Prospects of life cycle assessment of renewable energy from solar photovoltaic technologies: A review

2018 ◽  
Vol 96 ◽  
pp. 11-28 ◽  
Author(s):  
Norasikin Ahmad Ludin ◽  
Nur Ifthitah Mustafa ◽  
Marlia M. Hanafiah ◽  
Mohd Adib Ibrahim ◽  
Mohd Asri Mat Teridi ◽  
...  
2021 ◽  
Vol 13 (1) ◽  
pp. 396
Author(s):  
Norasikin Ahmad Ludin ◽  
Nurfarhana Alyssa Ahmad Affandi ◽  
Kathleen Purvis-Roberts ◽  
Azah Ahmad ◽  
Mohd Adib Ibrahim ◽  
...  

Sustainability has been greatly impacted by the reality of budgets and available resources as a targeted range of carbon emission reduction greatly increases due to climate change. This study analyses the technical and economic feasibility for three types of solar photovoltaic (PV) renewable energy (RE) systems; (i) solar stand-alone, a non-grid-connected building rooftop-mounted structure, (ii) solar rooftop, a grid-connected building rooftop-mounted structure, (iii) solar farm, a grid-connected land-mounted structure in three tropical climate regions. Technical scientific and economic tools, including life cycle assessment (LCA) and life cycle cost assessment (LCCA) with an integrated framework from a Malaysian case study were applied to similar climatic regions, Thailand, and Indonesia. The short-term, future scaled-up scenario was defined using a proxy technology and estimated data. Environmental locations for this scenario were identified, the environmental impacts were compared, and the techno-economic output were analysed. The scope of this study is cradle-to-grave. Levelised cost of energy (LCOE) was greatly affected due to PV performance degradation rate, especially the critical shading issues for large-scale installations. Despite the land use impact, increased CO2 emissions accumulate over time with regard to energy mix of the country, which requires the need for long-term procurement of both carbon and investment return. With regards to profitably, grid-connected roof-mounted systems achieve the lowest LCOE as compared to other types of installation, ranging from 0.0491 USD/kWh to 0.0605 USD/kWh under a 6% discounted rate. A simple payback (SPB) time between 7–10 years on average depends on annual power generated by the system with estimated energy payback of 0.40–0.55 years for common polycrystalline photovoltaic technology. Thus, maintaining the whole system by ensuring a low degradation rate of 0.2% over a long period of time is essential to generate benefits for both investors and the environment. Emerging technologies are progressing at an exponential rate in order to fill the gap of establishing renewable energy as an attractive business plan. Life cycle assessment is considered an excellent tool to assess the environmental impact of renewable energy.


2019 ◽  
Vol 11 (5) ◽  
pp. 1370 ◽  
Author(s):  
Shutaro Takeda ◽  
Alexander Keeley ◽  
Shigeki Sakurai ◽  
Shunsuke Managi ◽  
Catherine Norris

The adoption of renewable energy technologies in developing nations is recognized to have positive environmental impacts; however, what are their effects on the electricity supply chain workers? This article provides a quantitative analysis on this question through a relatively new framework called social life cycle assessment, taking Malaysia as a case example. Impact assessments by the authors show that electricity from renewables has greater adverse impacts on supply chain workers than the conventional electricity mix: Electricity production with biomass requires 127% longer labor hours per unit-electricity under the risk of human rights violations, while the solar photovoltaic requires 95% longer labor hours per unit-electricity. However, our assessment also indicates that renewables have less impacts per dollar-spent. In fact, the impact of solar photovoltaic would be 60% less than the conventional mix when it attains grid parity. The answer of “are renewables as friendly to humans as to the environment?” is “not-yet, but eventually.”


2021 ◽  
Vol 35 ◽  
pp. 102339
Author(s):  
Miguel A. Morales-Mora ◽  
Joep J.H. Pijpers ◽  
Alejandro Castillo Antonio ◽  
Javier de la Cruz Soto ◽  
Agustín Moisés Alcaraz Calderón

2017 ◽  
Vol 93 ◽  
pp. 229-238 ◽  
Author(s):  
Muratcan Başkurt ◽  
Ilgın Kocababuç ◽  
Esra Binici ◽  
Ebru Dulekgurgen ◽  
Özlem Karahan Özgün ◽  
...  

Author(s):  
Velma Mukoro ◽  
Dr Alejandro Gallego-Schmid ◽  
Dr Maria Sharmina

2003 ◽  
Vol 75 (3-4) ◽  
pp. 205-211 ◽  
Author(s):  
Małgorzata Góralczyk

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document