Thought Piece:

MAKING
SOLAR
WORK
Thought Piece:
MAKING SOLAR WORK
Contents
Increasing Energy Yield 3
CAPEX Reductions and Value Engineering 9
OPEX Reductions 10
Maximising Returns 11
Technical Advice 13
2
Introduction
Solar PV costs have been steadily decreasing
over recent years, making the technology a
focus for utilities and governments in countries
with high solar resources. Significant solar PV
demand, combined with high technology
accessibility, has resulted in fiercely contested
development markets. This has put pressure
on developers, financiers and contractors to
find smart ways to decrease their costs, while
maintaining a healthy risk-reward balance.
Reducing project costs further requires a
holistic approach, looking at the full techno-
economic life cycle of the project. This paper
explores WSP’s views on the different technical
factors which need to be considered for cost
reduction in large and medium scale solar PV
developments, including:
• Increasing energy yield
• Decreasing CAPEX and OPEX; and
• Maximising returns
Thought Piece:
MAKING SOLAR WORK

Increasing Energy Yield

There are several challenges associated
with maximising energy yield from solar Mono-facial PV with varying electrical
PV plants: and array design parameters
• Maximum allowed export capacity
to the grid
• Limitations of the PV technology
available in the market and in the
near future
• Available land area for the PV array,
including ground features
• Solar resources available at the site
location and the diurnal irradiance
patterns.
The interaction between these
limitations and the underlying cost Bifacial PV with varying electrical and
impact usually determines the optimal array design parameters
energy yield for the PV plant. We have
helped our clients explore the technical
boundaries of their projects to identify
the main potential drivers for an
optimised techno-economical solution.
Below are examples of some of the areas
that should be thoroughly explored to
arrive at an optimised solution for a solar
PV project.
Figure 1 - Example LCOE optimisation results taking into account different design configurations,
oversizing ratios, and resulting CAPEX, OPEX and clipping and curtailment energy losses

3
Thought Piece:
MAKING SOLAR WORK

Selection of technology
Selection of any technology is ultimately
determined by the lowest levelised cost of
electricity it helps achieve. Developers need to
understand the techno-economical merit of
different technologies available with regard to:

• Energy yield impact

• Capacity limits
• Bankability and eligibility for the project
• Long term performance

For many years, polycrystalline silicon was the

technology of choice for many projects, typically
offering the lowest $/kWp. Advances in cell
technologies and manufacturing processes
have brought several other options with varying
degrees of commercial success. A recent notable
example of technological improvement are
bifacial PV modules. Although bi-faciality is not
a new concept, the technology has taken the
industry by storm in 2018-2019, having achieved
significant improvements in efficiency and cost. As
a result, developers are now considering bifacial
PV technology in most of their bids - tasking their
technical advisors with quantifying the added
value brought to a project.
While the additional energy ‘gain’ offered
by bifacial is uncontested, the key question
developers and their advisors try to answer is how
to quantify and maximise this ‘gain’ for a specific
project. Our approach to bifacial PV is twofold:
4
Figure 2 - Example of non-uniformity across the rear of bifacial module cells –
simplistic view-factor model used in PVsyst is not able to capture this detail
1. To unlock the full potential of bifacial PV, the performance models. To this end, we have
system design must be optimised, taking into developed our own bifacial modelling tools
account the impact that installation decisions which incorporate ray-tracing techniques to
can have on rear-side irradiance. The proposed address the drawbacks of available packages.
structure also needs to minimise shading on For example, industry standard tools, such
the module’s rear-side; as PVsyst and SAM, utilise an over-simplified
methodology to calculate non-uniformity and
2. Our modelling approach recognises the
shading losses on the rear-side of the modules.
increased uncertainty associated with the
By integrating our ray tracing model in the
modelling of the rear-side performance
simulation process we can significantly reduce
compared to traditional mono-facial
the uncertainty of the bifacial ‘gain’ calculation.
Thought Piece:
MAKING SOLAR WORK

Figure 3 - Bifacial PV plant with two-portrait configuration

5
Thought Piece:
MAKING SOLAR WORK

During the bidding stage,

a number of modelling
assumptions linked to
the performance of PV
modules and inverters
(regardless of technology)
do not get the appropriate
attention. Certain system
losses, such as module
loss at low irradiance,
light-induced degradation
and incident angle
modifiers can be verified
for the selected modules
through third party tests,
which further improves
the accuracy of the
energy model. Also, the
advantages that string
inverters could bring to
the project, compared
to central inverters or
vice versa, should be
carefully considered.
Full design details are
not typically available at
the bidding stage, but
reasonable assumptions
can be made - in line
with standard market
offering from prospective
suppliers - instead of overly
conservative standard loss
assumptions.
Figure 4 - ‘Irradiance gain’ achieved relevant to mono-facial PV modules at different albedo values and considering fixed and tracker systems

6
Thought Piece:
MAKING SOLAR WORK

Bidding with the right technology for the

right time

In this rapidly-evolving area, significant

changes in market offering can happen
during the few months, or in some cases
years, separating the bidding stage from
the date of equipment procurement.
Technology and costs at the time of
bidding are often superseded by the
time of construction. Therefore, thorough
understanding of future techno-economic
trends is vital competitive insight.
Suitable sizing
The determination of optimal DC and AC capacity
of the plant is a design decision with a direct
impact on the levelised cost of energy (LCOE) of the
bid. This is commonly referred to as the ‘inverter
under-sizing factor’ or the ‘DC/AC ratio’. Technical
advisors should work closely with financial advisors
to optimise this aspect of the design, based on:
• Available PV modules and inverter price for
each of the technologies considered;
• Inverter’s operational limits for handling power
above nominal capacity;
• Grid code power factor limitations;
• Losses incurred at peak irradiance due to
curtailment and inverter clipping;
• Irradiance and temperature distribution at the
project location.

7
Thought Piece:
MAKING SOLAR WORK

Compatibility of the overall design to

deliver the desired outcome
To unlock full PV energy potential at any
given location, it is important to deploy
a system design that is compatible
with the project’s specific conditions
such as: available solar resources on
site, topography and PV technology
requirements. Due consideration must
be given to the full lifecycle of the project,
including:
• PV array geometrical design, including
inter-row spacing, array elevation above
ground and PV table design;
• Mounting structure and tracker
suitability for terrain, ground conditions
and PV technology used;
• Optimised DC Cable runs and suitable
location of inverter stations;
• DC/AC ratio and compatibility with the
inverter characteristics, if applicable,
considering the expected bifacial gain;
• Ground conditions and albedo
consideration which directly affects the
bifacial gain;
• Constructability and ease of
maintenance (e.g. module cables
routing and cleaning approach in
desert conditions etc.);
• Maintaining/improving albedo and
shading conditions on site.

8
Thought Piece:
MAKING SOLAR WORK

CAPEX Reductions and Value Engineering • Civil and structural solutions – depending on the site’s geotechnical
conditions several value engineering solutions could be introduced such
The bulk of the cost of a solar farm relates to upfront construction. As as temporary road way matting, shallow trenches with cable mechanical
such, their economics depend more on capital costs than conventional covers, reduced piling etc.
fuel-burning generators . Due consideration must be given to operational
durability, practicality, speed of construction etc., but it is vital that developers • Cable optimisation – A typical solar farm could incorporate up to 4km
aim to reduce their solar project’s CAPEX and associated financing costs. of DC and AC cabling per MWp installed. This represents a significant
balance of plant cost item. Simple but proven routing techniques often
Developers cannot afford ‘overbuilding’ in a competitive market. A sound lead to substantial savings in cabling costs. This includes leap-frog
understanding of the minimum functional specifications, grid code modules stringing (if suitable), DC-harness collection system, in addition
requirements and the provisions of project agreements is the first step for to other best practices in optimising LV and MV collection system cables.
achieving a competitive, yet compliant, solution. Unnecessary cost could
creep into the bid at these points: Figure below illustrates the leap frog and daisy chain module stringing
[source: SolarPro Magazine];
• Redundancy – some power purchase agreements (PPAs) include stringent
redundancy requirements. This could inadvertently lead to developers
assuming unnecessary redundancies/oversizing. Cutting the cost of an
additional substation HV transformer, for example, could save the project
over 5% on CAPEX.
• Operational monitoring – is string level monitoring a compulsory
requirement in the RfP? While this does offer enhanced control over
the plant’s performance, string level monitoring can add unnecessary
cost to the projects of up to $10,000 per MWp. Alternative operations
and maintenance (O&M) contractual warranties could be negotiated to
provide sufficient assurance on the plant’s performance without incurring
the upfront cost. Could string inverters offer a better, and cheaper,
solution? Figure 5

• Reactive power - Some PPAs may require excessive reactive power

compensation from the solar farm. To avoid having to use expensive
STATCOM devices, other technical solutions could be considered - like
oversizing the solar AC (and DC) capacity, while limiting export at the ‘understanding of the minimum functional specifications,
inverter level. This method will ensure that additional reactive power grid code requirements and the provisions of project
support is met by the additional inverters installed while making use of agreements is the first step for achieving a competitive,
the surplus capacity at low irradiance conditions, bringing additional yet compliant, solution’
revenue to the project instead of incurring pure cost.

9
Thought Piece:
MAKING SOLAR WORK

OPEX Reductions
Typically, OPEX is not as critical as
CAPEX in ensuring the financial
viability of a project. There are, however,
opportunities to improve the financial
performance of new and existing
assets through OPEX reduction. Many
opportunities for OPEX reductions
overlap and must be balanced against
operational performance improvements.
Areas to explore include:
• Structure of the O&M contract –
an initial period with options for
extension to stay aligned with best
price offering in the market.
• Maintenance Reserve Account (MRA)
vs inverter warranty – depending on
the project location and operational
environment, full wrap warranties
for the lifetime of the project may
be cheaper and more effective
compared to the reserve accounts
approach. String inverters offer a
unique O&M advantage in locations
with low-skill, low-cost plug-and-
play solutions.
Figure 6 - Example PV+BESS - Despite a 15MW curtailment, with the help of BESS
• Tailored O&M methodology that the plant is capable of producing 20MW+ with BESS storing the excess
addresses site specific maintenance
and cleaning requirements. This
helps optimise costs associated with
water usage and labour, robotic
cleaning etc.

10
Thought Piece:
MAKING SOLAR WORK
Maximising Returns
Energy storage and batteries
Incorporating batteries or other energy storage
systems into a solar farm can avoid or defer
expensive grid reinforcement costs, improve power
quality and reliability, and increase revenue. For
example, on a grid capacity constrained site, it may
be possible to install additional DC and AC capacity
and, at times of peak irradiance, charge the battery
rather than curtail solar output. Hence, a 10MWac
constrained grid on a 33kV distribution feeder with
some local load could allow more than 20MWac
with integrated storage where the battery can
export to the grid during low irradiance or overnight;
ideally when the spot price of electricity is higher.
Batteries might also offer other revenue streams,
e.g. frequency response services to the grid and
other demand side response (DSR) advantages
Alternative proposals
One way to maximise project return and improve
competitiveness is tailoring your offer to the project’s
RfP requirements. In parallel, utilising knowledge of
the offtaker’s main techno-economical drivers can
help to propose innovative solutions that may boost
your bid’s competitive advantage.
Technical advisors could assist developers in
exploring alternative solutions, that may not be
strictly in compliance with the RfP requirements,
but which bring added value to the offtaker
(such as a lower electricity tariff or an improved
impact on the grid infrastructure). While this is not
always feasible in the tendering framework, many
offtakers will consider those alternative proposals • Developing microgrids – PV and BESS
either by allowing for the relevant deviations in systems are pivotal in developing micro
bids, or through post-award negotiation. Options grids from the residential to the utility
that could be explored include: scale. With the advancement in BESS
technology, reaction times, lifetimes and
• Using battery energy storage systems
storage durations have all significantly
(BESS) with PV systems. This opens up many
improved.
possibilities, such as:
• Reactive power capabilities and multiple
• Smoothing PV ramping – PV plants often
operating profiles – combining PV plants,
ramp by 5 to 10% of the total installed
BESS systems and inverters capable of
capacity in under a minute. This creates
four-quadrant operation will give the
significant instability in a weak power
plant 24-hour reactive power capabilities.
system and a BESS capable of absorbing or
This solution will be adopted widely
delivering power equal and opposite to the
soon, decreasing the need for STATCOMs
ramps can ensure smooth power flow.
and other devices capable of only one
• Peak shifting – using excess power available operation.
from PV plants, a BESS can store this energy
• Connecting solar PV, concentrated solar
and deliver it later. This is currently seen
power (CSP), or wind plants to the same grid
in residential and commercial sectors.
connection: solar output is higher in summer
However, as better BESS technologies
when wind speeds are lower, and vice-versa
become available and the cost per kWh
in winter, also solar CSP offers dispatchable
decreases, BESS systems are being
generation capabilities during the night,
considered for use in grid-level peak shifting
complementing solar PV during the day.
systems.
In such scenarios one plant can share grid
• Peak shaving – PV plants feeding into a capacity with the other, reducing overall cost.
network with limited power acceptance
• Alternative designs and configurations,
capabilities can be combined with BESS
including top-hat fixed tilt configuration, could
systems. Here the BESS system absorbs
be deployed when limited land is available or
all power delivered by the PV plant that is
where there are significant site constraints.
above the acceptance capabilities of the
network. This power is discharged when
the PV plant is not producing power. This
ensures a longer duration of required
power delivery into the network.
11
Thought Piece:
MAKING SOLAR WORK

Future extension consideration

When good O&M practice is followed, solar
PV farms could have a useful operational
lifetime well beyond most of the standard
PPA terms available. With a relatively minor
capital injection to repower or overhaul
aging inverters and other balance of system
components, it would be relatively easy to
achieve five or more years’ PPA extension.
However, regulatory framework and
technology trends are typically difficult
to forecast 25 years in advance and would
therefore require careful consideration on a
case-by-case basis.
Replenishment of degraded capacity over
the years
One possible solution to achieve a reduced
LCOE is to prepare the site to have
additional PV modules installed as the
overall plant capacity degrades. If sufficient
land is readily available with minimum civils
works and clearing required, PV modules
with ramming foundations and additional
inverters can be added to compensate
yearly degradation.
Questions around length of guarantees and
financing elements remain to maintain
energy yield. The augmentation is likely
to be needed every two to five years to
maximise economies of scale during
installation. This would minimise warranty
discrepancies and staggered durations.

12
Thought Piece:
MAKING SOLAR WORK

Technical Advice
Correct and appropriate technical advice is invaluable across the
whole life of a solar farm. WSP can assist in every aspect of project
development activities from site selection and screening through
feasibility, grid connection, assessing the techno-economic merit of
technologies, tendering support, project consenting, construction
and operation for any size of solar energy project. We bring a strong
understanding of market and financing standards, including options
available for reducing CAPEX. We have extensive international
experience advising developers, project lenders, governments and
non-governmental organisations on all aspects of the solar sector.
Our engineers have worked on projects ranging from roof-top solar PV
installations to some of the world’s largest solar farm developments.
In total we have delivered technical advisory for over 7GW of solar
PV energy projects across more than 250 sites in Europe, Africa, the
Middle East, Asia, Australasia, North and South America. As technical
advisors and market experts, we closely monitor long-term pricing
trends and learning rates as well as short-term forecast fluctuations
affecting the supply chain for different products. As such, our
exposure to international markets benefits our clients.
Our traditional power expertise and in-house electrical, mechanical,
civil, marine and environmental capabilities give us the edge over
smaller companies. We draw on this large body of expertise to ensure
that the projects on which we work progress as quickly and effectively
as possible.

for further information contact

f

Dominic Cook Luca Santoni Nicholas Badcock

Director, Energy Operations Manager Sector Lead
WSP UK Ltd WSP UK Ltd WSP UK Ltd
Dominic.Cook@wsp.com Luca.santoni@wsp.com Nicholas.Badcock@wsp.com

13