we don't care"
-The PV module manufacturer's figures are a little "trafficed": the peak power is defined in "STC" condition at 1000W / m² for a module temperature of 25 ° C, which is unlikely to happen, since the normal temperature of the modules would be closer to "NOCT" conditions (around 50 ° C) at 800W / m² with an ambient temperature of 20 ° C.
A loss of at least 10%!