Journal of Cleaner Production 249 (2020) 119405

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Journal of Cleaner Production

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/jclepro

Novel thermodynamic efficiency indices for choosing an optimal

location for large-scale photovoltaic power generation
C. Ogbonnaya a, c, *, A. Turan a, C. Abeykoon b
a
Department of Mechanical, Aerospace and Civil Engineering, The University of Manchester, M60 1QD, UK
b
Aerospace Research Institute, Department of Materials, The University of Manchester, Oxford Road, M13 9PL, UK
c
Faculty of Engineering and Technology, Alex Ekwueme Federal University Ndufu-Alike Ikwo, Nigeria

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: Sustainable energy is a current key priority across the globe. Hence, renewable energy sources have been
Received 14 August 2019 widely accepted as potential substitutes for fossil fuels in the existing energy infrastructures. A recent
Received in revised form report showed that photovoltaic power generation constituted around 100 GW out of 2378 GW of the
19 November 2019
global renewable power capacity installed in 2018. Consequently, various researchers are investigating
Accepted 20 November 2019
Available online 21 November 2019
how the increasing utilisation of photovoltaics can be handled in order to reduce future environmental
impacts; whilst leveraging their operational zero-emission. From a circular economic paradigm, recy-
Handling editor: Giorgio Besagni cling, reuse and reduction strategies are often adopted to improve the sustainability of systems. This
study proposes novel thermodynamic efficiency indices as a resources reduction strategy. By selecting an
Keywords: optimal location for large-scale photovoltaic power generation (LSPPG), the same amount of resources
Solar energy (such as land space, materials, energy) will achieve higher utilisation efficiency. In this study, actual two-
Photovoltaic modules year solar radiation and temperature data were sourced from Nigerian Meteorological Agency, Abuja. A
Thermodynamic efficiency indices probability distribution modeling was used to generate statistical mean values for solar radiation and
Modeling and simulation
temperature based on the classical almost sure central limit theory. Then, Photovoltaic modeling and
Nigeria
simulation code was used to simulate the power generation characteristics of the LSPPG. Comparative
analyses of the results for a 5 MW (MW) LSPPG showed that statistical mean value of power generation,
energy efficiency index and exergy efficiency index range from 0.76 to 0.99 MW, 1.315 to1.254 and 1.298
to1.237, respectively, across the locations studied. Overall, the thermodynamic efficiency indices can
complement the current laboratory-based rating of the photovoltaic modules in order to establish the
environmental, economic and policy rationales for sitting a LSPPG. This would ultimately improve the
cradle-to-cradle management of LSPPG installations based on resources reduction strategy.
© 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction particularly in developing countries. Goal 7 focuses on providing

Sustainable energy supply portfolio of the future would
certainly include solar energy technologies because solar energy is
environmentally benign, ubiquitous, renewable and vast in appli-
cations (Bukar and Tan, 2019; C. Ogbonnaya et al., 2019a; Penga
et al., 2019). Notably, the subsisting Sustainable Development
Goals (SDGs) of United Nations (UN, 2015) has specifically stated
that renewable and clean energy should be explored for meeting
diverse human needs. In particular, Goals 1 and 2 which focus on
ending poverty and hunger would need energy as a critical enabler,
* Corresponding author. Department of Mechanical, Aerospace and Civil Engi-
neering, The University of Manchester, M60 1QD, UK.
E-mail address: chukwuma.ogbonnaya@manchester.ac.uk (C. Ogbonnaya).
affordable and clean energy. Energy is crucial for furthering eco-
nomic growth and industrial developments as expressed in Goals 8
and 9. Goal 12 focuses on achieving responsible consumption and
production based on sustainable energy source; while Goal 13 fo-
cuses on the reduction of environmental impacts of energy pro-
duction including climate change and global warming. In order to
realise these goals, there is an urgent need to shift from the
dependence on fossil fuels (e.g. coal, oil, gas) to renewable energy
sources (solar, wind, geothermal, biomass, hydro, tidal, etc)
(MacKay, 2009). Consequently, the utilisation of renewable energy
resources would be fundamental in every country if the global goal
of future 100% renewable energy supply must be achieved.
Recently, the Renewables 2019 Global Status Report (GSR)
(REN21, 2018) indicates that solar photovoltaic (PV) constitutes

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.119405
0959-6526/© 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
2 C. Ogbonnaya et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 249 (2020) 119405
Nomenclatures
A ideality constant
EnEI energy efficiency index
EoL end-of-life
ExEI exergy efficiency index
FC factor of coverage (m
2)
GSMV solar radiation at statistical mean value
GSTC solar radiation at standard test condition
Is saturation current of PV module
k Boltzmann’s constant (1.38  10
23 J/K)
LCA life cycle assessment
Ns number of solar cells in series
Np number of modules in parallel
PV photovoltaic
PSMV output power at statistical mean value
PSTC output power at standard test condition
q electron charge (1.602  10
19 C)
around 100 GW out of 2378 GW (equivalent to 55% of the global
renewable capacity additions in 2018). Basically, PV does not emit
greenhouse gases during operation. Nonetheless, there is a current
concern that there would be a PV waste surge in 20e30 years when
the current installations would have reached their end-of-life (EoL).
For instance, Santos and Alonso-García (2018) projects that about
700,000 tonnes of PV wastes would be generated by 2050 in Spain.
Chen et al. (2016) demonstrated, based on a life cycle assessment
(LCA), that the impact of human toxicity, marine ecotoxicity and
precious metal depletion for mono-Si PV cells could be issues of
concern in China in the future. Landfilling of PV wastes is cheap but
it is unsustainable because it may introduce toxic chemicals such as
Pb, Cd and Te into the environment. Instead of landfilling, recycling
is preferable for the future management of PV wastes since it has
been projected that PV waste could be about USD 15 billion ma-
terial value by 2050 (IRENA and IEA-PVPS, 2016). Invariably, more
PV wastes across the globe will increase exponentially as the con-
version efficiency and cost of PV improves; hence the need to adopt
sustainable approaches to reduce the environmental impacts of PV
in the future. Some studies (Deng et al., 2019; Peng et al., 2013;
Rocchetti and Beolchini, 2015; Tao and Yu, 2015) have considered
different recycling pathways and techno-economic implications of
recycling PV modules such as crystalline silicon, copper indium
gallium selenide (CIGS), and cadmium telluride (CdTe) module.
Veolia (2018) reported that end-of-life crystalline silicon
photovoltaic module can be recycled at 95% recovery rate thereby
reintroducing the recycled glass top, aluminium frame, silicon,
Ethylene vinyl acetate polymer, connection box, and copper cables
into the relevant industries. Even with such reported recovery rate,
the economic sustainability of recycling photovoltaic modules in
some locations may face drawbacks because there may not be
sufficient PV wastes to drive business models based on PV alone
(Deng et al., 2019). Besides, LCA of PV modules clearly shows that
the zero-emissions of PV during operation needs to be considered
alongside possible emissions associated with material mining and
processing, manufacturing, transportation, installation, servicing,
decommission, and recycling of PV modules (Deng et al., 2019;
Stoppato, 2008). Such cradle-to-cradle assessment of the PV sys-
tems (Contreras-Lisperguer et al., 2017) could help create new
business models as well as reduce the environmental impacts
throughout the life cycle of the PV system. Some studies have
proposed considering the waste management of the PV from a
circular economic paradigm. Circular economy has been defined by
ROCE return on capital employed
SMV statistical mean value
STC standard test condition (25  C, 1000 W/m2, AM 1.5)
T temperature
TEI thermodynamic efficiency index (or indices)
TEI-ROCE thermodynamic efficiency index moderated return
on capital employed
Vpv output voltage of PV module
Greek symbols
hen; STC energy efficiency at standard test condition
hex; STC exergy efficiency at standard test condition
hen; SMV energy efficiency at statistical mean value
hex;SMV exergy efficiency at statistical mean value
Subscripts
en energy
ex exergy
Prieto-Sandoval et al. (2018) as “an economic system that repre-
sents a change of paradigm in the way that human society is
interrelated with nature and aims to prevent the depletion of re-
sources, close energy and material loops, and facilitate sustainable
development through its implementation at the micro, meso and
macro levels”.
Sica et al. (2018) analysed the management of the EoL of PV
modules and stated that future circular economic model will
require reduction in materials such as Si, Al, Ag or substitution with
readily available and environment friendly materials. The main
thesis of this paper aligns with approaches that can reduce the
amount of resources without impacting on the reliability of power
generation. The reduction strategy within the framework of circular
economy is a waste prevention approach whereas the recycling
strategy is a waste recovery strategy. By preventing waste of re-
sources from happening in the first place, such resources can be
channelled to other uses. This study therefore focuses on resources
reduction strategies based on an interrogation of the operating
environment of LSPPG. This is a novel way of achieving resources
reduction aside the current focus on reduction of materials used for
manufacturing PV modules. Hypothetically, the environmental
variables of the operating locations provide the thermodynamic
basis for comparing the performance of LSPPG at multiple locations
since the system needs to interact with the environment in order to
generate power. The selection of the optimal location for LSPPG
favours environmental sustainability because it will reduce the
quantity of resources (including land space, PV materials, and en-
ergy inputs) used for power generation. The utilisation efficiency in
this study refers to the ratio of the power generated to total capital
employed (measured as the monetary value of the resources
committed to the LSPPG).
Our motivation for this study is driven by the need to develop a
scientific and procedural approach to decision making for
increasing the solar power generation in Nigeria. Nigeria has a
population of over 186 million in 2016 according to World Bank
(World Bank, 2013); and could reach over 300 million people by
2050 (General Assembly, United Nations, 2015), but it generates
about 7566.2 MW, with an abysmal 59.3% access to electricity
based on population (TCN, 2018; U.S. Central Intelligence Agency,
2014). The key challenges of power generation in the country are
that the current low capacity and centralised energy infrastructure
is dominated by fossil-fuel (Edozien et al., 2016). Nevertheless,
studies have shown that Nigeria can generate 100% of its energy
 C. Ogbonnaya et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 249 (2020) 119405
demand from renewables; if the right technologies and policies are
deployed (Akuru et al., 2017; Mohammed et al., 2013). Although the
data used for this study is from Nigeria, the proposed thermody-
namic efficiency indices (TEI) are applicable for comparative anal-
ysis of the performance of LSPPG involving a choice from multiple
locations within national borders, regions or internationally. The
use of renewable energy resources implies that distributed energy
infrastructures can be located near the end-users without neces-
sarily relying on the grid; although they can be integrated with the
grid where possible since it has been shown that renewable energy
technologies such as LSPPG can be integrated with the grid (Attari
et al., 2016; Charfi et al., 2018; Sharma and Goel, 2017; Shiva Kumar
and Sudhakar, 2015).
Bridge et al. (2013) has advocated that appropriate energy policy
on low carbon energy transition should be recast as a geographical
process rather than a process that affects places. From such
geographical perspective, pieces of extant literature show that solar
energy potential in Nigeria is promising (Akinyele et al., 2015;
Fadare, 2009; Ohunakin et al., 2014; Ojosu, 1990). For instance, a
study of 25 locations from the 5 climatic zones of Nigeria over 26
years showed that the range of the average daily solar irradiation in
Nigeria is 15.01e25.01 MJ/m2/day (Osinowo et al., 2015). An anal-
ysis of 36 years records of global solar radiation across 28 cities in
Nigeria show that the average monthly global irradiation across the
locations ranges from 3.748 to 6.966 kW h/m2/day (Ojosu, 1990).
Fig. 1 shows a global horizontal irradiation for Nigeria, which is
situated on the west coast of Africa between latitudes 4o 16’ and
13o 53’ north and longitudes 2o 40’ and 14o 41’ east, with a land
mass of 923,768 km2 stretching from the Gulf of Guinea on the
Atlantic Ocean in the south to Sahara desert in the North (Nigeria,
2013).
Nigeria’s large land mass coupled with the closeness to the
equator means that solar energy could be a major renewable en-
ergy source for the inhabitants. Therefore, it is expected that LSPPG
Fig. 1. Global horizontal irradiation in Nigeria (RECP, 2018).
3
might be a key contributor to renewable energy portfolio in Nigeria.
Thus, cleaner energy production strategies with minimum envi-
ronmental impacts of PV wastes as well as low pollution and CO2
emissions throughout the lifecycle of the PV modules is needed.
Solar radiation and temperature fluctuates according to the season
of the year and time of the day; and that affects power generation
potential of the PVs (Acakpovi and Ben Hagan, 2013; Dupre
et al.,
2017; Leuchter et al., 2010; Villalva et al., 2009). This also poses a
challenge in designing, sizing, optimising and operating solar-
based technologies. The current standard test condition (STC)
specification of PV modules by the International Electrochemical
Commission IEC 61215 (Vigano
et al., 2014) does not capture actual
field data. So, it cannot show a comparative performance of the
same PV system if it was to be installed at different locations across
the globe. However, for convenience, PV modules are rated at an
energy flux of 1000 W/m2, a temperature of 25  C, and at an air
mass (AM) of 1.5 (Paghasian and TamizhMani, 2011); and this is
particularly sufficient for comparing solar cells’ conversion
efficiencies.
Unfortunately, the reality is that many locations across the globe
do not experience up to 1000 W/m2 while average temperatures in
such locations may be below or above 25  C. This warrants the need
to interrogate the current laboratory-based STC specification in
order to create a novel approach that can capture the field data;
particularly when there is a need to choose an optimal location for
an installation of a LSPPG in a real world operating environment.
There is a current acknowledgement that the rating and perfor-
mance specification of the PV should capture the environmental
variables. The IEC has developed IEC 61853 titled “Photovoltaic
Module Performance Testing and Energy Rating” for explicit power
rating of PV modules (Paghasian and TamizhMani, 2011). It has four
parts: (1) irradiance and temperature performance measurement
(IEC 61853e1); (2) spectral response, incidence angle, and module
operating temperature measurements (IEC 61853e2); (3) energy
4 C. Ogbonnaya et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 249 (2020) 119405
rating of PV modules (IEC 61853e3) and (4) standard days that
states standard time periods that can be applied for energy ratings
(IEC 61853e4). In addition, reproducible, operational, probabilistic
or physically-based, ensemble, and skill (ROPES) (Yang, 2019) is a
guideline that describes future solar forecasting studies. In this
regard, this study is designed to fit into a predictive model by using
actual data and clear procedures that can be reproduced for taking
strategic decisions on LSPPG installations.
Although laboratory-based specifications could characterize
materials, making national or regional strategic decisions on the
location to install LSPPG or commercial analysis of LSPPG by cor-
porations require an approach that can combine the STC specifi-
cation with actual field data. Vigano
et al. (2014) argued that a
better estimation of power generation from a PV installation is
crucial since different solar cell materials vary in performance even
when they are deployed to the same environment. There are
studies that have proposed approaches for forecasting day-ahead
operational or short period PV generation (Almonacid et al., 2014;
Liu et al., 2015; Raza et al., 2018; Sobri et al., 2018). Here, we focus
on the long-term strategic prediction of PV generation using ther-
modynamic principles and actual meteorological parameters. A
typical case of data-driven solar generation is the efforts of the
United States of America to update its national solar radiation data
through the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) and
National Climate Data Base (NSRDB) (Dunlop et al., 2003). Hence, in
the future, data-driven short-term operational forecasting or long-
term strategic forecasting would be of research interests in order to
increase the utilisation efficiency of solar-based technologies.
Therefore, the overall aim of this research is to provide a novel
procedure for selecting a location from multiple locations for
installing LSPPG using actual meteorological data, STC specification
of PV modules and the laws of thermodynamics. In order to sys-
tematically analyse the collected data so that the generalisation of
the proposed thermodynamic efficiency indices (TEI) can be sup-
ported, the following research questions have been posed in this
study:
1. Do the stochastic distributions of solar radiation and tempera-
ture have any effect on LSPPG at different locations?
2. Are there significant differences between mean photovoltaic
power generations at the selected locations in Nigeria?
3. Can the proposed TEI unambiguously rank generation potential
of LSPPG using solar radiation and temperature data from
multiple locations?
4. Can TEI support thermoeconomic analysis of LSPPG?
These questions also guide the formulation of the research ob-
jectives and research approach. In particular, the specific objectives
of this study are to:
1. Propose a novel statistical mean value (SMV) approach for
normalising solar radiation and temperature data to enable a
comparative analysis using TEI;
2. Formulate a novel TEI in order to complement the use of the
current STC specification of PV by Manufacturers for strategic
decision making;
3. Integrate the TEI with return on capital employed (ROCE) for
thermoeconomic analysis of LSPPG; and
4. Apply the proposed TEI and SMVs to compare the performance
of a 5 MW LSPPG installation in six spatially distributed loca-
tions in Nigeria.
The first/major contribution of this study is to provide a new
procedure for comparative analysis of the performance of a LSPPG
for a situation where optimal generation is to be determined from
multiple potential locations. Multinational energy companies may
use TEI approach to select an optimal location based on the solar
and temperature profiles of the potential alternative locations
across their operational locations. Again, Department for Energy of
any country can use the TEI approach to systematically establish
where LSPPG can be deployed for optimised generation. Deploying
LSPPG to locations with optimal power generation is more sus-
tainable because it would reduce the overall emissions resulting
from the life-cycle emissions from LSPPG. In other words, the cur-
rent low conversion efficiency of solar cells requires informed
deployment of LSPPG for optimised solar energy utilisation. Such
informed deployment would ensure that the overall environmental
(Tsoutsos et al., 2005) and economic sustainability of PV application
for power generation can be maximised.
Secondly, this study contributes towards increasing the mutual
trust and understanding among stakeholders in PV applications.
This could be achieved by communicating a more realistic PV per-
formance as a function of field data so that end-users, governments,
energy companies, manufacturers and investors can understand
how the operating parameters at different locations can affect the
PV performance apart from the performance rating by the Manu-
facturers. Harjanne and Korhonen (2019) have argued that proper
framing and conceptualisation of renewable energy would improve
energy policy making. By complementing the current STC specifi-
cation, a more vibrant sustainable ecosystem could be created to
achieve higher investments, research funding, and developments of
PV-based technologies. Most likely, future advancements in the PV
technology would reduce its capital cost and ultimately make it a
competitive technology (Kavlak et al., 2018).
2. Research approach and methodology
In this section, the steps taken in order to achieve the research
aim and objectives are described. It is divided into five sections:
formalisation of the formulation of the problem as an optimal
location problem, data collection and analysis approach; design and
modeling of the 5 MW LSPPG; formulation of thermodynamic
indices; and simulation of the mean power generation.
2.1. Formulation of the problem of optimal location for LSPPG
power generation
Suppose that there exist a large non-zero independent and
identically distributed data of solar radiation and temperature of
multiple locations under consideration for LSPPG installation.
Suppose, again, that the efficiency and power rating of the PV
modules constituting the 5 MW LSPPG are rated 16% and 40 W,
respectively; and that the solar cells covers an area of 31; 250 m2.
Let the power generation be subject to the first and second laws of
thermodynamics expressed in terms of energy and exergy effi-
ciencies, respectively. Since solar radiation and temperature fluc-
tuates in all the locations, let the objective function be to determine
the location with optimal power generation. In principle, the same
5 MW LSPPG is to be deployed at the locations. This means that the
LSPPG would generate power based on the net effect of the envi-
ronmental variables. Thus, the formal statement of the optimal
location problem for the LSPPG is as follows:
Maximize PLSPPG;PV ¼ PPv þ PPv ðNP
1Þ  5MW (1)
Subject to:
PLSPPG;PV ¼ hEn  Acell  GSMV ;
 C. Ogbonnaya et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 249 (2020) 119405 5

The flowchart in Fig. 2 presents the systematic procedure from

  !
4 TSMV 1 TSMV 4 the stage of data collection to decision making. The key tasks in the
PLSPPG;PV ¼ hEx x Acell x GSMV x 1
þ ;
3 Tsun 3 Tsun procedure are further expounded next; while the summary of the
steps are presented at the end of this section.
The proposed TEI approach precedes short-term forecasting and
GSMV > 0;
predictions of PV generation (Almonacid et al., 2014; Liu et al.,
2015; Raza et al., 2018) because the LSPPG should be sited at the
TSMV > 0; optimal location in the first place before the daily or next day
optimal generation can be realistic. Whereas both approaches are
Np ¼ 125; 000; desirable, thermodynamic principles remain a reliable basis for
determining the global optimum of the efficiencies of energy sys-
tems with respect to their local operating conditions.
Acell ¼ 31; 250 m2 ;

Ppv ¼ 40 W; 2.2. Data collection and analysis approach

hPV ¼ 16%
where PLSPPG; PV is the total power output of the LSPPG, hen is the
energy efficiency of the PV modules at statistical mean value, hex is
the exergy efficiency of the PV modules at statistical mean value,
PPv is the power rating of each of the PV modules, NP is the number
of PV modules connected in parallel, GSMV and TSMV are the sta-
tistical mean values of solar radiation and temperature, respec-
tively; Tsun is the temperature of the sun.
Daily data on solar radiation, minimum and maximum tem-
peratures were sourced from Nigerian Meteorological Agency,
Abuja. In order to maintain spread within the Nigerian borders, one
state from each of the six geopolitical regions were selected. The
regions and states selected are: North Central Region (Abuja);
South-South Region (Calabar); South-East Region (Enugu); North-
East Region (Gombe); South-West Region (Lagos - Ikeja) and
North-West Region (Kano). These states are also visible in the map
in Fig. 1.

Fig. 2. Flowchart of the proposed TEI approach for deciding on the optimal location for LSPPG installation.
6 C. Ogbonnaya et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 249 (2020) 119405

In order to normalise the data to enable comparison of the six Table 1

locations under study, SMVs of solar radiation and temperature Design and operating parameters of the 5 MW LSPPG.

were generated using probability distribution functions. The SMV is Parameters Values Units
based on the classical almost sure central limit theorem (ASCLT) Module rated power (Pr ) 40.00 W
(Zang, 2014); which predicts that a very large discrete data from the Module maximum power point power (Pmpp ) 39.51 W
same domain would tend to form a normal distribution. The Module maximum voltage (Vmpp ) 14.74 V
mathematical statements for the generation of the SMVs of solar Module short circuit current (Isc ) 2.68 A
Module open circuit voltage (Voc ) 23.30 V
radiation and temperature based on the ASCLT are expressed as
Ideality factor (A) 2.83
follows: Band gap (Silicon) at 0 K 1.17 eV
Let fX; Xn ; n  1g be a sequence of independent and identically Saturation current ðIs ) 5.39  10
5 A
distributed (i.i.d) random variables of solar radiation or tempera- Material constant (alpha(a)) 7.021  10
4
ture (X); where S is the sum, M is the mean and n is the total Material constant (beta(b)) 1108
Temperature coefficient at Isc (Ki ) 0.04 %/oC
number of variables. Sum and mean of these variables from the first
Boltzmann constant (k) 1.38  10
23 J/K
non-zero variable “k” can be expressed as in Eq. (2). Electron charge (q) 1.602  10
19 C
Temperature at standard test condition (STC) 298.15 K
X
n Solar radiation at standard test condition (G) 1000 W/m2
Sn ¼ Xk ; Mn ¼ max1kn Xk ; n  1: (2) Number of solar cells in each module (Ns ) 36
k¼1 Total number of modules in the LSPPG (Np ) 125,000
Total solar cell active area 31, 250 m2
Now, if E(X) ¼ 0, and EðX 2 ) ¼ 1, the ASCLT for the solar radiation Total rated maximum power output 5.000 MW
and temperature data can be expressed as Eq. (3). Model predicted maximum power point 4.939 MW
Efficiency at STC ðhPV ) 16%
     
1 X n
1 Sk Number of simulation iteration 700
lim pffiffiffi  x ¼ 4 x a:s: for all x 2 R;
n/∞ logn k k
k¼1
(3) solar, electrical and thermal exergies of photovoltaic module based
on the second law of thermodynamics as expressed in Eq. (5) (C.
where ak > 0 and bk 2R satisfy Eq. (4),
Ogbonnaya et al., 2019b).
   
Mk
bk "   !#
p  x / G X a:s: for all x2R; (4) 4 T 1 T 4
ak Q_ loss ¼G x Acell x tglass 1
þ
3 Tsun 3 Tsun
for any continuity point x of G. Given that G represents the domain     
qVpv
of solar radiation and temperature data.
Iph Np
Is Np exp
1 x Vpv (5)
ANs kT
In order to generate the SMVs based on actual data, mean values
for the daily minimum and maximum temperatures for 731 days where Q_ loss is the heat generation rate in the module; tglass is the
(January 1, 2015 to December 31, 2016) were computed using Excel. transmissivity of the PV glass surface; Tsun is the temperature of the
The daily solar radiation and temperature data for the six locations sun while other terms are already defined in Table 1 or in the
are presented in Appendix A. Then, the solar radiation and tem- nomenclature.
perature data were organised in Microsoft Excel and imported into The energy (Eq. (6)) and exergy (Eq. (7)) efficiencies of a
MATLAB. Each of the dataset was vectorised by plotting a histogram photovoltaic module at STC have been expressed by Park et al.
first before applying different “distributionfitter” in MATLAB on the (2014) and Sudhakar and Srivastava (2014), respectively.
data. At the end, t-location scale and stable fit were selected and
applied as evidenced in Appendix B. In some cases, both models PSTC
coincided. However, the t-location scale was selected because it
hEn; STC ¼ (6)
Acell x GSTC
reflects a better probability distribution fit for solar radiation and
temperature with tails unlike the normal distribution. SMVs for the PSTC
solar radiation and temperature using t-location for each of the hEx;STC ¼  4 ! (7)
locations were generated and carried forward in this study; hence, Acell x GSTC x 1
4 T þ 1 T
3 Tsun 3 Tsun
the first objective has been met.

Similarly, let the energy and exergy efficiencies of the PV at

2.3. Design and modeling of 5 MW LSPPG SMVs be stated as Eqs. (8) and (9), respectively.

The 5 MW LSPPG applied in this study was first created with an PSMV
hEn; SMV ¼ (8)
in-house Photovoltaic Modeling and Simulation Code (PVMSIC) Acell x GSMV
(Ogbonnaya, 2019). Table 1 shows the design and operating pa-
rameters of the LSPPG at STC. Fig. 3 shows the PVMSIC predicted PSMV
maximum power point (MPP) of the LSPPG. hEx; SMV ¼  4 ! (9)
Acell x GSMV x 1
4 TSMV þ 1 TSMV
3 Tsun 3 Tsun
2.4. Formulation of the thermodynamic efficiency indices (TEI)
Energy efficiency index (EnEI) and exergy efficiency Index (ExEI)
The TEI comprises two components. The first component is the are hereby defined as the ratios of the corresponding efficiencies at
energy efficiency index (EnEI) which focuses on the efficiency of STC to efficiencies at SMV as expressed in Eqs. (10) and (11),
solar-to-electrical energy conversion based on the first law of respectively. These two equations practically integrates field data
thermodynamics. To account for the heat loss when solar exergy is with STC values of PV modules and they satisfy the second objective
converted to electrical exergy, we have numerically integrated the of this study.
 C. Ogbonnaya et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 249 (2020) 119405 7

Fig. 3. PVMSIC-predicted maximum power output of the 5 MW LSPPG at STC.

replacement cost, etc). The TEI-ROCE generates an output using a

hEn; STC combination of results at STC, SMV and CE so that the economic
EnEI ¼ (10)
hEn; SMV performance of the LSPPG can be compared, even more fairly. In
this study, a discussion is made in Section 3 for a case where the CE
hEx; STC is kept constant. The integration of the values for solar radiation
ExEI ¼ (11)
hEx; SMV
and temperature at STC, SMV and the ROCE in Eq. (15) satisfy the
research objective 3.
EnEI compares the power generation potential of LSPPG at STC
and SMV as a function of solar radiation and temperature. 2.5. Simulation of the power generation characteristics of the 5 MW
Assuming that power output varies proportionally with operating LSPPG
profit; that is, the higher the power generated, the higher the po-
tential profit under commercial setting. The EnEI can explicitly be In order to simulate the performance of the modelled 5 MW
stated in terms of power generation and solar radiation as in Eq. LSPPG with respect to the actual data of the locations, the SMVs of
(12); and can be combined with the economic analysis equation for the solar radiation and temperature were updated in the PVMSIC in
return on capital employed (ROCE) in Eq. (13) in order to derive the a MATLAB environment and then simulated. Recall that in principle,
proposed thermodynamic moderated return on capital employed the same 5 MW LSPPG has been deployed to the six locations. The
(TEI-ROCE) expressed in Eq. (14). This formula can be used to results of the simulation were further analysed and presented in
compare the potential economic performance of the same LSPPG at the following section.
different locations since profitability is expected to increase with The significance and justification of the steps adopted for
increase in power output (while all other factors remain constant). implementing Eq. (1) in order to arrive at the decision on the
optimal location are hereby summarised. The systematic procedure
PSTC x GSMV consists of multiple steps which are carried out as shown earlier in
EnEI ¼ (12)
GSTC x PSMV the flowchart in Fig. 2.

operating profit (a) Collection/acquisition of solar radiation and temperature

ROCE ¼ x 100 (13) data: The use of actual field data of the locations under study
Capital employed for the LSPPG
will form a link between the operating meteorological vari-
ables and the laboratory-based standard testing conditions
operating profitðOPÞ of PV modules.
TEI
ROCE¼ x 100
Capital employed for the LSPPGðCEÞ x EnEI (b) Generation of SMVs of solar radiation and temperature:
(14) Statistical modeling is used in order to have a common basis
for comparing the performance of the LSPPG at the locations.
The TEI-ROCE can also be stated in terms of Eq. (12) as expressed
This is necessary because solar radiation and temperature
by Eq. (15).
fluctuates continuously throughout the year across the lo-
OP x GSTC x PSMV cations under study.
TEI
ROCE ¼ x 100 (15) (c) Creation of the code-based model (CBM) of the LSPPG: The
CE x PSTC x GSMV
model is created at STC and simulated to verify that the
Capital employed (CE) for the installation and operation of maximum power point (MPP) is equivalent to the physical
LSPPG varies from location to location and could be affected by LSPPG to be deployed.
factors which may not be completely technical (e.g. licencing, (d) Deployment of LSPPG: This is done by updating the SMVs of
taxation, logistics, cost of installation, maintenance cost, the individual location in the CBM of the LSPPG, followed by
8 C. Ogbonnaya et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 249 (2020) 119405
a simulation in order to generate the MPP based on the SMVs.
The SMVs are also updated in order to estimate the amount
of heat generated from the system based on Eq. (5).
(e) Result synthesis and analyses: The results of the simulations
at STC and SMVs are used to generate the TEI based on Eqs.
(10) and (11). The economic analysis due to the location of
the LSPPG can be done using Eq. (15).
(f) Performance ranking: The TEIs of the locations are compared
at this stage. The TEIs can focus on the EnEI if electricity is the
only expected output; or consider both the EnEI and ExEI if
the heat generated is of interest as in the case of
photovoltaic-thermal systems.
(g) Decision making: The ranking will provide the optimal
location for installing the LSPPG. However, other factors that
may not be environmental, economic or technological (such
as social, legal, political) can be considered at this stage.
3. Results and discussion
The significance of the results from the study is further dis-
cussed in order to gain insights into how the 5 MW LSPPG
comparatively performed at the six locations in the six geopolitical
regions of Nigeria. Fig. 4 (a) and (b) show the power-voltage and
current-voltage profiles for the locations as predicted by the
PVMSIC at the SMVs of solar radiation and temperature. The MPP at
different locations is as a result of the combination of the solar
radiation and temperature. It can be seen that the differences in the
MPP are distinct and clearly show that the stochastic variation of
the two meteorological parameters (solar radiation and tempera-
ture) ultimately affected the MPP of the LSPPG at the locations.
Table 2 presents the detailed results generated from the simu-
lations done with the PVMSIC; and from the implementation of Eqs.
(10) and (11). The factor of coverage (FC), is hereby defined as the
ratio of the SMV solar radiation to the SMV power generation, was
computed for each of the locations. The FC indicates the active area
of the solar cell used for power generation. Therefore, at a constant
solar radiation, power generation increases with an increase in the
active area of the solar cell. Implicitly, increasing the solar cell area
means increasing the overall material input into the system; and
increase in materials means increase in cost, energy and emissions
from the life cycle of the LSPPG. Again, it also follows that low
conversion efficiency solar cells require larger active area of the
solar cell than a high conversion efficiency solar cells if the same
amount of power is to be generated. It can be argued that apart
from the efforts to increase the efficiency of solar cells and also
reduce the material content of PV modules, informed deployment
could improve the utilisation efficiency, particularly when signifi-
cant resources are to be committed for a LSPPG. The solar cells used
in the 5 MW LSPPG has 16% conversion efficiency, but future gen-
erations of solar cells would require having high conversion effi-
ciencies if the active area of the solar cell needed for the LSPPG are
to be reduced.
Further analysis of the solar exergy, power and heat generation
at SMV shows that Kano generated the highest power and heat as
shown in Fig. 5 based on Eq. (5). The mean power generation across
the locations ranges from 0.76 to 0.99 MW. The magnitude of the
solar exergy flow across the locations also indicates that other
solar-based technologies, such as photovoltaic-thermal systems
and solar thermal plants (Akinyele et al., 2015; Michael et al., 2015;
Ogbonnaya et al., 2019; Ozturk and Dincer, 2013) are applicable in
the locations under study. Overall, the cities can be listed as follows,
in descending order, in terms of the of generation potential: Kano,
Abuja, Gombe, Enugu, Ikeja and Calabar. These findings agree with
the global solar radiation profile presented in Fig. 1 and the iso-
irradiation map of Nigeria by Ojosu (1990). These findings answer
research question 1 having combined actual solar radiation and
temperature data to generated distinct power outputs for the lo-
cations under study. Generally, it appears that only two meteoro-
logical parameters are sufficient for ranking the performance of the
LSPPG at multiple locations.
From Fig. 6, based on Table 2, there is a clear difference between
the energy and exergy efficiency indices at SMV among the loca-
tions. This suggests that a combination of the statistical mean
values of the operating parameters and the laboratory-based
measurement of the PV yielded distinct TEI. Based on the ASCLT,
assuming that two other locations X and Y are considered, such that
the daily values of the solar radiation and mean temperature of X
for 731 days are all higher than the SMVs of Kano; while those of Y
are all less than the SMVs of the solar radiation and mean tem-
perature of Kano. Inferentially, location X would generate power
more than Kano while Y would generate less than Kano. In this
study, since the differences between the SMV of solar radiation and
mean temperature across the location are not large, the differences
in their thermodynamic efficiency indices are not quite significant.
This means that the LSPPG can be deployed to any of the locations
for sustainable energy generation; and this finding, therefore ad-
dresses research question 2.
However, when the size of the LSPPG and the number of years of
operation are considered, the margin of difference would increase
proportionally. For instance, if the 5 MW LSPPG applied in this
study are to be operated for 10 years at SMV, the difference be-
tween the power generated in Kano (9.9 MW) and Calabar (7.6
MW) would be 2.3 MW. This value would become quite significant
if the size of the LSPPG increases; but it does not necessarily mean
that a significant power would not be generated from Calabar; it
implies that Kano has a better potential than Calabar. The low
margins between the TEI of the locations could be because Nigeria
has fairly homogeneous tropical climate. Further comparative
analysis of tropical locations with temperate locations (e.g. Europe
or North America), where temperature is low, would be of future
research interest. Experimental designs can also gain insights from
this study when comparing multiple locations for LSPPG. Further-
more, the energy efficiency index (EnEI) ranges from 1.254 to 1.315;
whereas the exergy efficiency index (ExEI) ranges from 1.237 to
1.298. It is important to note, for the purpose of interpreting the TEI,
that locations with higher power generation potential would tend
towards 1.0 since the TEI at the STC is unity.
In order to show how the EnEI is actually related to the power
generation, power generation was plotted against EnEI as shown in
Fig. 7. Interestingly, Abuja with higher solar radiation (237.27 W/
m2) and lower temperature (300.05 K) generated slightly higher
power than Gombe with lower solar radiation and higher tem-
perature of 231.48 W/m2 and 301.35 K, respectively. This is
important because Kano, Gombe and Abuja are in the Northern part
of Nigeria (see Fig. 1); but the stochastic distributions of the solar
radiation and temperature clearly show that power generation
differ slightly in those locations. This addresses research question
3; and can be used for point prediction of optimal location for
LSPPG within the framework of ROPES.
There is also a potential application of the TEI approach for
comparing the performance of LSPPG in different countries or re-
gions; but this requires combining statistically representative data
from each of those locations. To compare two or more locations
from different countries or regions, the plot of EnEI versus FC for
each country can be used. A country with homogeneous climatic
conditions would tend to produce a more linearly distributed EnEI-
FC plot. The slope of the plot would give the ratio between the
outputs of the PV system to solar radiation at STC based on Eq. (12).
Fig. 8 presents a plot of the EnEI versus FC for the LSPPG using six
locations in Nigeria. If other countries are plotted on the same
 C. Ogbonnaya et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 249 (2020) 119405 9

Fig. 4. Power generation characteristics of the 5 MW LSPPG: (a) Power - Voltage (b) Current - Voltage curves.

Table 2
Predicted photovoltaic power generation characteristics in the six states in Nigeria.

Regions North Central South-South South-East North-East South-West North-West

States Abuja Calabar Enugu Gombe Ikeja Kano

Temperature (SMV) (K) 300.05 300.25 301.05 301.35 300.95 301.25

Solar radiation (SMV) (W/m2) 237.27 200.23 210.65 231.48 203.70 247.69
Solar exergy flow (SMV) (J/s) 2.92eþ6 5.84eþ5 6.14eþ5 6.74eþ5 5.94eþ5 7.22eþ5
Power (SMV) (W) 9.29eþ5 7.61eþ5 8.14eþ5 9.11eþ5 7.81eþ5 9.88eþ5
Heat generation rate (J/s) 2.37eþ5 1.78eþ5 2.00eþ5 2.36eþ5 1.88eþ5 2.66eþ5
Energy efficiency (SMV) (%) 12.53 12.17 12.37 12.60 12.28 12.76
Exergy efficiency (SMV) (%) 13.42 13.04 13.25 13.50 13.16 13.68
Energy efficiency (STC) (%) 16 16 16 16 16 16
Exergy efficiency (STC) (%) 16.92 16.92 16.92 16.92 16.92 16.92
Energy efficiency Index (EnEI) 1.277 1.315 1.293 1.270 1.303 1.254
Exergy efficiency index (ExEI) 1.261 1.298 1.277 1.253 1.286 1.237
Factor of coverage (Gsmv/Psmv) (m
2) 0.2554 0.2629 0.2588 0.2540 0.2605 0.2507
10 C. Ogbonnaya et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 249 (2020) 119405

Fig. 5. Solar exergy and power generations at the six locations in Nigeria.

Fig. 6. Thermodynamic efficiency indices of 5 MW LSPPG.

Fig. 7. Plot of SMV power generation to the EnEI for the locations under study.
 C. Ogbonnaya et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 249 (2020) 119405
Fig. 8. Plot of EnEI versus factor of coverage for Nigeria.
graph, lines steeper than that of Nigeria suggest locations with
higher EnEI than Nigeria. The accuracy of the predictions would
depend on the size of the “n” in the ASCLT (see Eqs. (2) and (3)) and
the number of locations used for the study.
The positive slope of the EnEI-FC plot shows that the TEI-ROCE
in Eq. (15) would always surely lead to a result that indicates that
lower EnEI yields higher TEI-ROCE. Hypothetically, if the cost of
capital employed is kept constant, the operating profit would vary
with the power output from the locations; which also depends on
the solar resource availability. Therefore, TEI-ROCE will increase if
the EnEI decreases; and locations with the lowest EnEI would have
the highest TEI-ROCE. Assuming that the capital employed for the
5 MW LSPPG in this study is constant, Kano would potentially be
the best location to site a LSPPG because it has the lowest EnEI and
would produce the maximum TEI-ROCE. An alternative interpre-
tation of the results is possible if the EnEI is inverted. In that case,
the highest value of EnEI would be the optimal location but the
position of EnEI in Eq. (14) would be at the numerator. This analysis
is useful for both commercial and national sustainable energy
strategic planning for LSPPG. Since, the proposed TEI and SMV has
been applied to understand how the 5 MW LSPPG would perform
at these six different locations. This satisfies the fourth research
objective and also answered the fourth research question.
4. Conclusions and policy implications
This study proposes novel thermodynamic efficiency indices
approach for taking a strategic decision on the optimal location for
installing a large-scale photovoltaic power generation (LSPPG). A
procedural approach is proposed as a waste prevention strategy to
complement the prevalent waste recovery strategy based on
recycling at the end-of-life of the photovoltaic modules. In order to
implement this study, actual solar radiation and temperature data
collected from six locations from Nigeria were used. First, the data
were normalised with a MATLAB distribution model fitter in order
to generate the SMVs. The SMVs were then applied to a 5 MW
LSPPG using photovoltaic modeling and simulation codes; and was
simulated in order to investigate the interactions between solar
radiation and temperature on the LSPPG. The achieved energy ef-
ficiency index appears to be sufficient to predict or/and to rank the
potential performance of the LSPPG at different locations. In
particular, the results show that Kano city has the highest power
generation potential of all the cities studied. The mean power
generation across the locations ranges from 0.76 to 0.99 MW. The
energy and exergy efficiency indices range from 1.315 to 1.298 and
1.298 to1.237, respectively. This implies that LSPPG across Nigeria is
comparatively sustainable although all the locations would not
11
generate power at the same efficiency.
The proposed procedure should be useful for energy policy-
makers and planners, multinational corporations, engineers,
governmental and non-governmental organisations since har-
nessing solar energy at an optimal location would reduce the global
environmental impacts associated with LSPPG. The resources
reduction strategy for the LSPPG through an informed choice on the
optimal operational location can also translate into better eco-
nomics since the utilisation efficiency of the LSPPG will increase at
the optimal location. The reduction of the amount of resources such
as PV materials, energy inputs, finance, life-cycle emissions, and
land space will make LSPPG more economically and environmen-
tally sustainable. However, in practice, small-scale generation does
not require such a rigorous procedure since material and energy
inputs are substantially lower. Regardless of whether the PV
modules are to be used in a LSPPG or as a small-scale system,
sustainable life cycle management involving resources reduction
and recycling requires policy frameworks and innovative business
models to prepare ahead of the surge of end-of-life PV modules in
the near future.
One of the assumptions of this study is that the heat generated
from a PV module would not degrade the electrical energy effi-
ciency. On the other hand, the heat generated can be harnessed
with photovoltaic-thermal systems; thereby incorporating the
electrical and thermal potentials of the LSPPG in the decision
making process. If the waste heat from the 5 MW LSPPG is recov-
ered, for instance, Kano city will produce additional 2.66 Eþ6 J/s of
heat at SMVs of the solar radiation and temperature. Within the
limits of the assumptions in this study, the proposed thermody-
namic efficiency indices are capable of ranking the power genera-
tion potentials of multiple locations using solar radiation and
temperature, which is a valuable piece of information for decision
making on LSPPG deployments.
Declaration of competing interest
The authors declare that they have no known competing
financial interests or personal relationships that could have
appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.
Acknowledgement
This work is supported by a scholarship of the Petroleum
Technology Development Fund Nigeria number PTDF/ED/PHD/OC/
1078/17. We acknowledge the Nigerian Meteorological Agency,
Abuja for providing temperature and solar radiation data.
12 C. Ogbonnaya et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 249 (2020) 119405

Appendix A. Solar radiation and temperature data for the six

locations under study (Source of data: Nigerian
Meteorological Agency, Abuja, Nigeria)
 C. Ogbonnaya et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 249 (2020) 119405 13

Appendix B. t-location scale and stable probability

distribution function (PDF) of solar radiation and
temperature data for the six locations under study (Source of
data: Nigerian Meteorological Agency, Abuja, Nigeria)
14 C. Ogbonnaya et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 249 (2020) 119405
(continued).
Author contributions section
Chukwuma Ogbonnaya collected data, carried out the simula-
tions, analyses and produced the draft. Professor Ali Turan is the
first project supervisor and provides the overall technical direction
of the study and he also proofread the manuscript. Dr Chamil
Abeykoon is the second supervisor of the project and he also
contributed towards providing guidance on the structure of the
article and also edited and proofread the manuscript.
References
Acakpovi, A., Ben Hagan, E., 2013. Novel photovoltaic module modeling using
matlab/simulink. Int. J. Comput. Appl. 83, 27e32. https://doi.org/10.5120/
14535-2978.
Akinyele, D.O., Rayudu, R.K., Nair, N.K.C., 2015. Global progress in photovoltaic
technologies and the scenario of development of solar panel plant and module
performance estimation - application in Nigeria. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev.
48, 112e139. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2015.03.021.
Akuru, U.B., Onukwube, I.E., Okoro, O.I., Obe, E.S., 2017. Towards 100% renewable
energy in Nigeria. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 71, 943e953. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.rser.2016.12.123.
Almonacid, F., Pe
rez-Higueras, P.J., Fern
andez, E.F., Hontoria, L., 2014.
A methodology based on dynamic artificial neural network for short-term
forecasting of the power output of a PV generator. Energy Convers. Manag.
85, 389e398. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enconman.2014.05.090.
Attari, K., Elyaakoubi, A., Asselman, A., 2016. Performance analysis and investigation
of a grid-connected photovoltaic installation in Morocco. Energy Rep. 2,
261e266. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.egyr.2016.10.004.
Bridge, G., Bouzarovski, S., Bradshaw, M., Eyre, N., 2013. Geographies of energy
transition: space, place and the low-carbon economy. Energy Policy 53,
331e340. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2012.10.066.
Bukar, A.L., Tan, C.W., 2019. A review on stand-alone photovoltaic-wind energy
system with fuel cell: system optimization and energy management strategy.
J. Clean. Prod. 221, 73e88. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.02.228.
Charfi, W., Chaabane, M., Mhiri, H., Bournot, P., 2018. Performance evaluation of a
 C. Ogbonnaya et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 249 (2020) 119405
solar photovoltaic system. Energy Rep. 4, 400e406. https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.egyr.2018.06.004.
Chen, W., Hong, J., Yuan, X., Liu, J., 2016. Environmental impact assessment of
monocrystalline silicon solar photovoltaic cell production: a case study in
China. J. Clean. Prod. 112, 1025e1032. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2015.
08.024.
Contreras-Lisperguer, R., Mun ~ oz-Cero
n, E., Aguilera, J., de la Casa, J., 2017. Cradle-to-
cradle approach in the life cycle of silicon solar photovoltaic panels. J. Clean.
Prod. 168, 51e59. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.08.206.
Deng, R., Chang, N.L., Ouyang, Z., Chong, C.M., 2019. A techno-economic review of
silicon photovoltaic module recycling. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 109,
532e550. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2019.04.020.
Dunlop, J., Rymesmrymesnrelnrelgov, M., Sloansloanveracom, M., 2003. Newsletter
of the Resource Assessment Division and suggested members of the conference
technical review. Sol. Energy 16.
Dupre
, O., Vaillon, R., Green, M.A., 2017. Thermal Behavior of Photovoltaic Devices:
Physics and Engineering. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-49457-9.
Edozien, L., Akinsoji, O., Yusuf, F., Orokpo, L., Folashade, O., Owolabi, S., Ukpai, E.,
2016. The Nigerian Power Sector Investment Opportunities and Guideline 9.
Fadare, D.A., 2009. Modelling of solar energy potential in Nigeria using an artificial
neural network model. Appl. Energy 86, 1410e1422. https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.apenergy.2008.12.005.
General Assembly, United Nations, 2015. Transforming our world: the 2030 agenda
for sustainable development. https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/content/
documents/7891Transforming%20Our%20World.pdf. https://doi.org/10.1007/
s13398-014-0173-7.2.
Harjanne, A., Korhonen, J.M., 2019. Abandoning the concept of renewable energy.
Energy Policy 330e340. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2018.12.029.
IRENA, IEA-PVPS, 2016. End-Of-Life Management: Solar Photovoltaic Panels. IEA
Photovolt. Power Syst. Program. WWW Document. http://www.irena.org/
publications/2016/Jun/End-of-life-management-Solar-Photovoltaic-Panels%
0Ahttp://www.irena.org/DocumentDownloads/Publications/IRENA_IEAPVPS_
End-of-Life_Solar_PV_Panels_2016.pdf. accessed 10.9.19.
Kavlak, G., McNerney, J., Trancik, J.E., 2018. Evaluating the causes of cost reduction
in photovoltaic modules. Energy Policy 123, 700e710. https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.enpol.2018.08.015.
Leuchter, J., Rerucha, V., Zobaa, A.F., 2010. Mathematical modeling of photovoltaic
systems. In: Proceedings of EPE-PEMC 2010 - 14th International Power Elec-
tronics and Motion Control Conference. https://doi.org/10.1109/EPEPEMC.2010.
5606897.
Liu, J., Fang, W., Zhang, X., Yang, C., 2015. An improved photovoltaic power fore-
casting model with the assistance of aerosol index data. IEEE Trans. Sustain.
Energy 6, 434e442. https://doi.org/10.1109/TSTE.2014.2381224.
MacKay, D.J., 2009. Sustainable Energy d without the Hot Air, vol. 383. UIT Cam-
bridge Ltd. https://doi.org/10.1109/PES.2004.1373296.
Michael, J.J., S, I., Goic, R., 2015. Flat plate solar photovoltaic-thermal (PV/T) systems:
a reference guide. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 51, 62e88. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.rser.2015.06.022.
Mohammed, Y.S., Mustafa, M.W., Bashir, N., Mokhtar, A.S., 2013. Renewable energy
resources for distributed power generation in Nigeria: a review of the potential.
Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 22, 257e268. https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.rser.2013.01.020.
Nigeria, F.M. of H., 2013. Nigeria, Demographic and Health Survey 2013. Abuja,
Nigeria.
Ogbonnaya, C., 2019. Novel Code-Based Modeling approach for photovoltaic power
generation. In: Proceedings of the 2019 MACE PGR Conference, pp. 24e26.
Ogbonnaya, C., Abeykoon, C., Damo, U.M., Turan, A., 2019a. The current and
emerging renewable energy technologies for power generation in Nigeria: a
review. Therm. Sci. Eng. Prog. 13, 100390. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsep.2019.
100390.
Ogbonnaya, C., Turan, A., Abeykoon, C., 2019b. Numerical integration of solar,
electrical and thermal exergies of photovoltaic module: a novel thermophoto-
voltaic model. Sol. Energy 185, 298e306. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.solener.2019.
04.058.
Ogbonnaya, C., Turan, A., Abeykoon, C., 2019. Energy and exergy efficiencies
enhancement analysis of integrated photovoltaic-based energy systems.
J. Energy Storage 26, 101029. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.est.2019.101029.
Ohunakin, O.S., Adaramola, M.S., Oyewola, O.M., Fagbenle, R.O., 2014. Solar energy
applications and development in Nigeria: drivers and barriers. Renew. Sustain.
Energy Rev. 32, 294e301. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2014.01.014.
Ojosu, J.O., 1990. The iso-radiation map for Nigeria. Sol. Wind Technol. 7, 563e575.
https://doi.org/10.1016/0741-983X(90)90065-A.
Osinowo, A.A., Okogbue, E.C., Ogungbenro, S.B., Fashanu, O., 2015. Analysis of global
solar irradiance over climatic zones in Nigeria for solar energy applications.
J. Sol. Energy 1e9, 2015.
Ozturk, M., Dincer, I., 2013. Thermodynamic analysis of a solar-based multi-gen-
eration system with hydrogen production. Appl. Therm. Eng. 51, 1235e1244.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.applthermaleng.2012.11.042.
Paghasian, K., TamizhMani, G., 2011. Photovoltaic module power rating per IEC
15
61853-1: a study under natural sunlight. In: Conference Record of the IEEE
Photovoltaic Specialists Conference, pp. 002322e002327. https://doi.org/
10.1109/PVSC.2011.6186418.
Park, S.R., Pandey, A.K., Tyagi, V.V., Tyagi, S.K., 2014. Energy and exergy analysis of
typical renewable energy systems. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 30, 105e123.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2013.09.011.
Peng, J., Lu, L., Yang, H., 2013. Review on life cycle assessment of energy payback and
greenhouse gas emission of solar photovoltaic systems. Renew. Sustain. Energy
Rev. 19, 255e274. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2012.11.035.
Penga, Z., Nizeti
c, S., Arıcı, M., 2019. Solar plant with short diffuser concept: further
improvement of numerical model by included influence of guide vane topology
on shape and stability of gravitational vortex. J. Clean. Prod. 212, 353e361.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.12.021.
Prieto-Sandoval, V., Jaca, C., Ormazabal, M., 2018. Towards a consensus on the cir-
cular economy. J. Clean. Prod. 179, 605e615. https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.jclepro.2017.12.224.
Raza, M.Q., Mithulananthan, N., Summerfield, A., 2018. Solar output power forecast
using an ensemble framework with neural predictors and Bayesian adaptive
combination. Sol. Energy 166, 226e241. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.solener.2018.
03.066.
RECP, 2018. Wind resources potential in Nigeria. WWW Document. https://www.
africa-eu-renewables.org/market-information/nigeria/renewable-energy-
potential/. accessed 12.3.18.
REN21, 2018. Renewables 2018 global Status report (Paris: REN21 secretariat). Paris
Renew. Energy Policy Netw. 1e324. ISBN: 978-3-9818911-3-3.
Rocchetti, L., Beolchini, F., 2015. Recovery of valuable materials from end-of-life
thin-film photovoltaic panels: environmental impact assessment of different
management options. J. Clean. Prod. 89, 59e64. https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.jclepro.2014.11.009.
Santos, J.D., Alonso-García, M.C., 2018. Projection of the photovoltaic waste in Spain
until 2050. J. Clean. Prod. 196, 1613e1628. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.
05.252.
Sharma, R., Goel, S., 2017. Performance analysis of a 11.2 kWp roof top grid-
connected PV system in Eastern India. Energy Rep. 3, 76e84. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.egyr.2017.05.001.
Shiva Kumar, B., Sudhakar, K., 2015. Performance evaluation of 10 MW grid con-
nected solar photovoltaic power plant in India. Energy Rep. 1, 184e192. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.egyr.2015.10.001.
Sica, D., Malandrino, O., Supino, S., Testa, M., Lucchetti, M.C., 2018. Management of
end-of-life photovoltaic panels as a step towards a circular economy. Renew.
Sustain. Energy Rev. 82, 2934e2945. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2017.10.039.
Sobri, S., Koohi-Kamali, S., Rahim, N.A., 2018. Solar photovoltaic generation fore-
casting methods: a review. Energy Convers. Manag. 156, 459e497. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.enconman.2017.11.019.
Stoppato, A., 2008. Life cycle assessment of photovoltaic electricity generation.
Energy 33, 224e232. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2007.11.012.
Sudhakar, K., Srivastava, T., 2014. Energy and exergy analysis of 36 W solar
photovoltaic module. Int. J. Ambient Energy 35, 51e57. https://doi.org/10.1080/
01430750.2013.770799.
Tao, J., Yu, S., 2015. Review on feasible recycling pathways and technologies of solar
photovoltaic modules. Sol. Energy Mater. Sol. Cells 141, 108e124. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.solmat.2015.05.005.
TCN, 2018. National Statistics for Power Generation and Supply. Transm. Co. Niger.
WWW Document. http://www.tcnorg.com/. accessed 4.12.18.
Tsoutsos, T., Frantzeskaki, N., Gekas, V., 2005. Environmental impacts from the solar
energy technologies. Energy Policy 33, 289e296. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0301-
4215(03)00241-6.
U.S. Central Intelligence Agency, 2014. CIA: the World Factbook: Saudi Arabia. CIA
World Fact Book. WWW Document. https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/
the-world-factbook/geos/sa.html.
UN, 2015. Sustainable Development Goals. United Nations. WWW Document.
https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/?menu¼1300.
Veolia, 2018. Veolia opens the first European plant entirely dedicated to recycling
photovoltaic panels. WWW Document. https://www.veolia.com/en/newsroom/
news/recycling-photovoltaic-panels-circular-economy-france. accessed 10.9.19.
Vigano
, D., Kenny, R.P., Müllejans, H., Alimonti, G., 2014. Standardization of the
energy performance of photovoltaic modules in real operating conditions. EPJ
Web Conf. 79, 3014. https://doi.org/10.1051/epjconf/20137903014.
Villalva, M., Gazoli, J., Filho, E., 2009. Comprehensive approach to modeling and
simulation of photovoltaic arrays. IEEE Trans. Power Electron. 24, 1198e1208.
https://doi.org/10.1109/tpel.2009.2013862.
World Bank, 2013. World development indicators 2013, vasa. https://doi.org/10.
1596/978-0-8213-9824-1.
Yang, D., 2019. A guideline to solar forecasting research practice: reproducible,
operational, probabilistic or physically-based, ensemble, and skill (ROPES).
J. Renew. Sustain. Energy 11, 22701. https://doi.org/10.1063/1.5087462.
Zang, Q.P., 2014. A general result in almost sure central limit theory for random
fields. Statistics (N. Y.) 48, 965e970. https://doi.org/10.1080/02331888.2013.
801974.