29th European Photovoltaic Solar Energy Conference and Exhibition
COMPARING ENERGY YIELD SIMULATION IN GRID-CONNECTED 450 kWp PARKING-INTEGRATED PHOTOVOLTAICS - CASE STUDY: VILLA LOBOS PROJECT IN SAO PAULO, BRAZIL Rafael Herrero1,2,3*, Emerson Melo2, Sergio Shimura3, Cesar Biasi3, Thiago Costa4, Roberto Simplicio3, José Aquiles Baesso Grimonni2 and Marcelo Knorich Zuffo2 1
Interdisciplinary Center in Interactive Technologies from University of São Paulo (CITI-USP), Prof. Lúcio Martins Rodrigues Ave. N 436, SP – Brazil Electronic Systems Department of Polytechnic School of the University of São Paulo, Professor Luciano Gualberto Ave., N 380, SP – Brazil Integrated Systems Technological Laboratory (LSI-TEC), SP - Brazil 4 Dya Solar – Belo Horizonte – MG - Brazil 2 3
ABSTRACT With the high cost of square meter in urban environment and the necessity of maximize the use of area, parkingintegrated photovoltaic can offer a attractive solution for photovoltaic plant non-ground mounted in several cities that aims to integrate an existing parking lots without affect another area and also promote sustainable energy supply. This paper presents how shading profiles and solar irradiation affects the resulting energy inject into grid and performance ratio (PR) in a 450kWp parking-integrated photovoltaic (PIPV) system located in an urban environment. To achieve this objective a PIPV system located in a public park in Sao Paulo city and 12 buildings nearby whose had identified as potential cause of partial shading, have been three dimensional modeled and simulated considering 1 year period of local weather data. The PIPV model was analyzed taking into account the solar irradiation and the buildings shading profiles, then results were compared for three different simulation softwares. Results showed that even with a non-optimal orientation, tilt angle and building surrounding, the PIPV system showed good and similar performance. Nowadays, the decision criteria for configuring a PIPV layout is related to length of cables, layout of the combiner DC boxes, number of inverters and basic orientation of the modules. The methodology presented in this article provides more alternatives and detail information for decision making implementing PIPV. KEYWORDS Parking-integrated photovoltaic systems (PIPV); performance and yield of PIPV, shading analysis for PIPV; Villa Lobos project; *Correspondence Rafael Herrero, Interdisciplinary Center in Interactive Technologies from University of São Paulo (CITI-USP), Prof. Lúcio Martins Rodrigues Avenue 436, bystreet 4, USP Butantã Campus - Brazil E-mail:
[email protected]
1
n°482/2012 [7], which defined the rules to allow photovoltaic systems connected to the utility grid. The normative introduced the concepts of mini and micro generation, respectively with powered limits of 100kW or less and among 100kW and 1MW. Besides, has introduced a new concept into the energy Brazilian sector that permits the netmetering mechanism to compensate the energy consumption with the generated energy. Despite those arrangements are new in Brazil, there is a huge market and potential to be reached, mostly by the PV market since it has the highest level of adaptability overall [8]. In the end of 2013, the Ministry of Mines and Energy announced that PV energy projects above 5MW would be included for the first time in the brazilian A3 energy auction to complement the wind, thermoelectric, hydroelectric and biomass power projects, in order to provisioning in the beginning of January 2016 considering the reference cost of US$ 63.00/ MWh [3]. However, only wind, hydroelectric and biomass power projects were awarded. As same occurred in A5 action, which winning bids consisted of 2.337MW of wind, 161.8MW of biomass and 1007.7MW of hydroelectric projects [9]. In the middle of 2014 Brazil’s MME has approved the final version of the guidelines for the next reserve energy auction for new power producers, which will be held on Nov 2014 and has been specially designed for PV projects with secure financial support from Brazilian Development Bank (BNDES) [10].
OVERVIEW – PHOTOVOLAICS IN BRAZIL
Solar energy research in Brazil dates back to the 1950s with the first development of crystalline silicon (cSi) cells, carried out at the Microelectronics Laboratory (LME) of São Paulo University (USP) [1] and during 20 years the country has stayed in the vanguard of photovoltaic sector. However, in the 80’s, due to lack of incentives, several research groups have changed to other areas and the companies reduced their production significantly or have become extinct, even though Brazilian territory having a favorable solar radiation conditions and be located in “sunbelt” region [2]. With the absence of investments which resulted in a gap among Europe, Asia and North America, the photovoltaic initiatives in Brazil have continued their activities with focus in energy regulation, silicon purification, photovoltaic cells for space application, terrestrial installation, thin film researches and also the creation of photovoltaic (PV) reference centers and the Brazilian Solar Energy Association (ABES) [3]. During twenty year, all those initiatives have been coordinated by professors and researchers from the universities and laboratories around the country. Until 2011 only about 235kWp of 20MWp of installed capacity [4] were grid-connected. These PV systems were manly located in universities and research centers [5] and [6]. The main initiative to fund research and development photovoltaic projects has started on August 2011 and has been coordinated by Brazilian government energy agency (ANEEL). The total investment was over US$ 100 million, which provided 24MWp prospected projects and has been supported by 18 energy companies’. In 2012, ANEEL published a Normative Resolution
2
INTRODUCTION
Photovoltaic in Brazil has sensed growth and become a known technology since 2011, aftermath of the
2612
29th European Photovoltaic Solar Energy Conference and Exhibition
same as the latitude and oriented appositive to hemisphere where it is locate [17]. On the other hand, there are another designs under research that have been considered neural network estimation [18], solar radiation prediction [19], seasonal adjustment of tilt-angles [20] and optimum tilt angle for south facing solar collectors [21] in order to maximize energy generation. As can be seen in Figure 1, PV parking lot has been built considering different fixed metallic structures, orientations angle and forms (curved or planed). Regarding to module tilt angle, have been observed that some of the PIPV are designed with low-tilt angle, minor than 10°, which increases the dust accumulation, impacting on energy generation and also tends to be more difficult the self-cleaning effect caused by rain [15]. Considering that there are several aspects to be taken into account in a PIPV system, this paper presents how shading profiles and solar irradiation affects the resulting energy inject into grid and PR for a fixed metallic structured at 26.5° north oriented, 6° tilted over the horizontal and with a group of buildings under construction nearby. As a final result the aim is to provide detailed information for decision makers (designers) and analyze possible effects in the energy production. A threedimensional model was built in Google Sketch Up and analyzed with Solar3DBR [22], Autodesk Ecotect Analysis [23] and PVsyst 6.26 [24] and for comparison.
government investments, preliminary results of R&D projects and a dedicated auction for PV projects. While world's photovoltaic sector has experienced another remarkable year, reaching 138.9 GW worlds’ cumulative installed PV in 2013 [12]. The urban environment, especially in capital cities, has become a place with less ground surface and more energy demands. Looking for this issue, it is essential the growing of the concept of self-generation and also maximize the use of the expensive square meter. For this reason, building-integrated photovoltaic (BIPV) and building-adapted photovoltaic (BAPV) are set to become one of the fastest-growing segments in the sector, with up to 4.6 GW of installations forecast through 2017 [14]. In the same way a parking-integrated photovoltaic (PIPV) or a parking-adapted photovoltaic (PAPV) play a role to offer also an attractive solution for PV plant nonground mounted, that aims to integrate or adapt existing cars parking. This is done without affecting the existing areas and also promoting sustainable energy supply. Whereas it plants an alternative to avoid occupation of vast undeveloped lands in rural areas [11]. In contrast of several PIPV in operation in Europe and North America, Brazil so far has a few ones already built as the 3.0kWp at University of São Paulo (a); 12.0kWp at ELETROSUL headquarter in Florianopolis; (b) 16.3kWp at WEG Company in Jaraguá do Sul; (c); 13.0kWp at KWARA Company in Ceará (d); 30.0 kWp at Institute of Technology for Development (Lactec) in Curitiba (e), 150kWp at University of São Paulo (f) and (g) 62.4kWp at Pituaçu Stadium in Bahia.
(a)
(c)
(e)
2
CASE OF STUDY
The 3 years research project “Villa Lobos” is one of eighteen projects, which started in November 2012 with the aim of planning, installing and monitoring a PV plant in order to evaluate the regulation, scientific and technical impacts on utility grid. As part of the project, a meteorological station and five PV subsystems composed by a 450kWp PIPV, 50kWp arranged in 9 solar trackers, 40 autonomous photovoltaic light poles and 2 buildings-added photovoltaic (BAPV) with 40kWp and 10kWp, are under construction in two near public parks in São Paulo city. As shown in Figure 2, the PIPV and the solar trackers are located in the Candido Portinari Park (red markings, 121.000m2). In Villa Lobos Park (yellow markings, 732.000m2) are located the autonomous light poles and the two BAPV.
(b)
(d)
(f)
(g) Figure 2: PV sub systems location in Villa Lobos and Candido Portinari public park – SP – Brazil.
Figure 1. Brazilian photovoltaic parking lot structureintegrated: (a) IEE/USP-SP, (b) ELETROSUL CompanySC, (c) WEG Company-RS, (d) KWARA Company-CE, LACTEC-PR (e), IEE/USP-SP (f) and (g) Pituaçu-BA.
During the conception of the PV plant in order to maximize yield and PR of the 450kWp installed capacity, the facility was planned to be ground-mounted, north oriented and tilted as same as the latitude, 23°, using a
In order to maximize the yield and performance ratio [16], the majority of PV installations follow the classical project design, taken into account the module tilt angle as
2613
29th European Photovoltaic Solar Energy Conference and Exhibition
total area of ~3.000m2. However, the optimal tilt and orientation have been limited due to area unavailability. As an alternative, it was suggested the use of parking lots that limited the design of the PV system to a non-optimal orientation and non-optimal tilt angle. Beyond that, buildings in vicinity were identified as potential shading cause that should be evaluated. The built of the PIPV has started in Sept. 2014 and the final commission is expected to be in the beginning of 2015. The whole system will be the largest system in installed capacity and the first one in public urban area in Brazil, which makes this work unique combining these two aspects. 3
Figure 5. Frontal view of buildings near the PIPV facility under construction (Google™ Earth adapted) The buildings were identified as potential cause of partial shading and performance ratio impact, being essential an evaluation on the shading behavior on the energy production on the PIPV. To accomplish this objective, a three-dimension building modeling was performed considering the horizontal and vertical distances (DH and DV), as shown in Table I, which were measured on-site, through pictures and in GOOGLE EARTH software (Google, Mountain View, CA, USA), for comparative effects Figure 6. Afterwards, have been developed the three-dimension (3D) models of each building in SKETCHUp software as shown in Figure 7.
THREE DIMENSIONAL MODELS
3.1 Parking-Integrated Photovoltaic With the previously decision about location and available area, a new design was conducted in SKETCHUp software (Trimble Navigation, Sunny Vale, CA, USA), as can be seen in Figure 3. The PIPV as mentioned is 26.5° north oriented and it is 6° tilted over the horizontal. There are two sections (canopies), section A and B with 924 PV modules. There are in total 1820 polycrystalline modules with nominal peak power of 245Wp (SV-245D20 from DYA Solar), covering a total PV surface of 2987m2.
Figure 3: 3D model concept of 450 kWp PIPV and 9 solar trackers with nominal power of 50 kWp. Figure 6: Distance and measures from the two PIPV sections reference (Y0, X0) to each building in the vicinity (Google™ Earth adapted).
Regarding the two section dimensions as shown in Figure 4, H1=3.0m; H2=4.2m; C=11.7m; D=4.4m; L=133.4 m and P=11.6 m. The modules are connected in 8 groups of 22 parallel strings of 10 series-connected modules each string. Two of these groups feeds the grid through an inverter of 100kVA of capacity grouped into the energy center near the utility grid.
Table I: Horizontal and vertical distances from PIPV to each building surrounding.
Figure 4: Section A and Section B of 450kWp PIPV, each one divided in 132 columns per 7 rows. 3.2 Buildings surrounding During technical visits around the PIPV local facility, were verified 10 buildings (A, A’, B, B’, C, D, D’, E, E’ and G) and 2 areas for future buildings construction (F e F’), as shown in Figure 5.
2614
Horizontal Distance
(m)
Vertical Distance
(m)
DHA
- 1.9
DVA
181.0
DHA’
- 6.2
DVA’
229.0
DHB
81.6
DVB
130.0
DHB’
84.1
DVB’
284.3
DHC
124.0
DVC
177.9
DHD
154.7
DVD
110.6
DHD’
170.3
DVD’
160.2
DHE
224.3
DVE
88.7
DHE’
239.9
DVE’
138.2
DHF
282.4
DVF
66.7
DHF’
298.0
DVF’
116.3
DHG
330.4
DVG
155.9
29th European Photovoltaic Solar Energy Conference and Exhibition Dimensions
(m)
H1
40.0
H2
37.0
H3
34.0
Dimension
L1
57.0
L2
45.0
L3
23.0
P1
20.0
P2
10.0
Dimension
(m)
H1
45.0
H2
39.0
H3
33.0
L1
43.0
L2
30.0
L3
20.0
P1
35.0
P2
20.0
P3
15.0
Dimension
(m)
H1
42.0
H2
36.0
L1
45.0
L2
12.0
P
20.0
Dimension
(m)
H1
42.0
H2
36.0
H3
33.0
L1
40.0
L2
30.0
L3
10.0
P1
5.0
P2
15.0
Dimension
(m)
H1
30.0
H2
25.0
(m)
H1
42.0
H2
35.0
H3
H3
9.0
L1
48.0
32.0
L
15.0
P1
50.0
P2
40.0
P3
18,.0
Dimensions
Medida (m)
HMín
30.0
HMáx
60.0
LD
60.0
L2
30.0
L3
12.0
P1
42.0
P2
12.0
Dimension
(m)
HMín
30.0
HMáx
140.0
LD
60.0 76.0
LT
76.0
LT
PD
40.0
PD
25.0
65.0
PT
35.0
PT
Dimension
(m)
H1
60.0
H2
50.0
H3
54.0
L1
18.0
L2
12.0
P1
23.0
P2
10.0
P3
12.0
P4
7.0
F and F` buildings were modeled only for impact analysis in the future, because at this moment they are not built.
Figure 7. Three-dimensional building dimensions models
2615
29th European Photovoltaic Solar Energy Conference and Exhibition respectively for PVsyst, Solar3DBR and Ecotect were: 1.7%, 4.5% and 0.71%. It was possible to observe the high difference found in Solar3DBR and the less shading presented in Ecotect that represent 4.1. Irradiation analysis: meteorological base a variation of 59% - 89% among the highest and lowest analysis. For this investigation, Meteonorm 6.1 irradiance data from São Paulo location at 23°32′51.36′′S and 46°43′53.76′′W was used. Global Horizontal Irradiation (GHI), Diffuse Horizontal Irradiation (DHI), Beam Horizontal Irradiation (BHI). Besides and Beam Normal Irradiation (BNI), were compiled for 1-year period as can be seen in Figure 8.
4. ANALYSIS
Figure 9. Shading Masks – Section A without buildings in the surrounding
Figure 8. Global, diffuse and beam horizontal also normal, daily average irradiation profiles from PVsyst synthetic data base 4.3. Near shading analysis: simulation The simulation for near shading analysis of the PIPV system was conducted considering the distance and the measurements of buildings in the surrounding and also without them. For the two scenarios, the shading analyses were performed by Ecotect, PVsyst and Solar3DBR software. For Ecotect analysis the 3D building and PIPV model were exported from three-dimensional (3D) models developed in SKETCHUP as a 3DS file (3D Studio Model) and the shading masks were designed using the sun-path diagram, which display the percentage of shading of a currently selected PIPV section in the model. Considering that Solar3DBR is a plug-in from SKETCHUP, the synthetic irradiation data was exported from PVsyst as a CSV file (Comma-separated values) and imported in Solar3DBR, later the two scenarios were simulated. The average of shadings per month, the total near shading and the masks for each section considering the two scenarios were calculated. Shading masks were calculated for each PIPV section demonstrating when is fully shaded (100% in black colour), when it is partially shaded (less than 100% in grey scale colours) or not shaded (0% in white colour) all over the year. The orthogonal projection of shading mask as can be observed from Figure 9 to Figure 12 show that both of sections are exposed to only diffuse irradiation in the sunrise before 7am due to the sunlight are behind the sections. For without buildings in the surrounding, the shading mask in Figure 9 show that the section A has been partially shaded in the late afternoon (after 4pm) because of proximity of section B, reaching 10% of shading loss after 4:30pm on May, June and July. Regarding the scenario with buildings in the surrounding, as shown in Figure 11 and Figure 12, it was observed that the shading losses for both sections reached 10% late afternoon (after 4pm) in Ecotect, however in PVsyst shading mask was observed 1% of shading loss between 3pm and 4pm in March, April, May, June; July, Aug and Sep. Figure 13 shows the total monthly shading comparison per software for the two sections without buildings presence. Solar3DBR display the most near shading percentage for the whole year, reaching an annual average near shading of 0.65% in comparison of 0.30% and 0.09%, respectively for PVsyst and Ecotect, which represent a difference of 72% - 87% among them. Considering the buildings in the surrounding, could be observed in Figure 14, the monthly values for the three software evaluated, which yearly the percentage of near shading reaching
Figure 10. Shading Masks – Section B without buildings in the surrounding
Figure 11. Shading Masks – Section A with buildings in the surrounding
Figure 12. Shading Masks – Section B with buildings in the surrounding
2616
29th European Photovoltaic Solar Energy Conference and Exhibition In Figure 17 to Figure 22, it is possible to visualize the average daily irradiation considering the direct and diffuse irradiation components separately for the two scenarios evaluated. For this simulations was performed considering 1820 photovoltaic modules each one as an unique element in the simulation, totalizing 2987m2 of PV area. Figure 17 to 19, can be observed without the presence of the buildings the influence of shading from section B (Superior) to section A (Inferior) and in Figure 20 to 22, it is possible to visualize the shading caused corresponding to the buildings nearby that. It can be see that the full exposed area (Yellow color) reached Figure 13. Near shading comparison between each simulation a daily average irradiation of 3.94 kWh/m2 in comparison of 3.92 software without buildings in the surrounding kWh/m2, corresponding to 0.5% of shading impact daily.
Figure 17. Direct and Diffuse average daily irradiation without buildings in the surrounding Figure 14. Near shading comparison between each simulation software with buildings in the surrounding 4.4. Array nominal energy, energy injected into grid and performance ratio analysis: measurements and simulation The annual array nominal energy has performed to compare the results in the three simulation software mentioned. The comparisons of array nominal energy without the presence of the buildings in the surrounding can be observed in Figure 15 which presented the average monthly value for each one of the software and also the similar results among them in summer and winter period. Solar3DBR and Ecotect display the most array nominal energy for the whole year, reaching an annual average of 12.14 MWh and 12.06 MWh respectively, in comparison of 11.25 MWh in PVsyst. A monthly analysis for all three software was carried out for array nominal energy with the presence of buildings in the surrounding. It can be seen in Figure 16 the comparison. Ecotect showed the higher energy reaching 11,98 MWh in comparison of Solar3DBR and PVsyst corresponding for 11.70 MWh and 11.11 MWh yearly.
Figure 18. Direct average daily irradiation without buildings in the surrounding
Figure 19. Diffuse average daily irradiation without buildings in the surrounding
Figure 20. Direct and Diffuse average daily irradiation with buildings in the surrounding
Figura 15. Array nominal energy comparison between each simulation software without buildings in the surrounding
Figure 21. Direct average daily irradiation with buildings in the surrounding
Figure 16. Array nominal energy comparison between each simulation software with buildings in the surrounding
Figure 22. Diffuse average daily irradiation with buildings in the surrounding 2617
29th European Photovoltaic Solar Energy Conference and Exhibition The energy injected into the utility grid, which represent the output energy after all PV system losses, can be observed in Figure 23. The three softwares followed the same pattern for summer and winter, reaching average yearly without the buildings presence: 561.76 MWh, 524.45 MWh and 499.02 MWh for Solar3DBR, Ecotect and PVsyst correspondingly, with a variation from 5% to 7% between the simulations. The same analysis was followed for the energy inject into grid with buildings in the surrounding. Again Solar3DBR has presented the higher energy inject into grid reaching 584.24 MWh yearly, Figure 25. Performance ratio comparison between each simulation while Ecotect and PVsyst results 520.37 MWh and 492.84 MWh software without buildings in the surrounding respectively, which represent a variation between the higher and lower values of 6% to 12%. The monthly analysis can be seen in Figure 24.
Figure 26. Performance ratio comparison between each simulation software with buildings in the surrounding Figure 23. Energy inject into grid comparison between each simulation software without building in the surrounding
5
CONCLUSION
The most important objective of this paper was to evaluate the shading impact and performance in PIPV facility, subsequent to the modification of the initial on-ground PV plant ideal concept with average yearly energy injected into grid of 538 MWh and PR with 78.9% that have been limited due to area unavailability at Cândido Portinari Public Park in São Paulo City. Over this new PV plant location, was used three simulation software: Ecotect, Solar3DBR and PVsyst in order to compare the analyses among them, considering two scenarios: the first one without buildings in the surrounding and the second with the presence of them. After the evaluations, it was possible to show that even despite non-optimal orientation, non-optimal tilt angle and the presence of buildings near the PIPV facility, the three software show similar results in array nominal energy, energy inject to the grid and performance ratio. However, near shading in Solar3DBR percentage comparison shown higher differences that will be investigate in future works. The near shading percentages found in Ecotect take into account irradiation components when the sun is behind the plane when the diffused radiation typically prevails around sunrise and sunset. Considering this, the software accounts this period as a shading period, increasing the percentage of shade during the monthly results. To contour this, was used the array energy to calculated the percentage of shading for Ecotect software. It was observed that the higher PR values which were presented in Ecotect and Solar3DBR simulation were calculated without take into account all the internal losses related to PV model as PVsyst do. Because of that the PVsyst PR values shown lower PR compared with the two of them. Regarding the analysis considering the buildings in the surrounding, even despite the proximity and the shading from buildings profiles into the PIPV sections, it is possible to visualize a lower impact in PR caused by shading interference at late afternoon. The shading mask showed that the two sections of PIPV system are subject to partial shading in the early morning (before 7pm) due to all modules are 6° tilted and facing the Northwest. In the late afternoon (after 4pm), section A is partially shaded by section B because of the proximity each other. Besides, these investigations show that the presence of buildings surrounding did not play a critical impact on the performance of PV system during the whole year, considering that the average distance among 12 buildings and the PIPV is 153 m, where the closest and the more distant building are located 66.7 m and 284.3 m respectively far from the PV system.
Figure 24. Energy inject into grid comparison between each simulation software with buildings in the surrounding Regarding the performance ratio (PR) for most grid-connected PV systems ranges from around 65 to 85%. Ordinarily sized installations normally achieve a PR exceeding 70%, and good systems reach values exceeding 75%. Excellent systems at sites with relatively low summer temperatures can even achieve PR values of up to around 80% [25]. Considering the simulation without any obstruction from the buildings, the three softwares has maintained the PR practically constant during the whole year as can be seen in Figure 25. Solar3DBR has reached the higher value, with an annual average PR of 89%. Ecotect has presented a PR of 82% and PVsyst was the lowest PR with 75% yearly. Regarding the analysis considering the buildings in the surrounding, even despite the proximity and the shading from buildings profiles into the PIPV sections, it is possible to visualize a lower impact in PR caused by shading interference at late afternoon. For the analyzed year, a comparison between the simulation softwares showed that the annual PR was higher for Solar3DBR with 86%, Ecotect has reached 82% and PVsyst 74%. The PR differences between the simulations were among 5% and 9%, due to Solar3DBR at this moment not account all the PVSystem losses as ohmic wiring loss, inverter loss during operation, module array mismatch loss, module quality loss. Besides it’s not possible to load the PV module model for the evaluated surface, which resulting in a higher energy injected to the grid and consequently higher PR. Regarding Ecotect analysis, all the losses (wire loss, panel efficiency, inverter loss etc...) is assign it at electrical efficacy variable and also it’s not possible to load the PV module model for the solar collector material, presenting a higher energy injected into grid and performance ratio compared with PVSyst software.
2618
29th European Photovoltaic Solar Energy Conference and Exhibition With the high cost of square meter in urban environment and [14] Pike. BIPV and BAPV: market drivers and challenges, the necessity of maximize the use of area, a parking-integrated technology issues, competitive landscape, and global market photovoltaic (PIPV) or a parking-adapted photovoltaic (PAPV) forecasts. In Pike Research Joins Navigant, Consulting N, (Ed). play a role to offer also an attractive solution for PV plant non2012, Navigant Consulting: Boulder. ground mounted, in several cities that aims to integrate or adapt existing cars parking. This is done without affecting the existing [15] Nobre A, Ye Z, Cheetamun H, Reindl T, Luther J, Reise C. areas and also promoting sustainable energy supply. High Performing PV Systems for Tropical Regions - Optimization of Systems Performance. In 27th European Photovoltaic Solar Energy Conference and Exhibition. 2012. Messe Frankfurt: 6 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Germany. The authors want to acknowledge the financial support by the Companhia Energética de São Paulo (CESP) and others four utility [16] Marion, B., et al. "Performance parameters for grid-connected companies, through the R&D public proposal from Brazilian PV systems." Photovoltaic Specialists Conference, 2005. government energy agency/ANEEL; the sponsors of Laboratory of Conference Record of the Thirty-first IEEE. IEEE, 2005. Interdisciplinary Integrated Technologies (LSI-TEC); the project “Desenvolvimento e instalação piloto de geração fotovoltaica para [17] Zomer, C., Nobre, A., Cassatella, P., Reindl, T., & Rüther, R. The balance between aesthetics and performance in modelo estratégico de referência tecnológica, regulatória, econômica e comercial, inserindo esta energia na matriz building‐integrated photovoltaics in the tropics. Progress in energética nacional” (ANEEL code: PE-0061-0034/2011) with Photovoltaics: Research and Applications. 2013. colaboration of TECNOMETAL- DyaSolar Division. [18] Chatterjee, A., & Keyhani, A. Neural network estimation of 6 REFERENCE microgrid maximum solar power. Smart Grid, IEEE Transactions on, 3(4), 2012. p. 1860-1866. [1] Dhere, N. G., Cruz, L. R., Lobo, P. C., Branco, J. R. T., Rüther, R., & Zanesco, I. (2005). History of solar energy research in [19] Zhao, Q., Wang, P., & Goel, L. (2010, June). Optimal PV Brazil. In Proceedings of ISES 2005 Solar World Congress (pp. 1panel tilt angle based on solar radiation prediction. In Probabilistic 6). Methods Applied to Power Systems (PMAPS), 2010 IEEE 11th International Conference on p. 425-430. [2] European Photovoltaic Industry Association. Unlocking the sunbelt potential photovoltaics. 2010 EPIA/ARE/ASIF. [20] Tang, R., & Liu, X. (2010, March). Installation design of solar panels with seasonal adjustment of tilt-angles. In Power and [3] GRUPO, D. T. D. E. S. GTES - Manual de Engenharia para Energy Engineering Conference (APPEEC), 2010. Asia-Pacific (p. Sistemas Fotovoltaicos. CEPEL-CRESESB, 2014. Rio de Janeiro. 1-4).
[4] PVPS, I. Trends in photovoltaic applications. Survey report of selected IEA countries between 1992 and 2011. Report IEA-PVPS T1–21.
[21] El-Kassaby, M. M. Monthly and daily optimum tilt angle for south facing solar collectors; theoretical model, experimental and empirical correlations. Solar & wind technology, 1988. 5(6), p. 589-596.
[5] Rüther, R. Edifícios Solares Fotovoltaicos: o potencial da geração solar fotovoltaica integrada a edificações urbanas e interligada à rede elétrica pública no Brasil. 2004. Editora UFSC.
[22] Emerson G. Melo, Marcelo P. Almeidab, Roberto Zilles, José A.B. Grimonia. Using a shading matrix to estimate the shading factor and the irradiation in a three-dimensional model of a receiving surface in an urban environment, Solar Energy Volume 92, June 2013, Pages 15–25.
[6] Ferreira de Oliveira, S. H., & Zilles, R. Grid‐connected photovoltaic systems: the Brazilian experience and the performance of an installation. Progress in Photovoltaics: Research and Applications, 2001, 9(5), 341-347.
[23] Autodesk, Ecotect Analysis 2011. 2010.
[7] Agência Nacional de Energia Elétrica - ANEEL, “Resolução Normativa 482/2012”, Brasília, DF.
[24] PVSyst Version 6.26, PVSyst, 2014. [25] Haberlin, H. Photovoltaics System design and practice / Heinrich Haberlin; translated by Herbert Eppel., John Wiley & Sons. 2012, 732 pags.
[8] Costa, T. M. G., Souza, M. E. M., & Silva, S. R. Uma Discussão quanto a Inserção de Sistemas Fotovoltaicos em Redes Elétricas – Um Estudo de Caso. Simposio Brasileiro de Energia Elétrica. Foz do Iguaçu – PR. 2014 [9] PHOTON Newsletter International edition Brazil's A-5 energy auction accepts preliminary PV project applications totaling 6.1 GW. 2014. [10] PHOTON Newsletter International edition Brazilian Energy Ministry publishes final guidelines for Reserve Energy Auction. 2014. [11] SERRANO‐LUJÁN, Lucía et al. Environmental benefits of parking‐integrated photovoltaics: a 222 kWp experience. Progress in Photovoltaics: Research and Applications, 2013. [12] EPIA. Global market outlook for Photovoltaics 2014-2018. European Photovoltaics Industry Association, 2014; 60. [13] EPIA. Global market outlook for Photovoltaics 2013-2017. European Photovoltaics Industry Association, 2013; 60.
2619
