energies

Article
A Photovoltaic Greenhouse with Variable Shading
for the Optimization of Agricultural and
Energy Production
Simona Moretti and Alvaro Marucci *
Department of Agricultural and Forest Sciences, University of Tuscia, Via San Camillo de Lellis, s.n.c.,
01100 Viterbo, Italy
* Correspondence: marucci@unitus.it; Tel.: +39-0761-357-365




Received: 11 June 2019; Accepted: 3 July 2019; Published: 5 July 2019


Abstract: The cultivation of plants in greenhouses currently plays a role of primary importance in
modern agriculture, both for the value obtained with the products made and because it favors the
development of highly innovative technologies and production techniques. An intense research effort
in the field of energy production from renewable sources has increasingly led to the development of
greenhouses which are partially covered by photovoltaic elements. The purpose of this study is to
present the potentiality of an innovative prototype photovoltaic greenhouse with variable shading to
optimize energy production by photovoltaic panels and agricultural production. With this prototype,
it is possible to vary the shading inside the greenhouse by panel rotation, in relation to the climatic
conditions external to the greenhouse. An analysis was made for the solar radiation available during
the year, for cases of completely clear sky and partial cloud, by considering the 15th day of each
month. In this paper, the results show how the shading variation enabled regulation of the internal
radiation, choosing the minimum value of necessary radiation, because the internal microclimatic
parameters must be compatible with the needs of the plant species grown in the greenhouses.

Keywords: dynamic photovoltaic greenhouse; variable shading; renewable source; passive

cooling system

1. Introduction
Cultivation in greenhouses allows us to satisfy the growing demand for vegetables and fruits
by the growing global population by extending the production window both geographically and
seasonally [1]. The use of greenhouses allows for the control of the microclimatic parameters that
characterize the internal environment (i.e., air temperature, relative humidity, lighting level, CO2
concentration) [2–5], influencing both crop quality and quantity [6,7] and the spread of pathogens and
diseases [8].
Greenhouses use solar radiation input, but the control of the internal environment takes place
thanks to energy supplied from different sources, including fossil fuels and the electricity network [9].
These systems that take advantage of the greenhouse effect require high amounts of energy for the
operation of forced cooling, heating, and lighting systems [10]. Given the need to reduce human
pollution, the combination and use of renewable energy sources (e.g., solar energy) seems to be the
best solution to follow [11,12]. Some studies have shown that solar panels can produce energy for the
operation of heat pumps in Italy [13,14], fog cooling systems in Malaysia [15] and in Saudi Arabia [16],
and for fan and pad cooling systems in Arizona [17].
By appropriately positioning solar panels on greenhouse roofs, it is possible to obtain multiple
advantages: using the solar energy produced to make the agricultural production independent of

Energies 2019, 12, 2589; doi:10.3390/en12132589 www.mdpi.com/journal/energies

Energies 2019, 12, 2589 2 of 15

traditional energy sources [18,19]; reducing the environmental impact and production costs; not
subtracting from the land useful for crops [20,21] (since both agriculture and photovoltaic panels need
sunlight and available land, and these two practices are in conflict [22]); and using the panels as a
passive cooling system thanks to the shading produced [23,24], as an alternative to special shading
systems such as nets [25–27] and reflective coatings [25,28].
Depending on the latitude and weather conditions, cultures must be protected from low
temperatures in winter and/or autumn and at night and from high temperatures in spring and/or
summer. These low- and high-temperature conditions occur easily in Mediterranean countries [25].
To correct the excessively high temperature values that can occur inside the greenhouse, there are
several methods; among them, shading is an advantageous practice—especially in regions of high
insolation such as Spain [29] and Saudi Arabia [30].
Shading reduces the level of solar radiation, the air temperature, and the rate of evapotranspiration,
reducing water consumption—a fundamental aspect for countries where this resource is scarce [31,32].
Furthermore, it has been shown that shading combined with evaporative cooling is more effective in
arid regions and in hot seasons, while shading combined with thermal screens reduces the energy
consumption used for heating in cold regions, maintaining the temperature of the internal air at 5 ◦ C
higher than outside air [33].
Shading is important to improving crop growth, extending the crop cycle, and delaying
ripening [33,34], and its benefits have been demonstrated by some studies conducted in Japan [35] and
in the Mediterranean regions [26]. When placing the solar panels on the roof of the greenhouse, the
shading depends on the inclination of the solar rays (and therefore on the latitude, altitude, time of
day, and season) [36], their arrangement on the roof, their degree of transparency, and their inclination.
Some studies have analyzed the effect of the panel arrangement on cultures, and highlighted how
this aspect drastically influences plant growth and energy production [7,37–39]. Controlling the panels’
disposition seems to be a good solution to reducing the lack of lighting uniformity [35].
Photovoltaic panels can be opaque, semitransparent, or transparent, and can let different amounts
of solar radiation pass, influencing crop growth [25]. Opaque panels have negative effects on production,
reducing the crop growth in the case of tomatoes or reducing the amount of biomass in the case of
maize [40–45]. Meanwhile, in the experiments conducted so far, semi-transparent panels such as
DSCs (dye-sensitized solar cells) [46,47], OPVs (organic photovoltaics) [48–50], and PVs based on
the latest generation of luminescent solar concentrators have been shown to have great potential for
improvement in terms of biomass production, plant morphology, and nutritional content, since they
allow the wavelength used by plants for photosynthesis and morphogenesis to pass through [49].
Li et al. say that “the installation of semi-transparent PV modules on a greenhouse roof surface
can be beneficial when crops require moderate shading under high-irradiation conditions” [9] and,
for example, tomato [10,38], lettuce [51,52], wild rocket [53], and Welsh onion [37] were cultivated
correctly under semi-transparent panels [9]. The arrangement of the semi-transparent panels varies
from checkerboard to conventional planar PV modules [7,54,55] or cells [39,56,57] to dispersed PV
micro-cells [58,59].
One important aspect to be analyzed for shading concerns the inclination of the panels [60]. By
placing the solar panels on the roof of the greenhouse and creating a static system, independent of
time, their inclination will be equal to that of the greenhouse cover. In this way, the shading system is
not very dynamic and not very adaptable to the needs of the plants, which are influenced by excessive
shadowing when it is not necessary [36,61].
Considering that the amount of solar radiation reaching the Earth varies according to the time of
day, season, latitude, weather conditions, and altitude, a compromise must be found between electricity
production and agriculture, making the solar panel system dynamic over time, exactly like irradiation.
In other words, until today the research has developed fixed-shading photovoltaic greenhouses.
Energies 2019, 12, 2589 3 of 15

A fixed shading value can work well in some months of the year, but not others; it can be optimal
in clear skies but not in partially or totally cloudy sky conditions. Additionally, during the day, the
shading should vary with higher values in the central hours of the day.
The research gap can be filled only with photovoltaic greenhouses with variable shading by
PV panels.
This article describes the experimental results obtained by applying a dynamic photovoltaic
greenhouse prototype where shading inside the greenhouse was continuously changeable according to
the demand of the crops for light and external weather conditions [62]. The panels’ position could
change at any time of the day, optimizing the production of electricity and agriculture.
When the irradiation was at a maximum, during the hot season and in the central hours of the
day, the panels could be positioned in such a way as to shade the crop and obtain maximum energy
production; when the level of radiation was reduced, such as in the cold season and in the first and
last hours of the day, the panels could be positioned in such a way as to allow more solar radiation to
pass through.
Thanks to the rotation of the panels, it was possible to vary the degree of shading from a minimum
of 0 degrees to a maximum of 78 degrees. Furthermore, it is important to underline that with this panel
movement system, when it was necessary to let in more solar radiation because the sky was covered,
the roof remained closed and the crop continued to be protected from any precipitation.
When the optimal inclination of the solar panels to produce electric energy was lost, causing a
reduction in energy production, reflective aluminum mirrors reflected the otherwise-lost radiation
back on the panels and in this way the electricity production was improved [62].
This innovative system is able to

(1) Continuously vary the shading according to the weather conditions, the period of the year, the
time of day, and the type of harvest. The mobile system (panels and mirrors) makes the structure
dynamic and flexible based on the needs of the situation;
(2) Optimize energy and agricultural production consuming the same land unit, without filling areas
adjacent to the greenhouse for the positioning of the panels at the expense of crops;
(3) Totally recover the amount of energy lost by reflection when the inclination of the direct solar
radiation moves away from the optimal one thanks to the use of aluminum mirrors constantly
aligned with the sun’s rays;
(4) Use a large part of the greenhouse roof for the installation of photovoltaic panels, leaving the
crop protected from precipitation.

In this paper the variation in shading obtained from the dynamic prototype of the photovoltaic
greenhouse is analyzed and discussed in order to maintain certain minimum internal solar radiation
thresholds expressed in terms of both global daily radiation (5 MJ m−2 day−1 ) and energy flow
(400 Wm−2 ).

2. Materials and Methods

The prototype used in this research was realized at the Tuscia University in Viterbo, Italy. The
length and width of the greenhouse were 3.79 and 2.41 m, respectively; it had an asymmetric cross
section specifically designed for photovoltaic energy generation.
The photovoltaic panels occupied an area of 8.15 m2 and were positioned on the south pitch,
inclined at 33◦ . The north pitch without photovoltaic panels had a slope of 51◦ (Figure 1).
Energies 2019, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW 4 of 15
Energies 2019, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW 4 of 15
Energies 2019, 12, 2589 4 of 15

Figure 1. The experimental prototype used for this search.

Figure 1.
Figure 1. The
The experimental
experimental prototype
prototype used for this
used for this search.
search.
The prototype was made of iron and glass, with a transverse vertical polycarbonate wall.
The prototype
More was made
details about iron and
of iron
the geometricaland glass,
glass, with aa transverse
with
characteristicstransverse verticaldata
vertical
and technical polycarbonate
polycarbonate wall. are
wall.
of the prototype
Moreindetails
More
reported details
Marucci about
about thethe
et al. geometrical
geometrical
[62]. characteristics
characteristics and technical
and technical data ofdata of the prototype
the prototype are
are reported
reported
in Marucci in Marucci et al. [62].
et al. [62]. system arose from the observation of shaded greenhouses where the pitch of
This innovative
innovative
This innovative
the south-facing system
roofsystem arosefrom
arose
was partially from thetheobservation
covered observation of of
by photovoltaic shaded
shaded greenhouses
greenhouses
panels. where
This solution wherethe the
has pitch
pitch
become of
of the
the south-facing
south-facing roof roof
was was partially
partially covered
covered by by photovoltaic
photovoltaic panels.panels.
This This
solution
most popular one. If we consider the latitude of the Mediterranean areas, knowing the inclination of solution
has has
become become
the the
most
most
popular
the popular
sun’s one. one.
raysIfatwe Ifconsider
12:00, weitconsider thetolatitude
the latitude
is possible of theofMediterranean
observe the Mediterranean
that the portionareas, areas,
of the knowing
knowing
illuminated the inclination
the inclination
floor is poor of
ofand
the
the uniform.
not sun’s
sun’s raysrays at 12:00,
at Figure
12:00, it2 is itpossible
shows is possible to observe
to observe
the distribution thatthat the portion
thepartial
of the portion of illuminated
of the
shadows the
fromilluminatedfloorfloor
June 21st. isthe
is poor
When poor
and and
not
height
not uniform.
uniform.
angle of the Figure
Figure
solar2 shows 2 shows the distribution
the distribution
rays decreases, of the
of the solar
the internal partial
partial shadows
shadowsisfrom
radiation from
alsoJune June 21st.
21st. When
reduced, as shownWhen the
the height height
angle
in Figures 3
angle
of
and 4. of
the therays
solar solardecreases,
rays decreases, the internal
the internal solar radiation
solar radiation is also reduced,
is also reduced, as shown asinshown
Figuresin 3Figures
and 4. 3
and 4.

Glass
PV panels
Glass
PV panels

Figure 2. Direct solar radiation at Mediterranean latitudes: 21 June, 12:00 pm. (PV:
(PV: photovoltaic).
Figure 2. Direct solar radiation at Mediterranean latitudes: 21 June, 12:00 pm. (PV: photovoltaic).
Energies 2019,
Energies2019, 12,
12,x2589
2019,12, xFOR
FORPEER
PEERREVIEW
REVIEW 5 of 15
Energies 5 5ofof1515
Energies 2019, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW 5 of 15

PVpanels
PV panels Glass
Glass
PV panels Glass

Figure 3.Direct
Figure Direct solarradiation
radiation atMediterranean
Mediterranean latitudes:2121September,
September, 12:00pm.
pm.
Figure 3.
Figure Directsolar
3. Direct
3. solar radiationat
solar radiation at Mediterraneanlatitudes:
at Mediterranean latitudes: 21
latitudes: September, 12:00
21 September, 12:00 pm.
12:00 pm.

PVpanels
panels Glass
Glass
PV Glass
PV panels

Figure4.
Figure
Figure 4.4.Direct
Directsolar
Direct solarradiation
solar radiationat
radiation atMediterranean
at Mediterraneanlatitudes:
Mediterranean latitudes:21
latitudes: 21December,
21 December,12:00
December, 12:00pm.
12:00 pm.
pm.
Figure 4. Direct solar radiation at Mediterranean latitudes: 21 December, 12:00 pm.
Under
Underthese
Under theseconditions,
these conditions,most
conditions, most
most ofofof
the
thedirect
thedirectsolar
direct radiation
solar
solar enters
radiation
radiation the protected
enters
enters environment
theprotected
the protected from
environment
environment
the
fromUnder
vertical these
thevertical
vertical conditions,
wall facing south.
wallfacing most of
Finally,
facingsouth.
south. the direct
FigureFigure
Finally, solar
5Figure
shows radiation
that the enters
checkerboard the protected
formation environment
allows greater
from the wall Finally, 55shows
shows that
that thecheckerboard
the checkerboard formation
formation allows
allows
from theuniformity
uniformity
greater vertical
of wall
lighting
of facing
and south.
therefore
lighting and Finally,
is much
therefore Figure
more
is much 5 shows
efficient
more that
for thethe
efficient checkerboard
growth
for theof crops.
growth formation
of crops. allows
greater uniformity of lighting and therefore is much more efficient for the growth of crops.
greater uniformity of lighting and therefore is much more efficient for the growth of crops.

PVpanels
PV panels
PV panels

Glass
Glass
Glass

Figure 5.5.Direct
Figure5. solar
Directsolar radiation
solarradiation atatMediterranean
radiationat latitudes
Mediterraneanlatitudes for
foraaadifferent
latitudesfor different checkerboard
differentcheckerboard formation
checkerboardformation of
formationof
of
Figure Direct Mediterranean
Figure 5. Direct
photovoltaic
photovoltaic solar
panels:
panels: radiation
21
21June,
June, at
12:00
12:00Mediterranean
pm.
pm. latitudes for a different checkerboard formation of
photovoltaic panels: 21 June, 12:00 pm.
photovoltaic panels: 21 June, 12:00 pm.
These solutions are expensive to implement, and as they are “static”, they are good for limited
Thesesolutions
These solutionsareareexpensive
expensivetotoimplement,
implement,and andasasthey
theyareare“static”,
“static”,they
theyare
aregood
goodfor
forlimited
limited
periods
Theseof the year and
solutions are day, and only
expensive to for certain crops.
implement, and as It
theyis necessary
are to consider
“static”, they are that under
good for clear
limited
periodsofofthe
periods theyear
yearand
andday,
day,and
andonly
onlyforforcertain
certaincrops.
crops.ItItisisnecessary
necessarytotoconsider
considerthat
thatunder
underclear
clear
sky conditions
periods solar
of the year radiation
and varies considerably
day, andvaries
only considerably during
for certain crops. the year
It isthe in terms
necessary to of intensity
consider of energy
that under flow
clear
sky
sky conditions solar radiation during year in terms of intensity of energy
(Wmconditions
sky
−2 ) and in solar
conditions terms
solar
radiation
radiation
varies
of duration
varies
considerably
of solar during
radiation (day
considerably
the year in terms of intensity of energy
length).
during the year in terms of intensity of energy
flow
flow (Wm
(Wm −2) )and
−2 and interms
in terms ofduration
of duration ofofsolar
solarradiation
radiation (day
(day length).
length).
flow (Wm−2) and in terms of duration of solar radiation (day length).
Energies 2019, 12, 2589 6 of 15

Energies 2019, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW 6 of 15

For example, in the absence of clouds, at the latitude of 42◦ north and at an altitude of 300 m, the
Energies 2019, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW 6 of 15
global daily
For radiation
example, inranges from of
the absence MJ m−2
7.3clouds, at d −1 on 21 December to 29.4 MJ m−2 d−1 on 21 June—an
the latitude of 42° north and at an altitude of 300 m, the
global
approximately
Fordaily radiation
four-fold
example, ranges
increase.
in the absencefrom 7.3 MJ m
of clouds,
−2d−1 on 21 December to 29.4 MJ m−2d−1 on 21 June—an
at the latitude of 42° north and at an altitude of 300 m, the
approximately
To make
global daily four-fold
theradiation increase.
dynamicranges
system, it was
from 7.3 MJdecided to move
m−2d−1 on the panels.
21 December to 29.4 MJ m−2d−1 on 21 June—an
To make
approximately
A the
mechanical system dynamic system,
four-foldallowed it was decided to move the panels.
increase.the rotation of the panels along the longitudinal axis and regulated
ATo mechanical
make the systemsystem,
dynamic allowedit was
the decided
rotation toofmove
the panels along the longitudinal axis and
the panels.
the shading inside the structure (Figure 6).
regulated the shading
A mechanical inside allowed
system the structure (Figure 6).
the rotation of the panels along the longitudinal axis and
regulated the shading inside the structure (Figure 6).

Figure 6. PV panels and mirrors on the prototype.

Figure 6. PV panels and mirrors on the prototype.
Figure 6. PV panels and mirrors on the prototype.
However, the dynamic system caused the loss of the optimal inclination for the production of
However, the dynamic system caused the loss of the optimal inclination for the production of
energy with photovoltaic
However, panels,
the dynamic resulting
system caused in losing
loss part of optimal
the solarinclination
radiation useful
thefor reflection.of
energy with photovoltaic panels, resulting inthe
losing of the
part of the solar radiationforuseful
production
for reflection.
This problem was partially solved by placing mirrors (Figures 6 and 7) [62].
energy with photovoltaic panels, resulting in losing part of the solar radiation useful for reflection.
This problem was partially solved by placing mirrors (Figures 6 and 7) [62].
This problem was partially solved by placing mirrors (Figures 6 and 7) [62].

Figure 7. Detail of the movement system of the PV panels and mirrors.

Figure
Figure 7. Detail
7. Detail ofofthe
themovement
movement system
system of
ofthe
thePV
PVpanels
panelsand mirrors.
and mirrors.
Energies 2019, 12, 2589 7 of 15

Energies 2019, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW 7 of 15

To reflect part of the lost radiation, the mirrors must always be aligned with the sun’s rays. Defined
with To reflect
α the angle part of the the
between lost mirrors
radiation,andthe
themirrors
panels,must always be aligned
the importance with the
of the mirrors sun’s rays.
is greater the
Defined with α the angle ◦ between the mirrors and the panels, the importance
smaller the angle α. At 55 , the area of the photovoltaic panel that allows the mirrors to be efficient for of the mirrors is
greater the smaller
the recovery of solarthe angle α.isAt30%.
radiation 55°, At
the45 ◦
area of the
, only photovoltaic
a reflection occurspanel thatmirror,
on the allows but
the the
mirrors
area to
of
be
theefficient
panel that for allows
the recovery
the mirror of solar radiation
to recover theissolar
30%.radiation
At 45°, only a reflection
is 100%. occurs
As studied byon the mirror,
Marucci et al.
but the
“For areasmaller
angles of the panel
than 45 ◦ , the
that allows the mirror
number to recover
of reflections the solar
increases radiation is to
proportionally 100%. As studied
the decrease by
in the
Marucci
incidenceetangle”
al. “For angles smaller than 45°, the number of reflections increases proportionally to the
[62].
decrease
If theinphotovoltaic
the incidence angle”
panels are[62].
parallel to the roof, they allow a maximum shading degree of 78%.
If the
Marucci etphotovoltaic
al. defines the panels
degree areofparallel
shadingtoasthe“asroof, they allow
the ratio betweena maximum shading
the projection degree
of the lengthofof
78%.
the
Marucci et al. defines
panel including the framethe degree
(21 cm)of onshading asand
the pitch “as thethe distance
ratio between
betweenthethe
projection
points ofofrotation
the length of
of the
the panel including
panel (27 cm)” [62]. the frame (21 cm) on the pitch and the distance between the points of rotation of
the panel (27 cm)” [62].
The percentage of shading could be modified thanks to the panel movement system. If the portion
of theThe percentage
panels projected ofon shading
the ground couldis be modified
reduced, thanks to
the shading is the panel movement system. If the
reduced.
portion of the panels projected on the
The degree of shading must be selected based on ground is reduced, the shading is reduced.
The degree of shading must be selected based on
(1) The1)kind Theof kind
crop; of crop;
(2) Latitude;
2) Latitude;
(3) The3)time The time and
of day; of day; and
4) External weather
(4) External weather conditions. conditions.

3. Results
Results and
and Discussion
Discussion
Figure 8 shows the values of the external and internal global solar radiation
radiation measured
measured on clear
days and with different values of shading by the PV panels and the values of the transmittance of the
photovoltaic cover.

30 90
MJ m-2d-1

%
80
25
70
20 60
50
15
40
10 30
20
5
10
0 0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80
Shading rate

External solar radiation Internal solar radiation

Average transmittance %

Figure 8. Outside and inside global solar radiation at different shading percentages.
Figure 8. Outside and inside global solar radiation at different shading percentages.
The values of internal solar radiation were obtained by processing the data measured by
The sensors
internal values [62].
of internal
It can be solar
seenradiation were obtained
that the internal by processing
solar radiation theasdata
decreased measured by
the percentage of
internal sensors [62]. It can be seen that the internal solar radiation decreased as the
shading increased, and that the system was very effective in adapting to external radiation levels. percentage of
shading
From theincreased,
measuredand data that the system
shown was8 very
in Figure effective
and with in adapting
the direct to external
and diffuse solar radiation
radiation levels.
levels
From the measured data shown in Figure 8 and with the direct and diffuse solar
calculated [36,63], the annual trends of external and internal solar radiation were simulated radiation levels
for different
calculated [36,63], the annual trends of external and internal solar radiation were
shading percentages (20%, 40%, 60%, and 78%). For this simulation, the 15th of each month in clear simulated for
different shading
sky conditions waspercentages
considered(20%, 40%,
(Figure 9). 60%, and 78%). For this simulation, the 15th of each month
in clear sky conditions was considered (Figure 9).
Energies 2019, 12, 2589 8 of 15
Energies 2019, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW 8 of 15

30

MJ m-2day-1
28

25

23

20

18

15

13

10

0
January February March 15th April 15th May 15th June 15th July 15th August September October November December
15th 15th 15th 15th 15th 15th 15th
20% 40% 60% 78% External solar radiation Internal solar radiation (0% shading) limit 5 MJm^-2day^-1

Figure 9. Levels
Levels of
of external
external and
and internal
internal solar
solar radiation
radiation under
under different
different levels
levels of
of shading
shading (0%,
(0%, 20%,
20%,
40%, 60%, and 78%).

Values of internal
internal solar
solar radiation
radiationbelow
below55MJ MJm m−2−2 day−1 −1 are not sufficient for the optimal growth
are not sufficient for the optimal growth
of most crops, and this this is
is reflected
reflected in in the
the poor
poor quality
quality of of the
the final
final products
products in in terms
termsof ofsize,
size,quantity,
quantity,
color, and nutritional properties.
This threshold value would never be reached if the shading percentage reached 78%. According
to the
thesimulation,
simulation,forfor 60% of the
60% of shading, the critical
the shading, monthsmonths
the critical are January, February, February,
are January, October, November,
October,
and December.
November, and For the months
December. ForoftheJanuary,
months November,
of January, andNovember,
December, and 40% December,
of the shading 40%was of not
the
allowed to reach the lower limit of 5 MJ m −2 day−1 . Finally,−2the month of December did not exceed
shading was not allowed to reach the lower limit of 5 MJ m day . Finally, the month of December
−1

the threshold,
did not exceedeven the with the shading
threshold, even withpercentage
the shadingat 20%. Thus, in the
percentage months
at 20%. Thus,of January,
in the months February, of
October, February,
January, November, and December,
October, November, thanks
and to the mobile
December, panels,
thanks it ismobile
to the possible to allow
panels, it is more
possiblesolar
to
radiation to pass, reducing the shading. During spring and summer, on
allow more solar radiation to pass, reducing the shading. During spring and summer, on the other the other hand, it is possible to
use theitpanels
hand, as if they
is possible to usewere
the apanels
passive as cooling
if they were system, becausecooling
a passive the available
system,solar radiation
because exceeds
the available
the demand
solar radiation of most
exceedsplants, at the same
the demand time plants,
of most producing electricity
at the same time thatproducing
could eventually
electricity be that
entered
could in
the electricity
eventually be network.
entered in Figure
the 9electricity
clearly shows
network.that in the spring
Figure and autumn
9 clearly shows thatseason in ittheis sufficient
spring and to
shade to season
autumn 20%, whileit isinsufficient
the summer periodto
to shade a value
20%, of 50% in
while is sufficient.
the summer period a value of 50% is
This new dynamic photovoltaic greenhouse was also designed and built to achieve instantaneous
sufficient.
shading
Thisvariations.
new dynamic When we set an optimal
photovoltaic limit (constant
greenhouse was oralsovariable) of internal
designed and solar
built radiation
to achieve for
the plant cultivated
instantaneous shading(for variations.
example, 400 Wm−2
When we ), all
setthe
anPV panels,limit
optimal initially alignedorwith
(constant the mirrors
variable) to the
of internal
solar rays, couldfor
radiation begin to rotate
the plant to increase
cultivated (forthe shading400
example, in such
Wm−2a),way thatPV
all the thepanels,
internalinitially
solar radiation
aligned
was maintained
with the mirrors at tothe
the established optimal
solar rays, could value.
begin to rotate to increase the shading in such a way that the
On solar
internal June 21, with clear
radiation was sky and at 42at◦ the
maintained north latitude, in
established order to
optimal maintain the greenhouse at the
value.
fixedOnlevel of 21,
solar radiation (400 Wm −2 ), the PVlatitude,
panels should begin to produce
June with clear sky and at 42° north in order to maintain the shade
greenhousethree hours
at the
after sunrise
fixed level ofand
solarstop shading
radiation three
(400 Wm hours
−2), thebefore sunsetshould
PV panels (Figurebegin
10). Into addition,
produce shadethe shading is not
three hours
constant and must gradually increase up to a maximum of 47% in the middle
after sunrise and stop shading three hours before sunset (Figure 10). In addition, the shading is not of the day.
constant and must gradually increase up to a maximum of 47% in the middle of the day.
Energies 2019, 12, 2589 9 of 15
Energies 2019,
Energies 2019, 12,
12, xx FOR
FOR PEER
PEER REVIEW
REVIEW 99 of
of 15
15

1000 100
1000
1000 100
100
W/m2
W/m22 900
900
90
90
900 90
%
800
800
80
80
%
800 80
700 70
700
700 70
70
600 60
600
600 60
60
46 47 47
47 47 47
500
500 42 44 46 47
44 46 47 47 47
47 47 44 42
47 44 50
50
500 42 44
38 42
44 42
42 38 50
400 38
38 38
38 40
400 33 33 40
400 33
33 33
33 40
300 25 25 30
300 25
25 25
25 30
300 30
200 14 14 20
200
200 14
14 14
14 20
20
100 10
100
100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10
10
0 0
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0
0
0 0 0
0
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
0
0 1
1 2
2 3
3 4
4 5
5 6
6 7
7 8
8 9
9 10
10 11
11 12
12 13
13 14
14 15
15 16
16 17
17 18
18 19
19 20
20 21
21 22
22 23
23 h h
Internal solar radiation External solar radiation Internal solar radiation (0% shading) Shading percentage PV energy production h
Internal solar
Internal solar radiation
radiation External solar
External solar radiation
radiation Internal solar
Internal solar radiation
radiation (0%
(0% shading)
shading) Shading percentage
Shading percentage PV energy
PV energy production
production

Figure10.
Figure
Figure 10. Daily
10. Daily trend
Daily trendof
trend of shading
of shadingpercentages
shading percentagesso
percentages sothat
so thatthe
that theinternal
the internalsolar
internal solarradiation
solar radiationis
radiation iskept
is keptlower
kept lowerthan
lower thanor
than or
or
equalto
equal
equal tothe
to theset
the setlimit
set limiton
limit onJune
on June21.
June 21.
21.

On March
On
On March21,
March 21,the
21, thePV
the PVpanels
PV panelsshould
panels shouldbegin
should beginto
begin toproduce
to produceshade
produce shade three
shade threehours
three hoursafter
hours after sunrise
after sunrise and
sunrise and stop
and stop
stop
producing
producing shade
shade three
three hours
hours before
before sunset
sunset (Figure
(Figure 11).
11). The
The shading
shading in
in this
this case
case should
should
producing shade three hours before sunset (Figure 11). The shading in this case should gradually gradually
gradually
increaseto
increase
increase toaaamaximum
to maximumof
maximum of35%
of 35%in
35% inthe
in themiddle
the middleof
middle ofthe
of theday.
the day.
day.

1000 100
1000
1000 100
100
W/m222
W/m 900 90
900
900 90
90
%
800 80 %
800
800 80
80
700 70
700
700 70
70
600 60
600
600 60
60
500 50
500
500 50
50
400 35 34
34 35 40
400 32 34 35 34 32
34 32 40
400 32 34
28 32 32 28 40
300 28
28 28
28 30
300 23 23 30
300 23
23 23
23 30
200 14 14 20
200
200 14
14 14
14 20
20
100 10
100
100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10
10
0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0
0 0
0
0 0 0
0
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
0
0 1
1 2
2 3
3 4
4 5
5 6
6 7
7 8
8 9
9 10
10 11
11 12
12 13
13 14
14 15
15 16
16 17
17 18
18 19
19 20
20 21
21 22
22 23
23 h
h
Internal solar radiation External solar radiation Internal solar radiation (0% shading) Shading percentage PV energy production h
Internal solar
Internal solar radiation
radiation External solar
External solar radiation
radiation Internal solar
Internal solar radiation
radiation (0%
(0% shading)
shading) Shading percentage
Shading percentage PV energy
PV energy production
production

Figure11.
Figure
Figure 11.Daily
11. Dailytrend
Daily trendofof
trend of shading
shading
shading percentages
percentages so that
so that
percentages so that the internal
internal
the internal
the solar
solarsolar radiation
radiation is lower
is lower
radiation is lower than
than orthan or
equal
or
equal
to to the
the set
equal to the seton
limit
set limit on March
March
limit on March
21. 21.
21.

Lastly,on
Lastly,
Lastly, onFebruary
on February21,
February 21,the
21, themaximum
the maximumshading
maximum shadingmust
shading mustnot
must notexceed
not exceed18%
exceed 18%(Figure
18% (Figure12).
(Figure 12).
12).
1000 100
1000
1000 100
100
W/m222
W/m 900 90
900
900 90
90
%
800 80 %
800
800 80
80
700 70
700
700 70
70
600 60
600
600 60
60
500 50
500
500 50
50
400 40
400
400 40
40
300 30
300
300 30
30
18 17
17 18
200
200 13 17
17 18 17
17 13 20
20
200 13
13 13
13 20
6 6
100 6
6 6
6 10
100
100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10
10
0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0
0 0
0
0 0 0
0
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
0
0 1
1 2
2 3
3 4
4 5
5 6
6 7
7 8
8 9
9 10
10 11
11 12
12 13
13 14
14 15
15 16
16 17
17 18
18 19
19 20
20 21
21 22
22 23
23 h
h
Internal solar radiation
Internal
External solar radiation Internal solar radiation (0% shading) Shading percentage PV energy production h
Internal solar
solar radiation
radiation External
External solar
solar radiation
radiation Internal
Internal solar
solar radiation
radiation (0%
(0% shading)
shading) Shading
Shading percentage
percentage PV
PV energy
energy production
production

Figure 12.
Figure 12. Daily
Daily trend
trend of shading
shading percentages
percentages so
so that the
the internal
internal solar
solar radiation
radiation is
is lower than
than or
or
Figure 12. Daily trend ofof
shading percentages so thatthat
the internal solar radiation is lowerlower
than or equal
equal
equal to the
to the set limit
seton
limit on February
on February 21.
21.
to the set limit February 21.

On the
On the three
three days
days considered,
considered, the
the panels
panels must
must begin
begin to
to shade
shade about
about three
three hours
hours after
after sunrise
sunrise
and stop shading about three hours before sunset; these intervals do not vary much during the
and stop shading about three hours before sunset; these intervals do not vary much during the year, year,
but they can be changed by modifying the limit for the internal solar radiation. However, one
but they can be changed by modifying the limit for the internal solar radiation. However, one factor factor
Energies 2019, 12, 2589 10 of 15

On2019,
Energies the 12,
three days
x FOR PEERconsidered,
REVIEW the panels must begin to shade about three hours after sunrise 10 of 15
and stop shading about three hours before sunset; these intervals do not vary much during the year,
but
thatthey
doescanvary
be changed by modifying
greatly during theislimit
the year the for the internal
percentage of solar radiation.
shading requiredHowever,
to haveone
thefactor
same
that does solar
internal vary radiation.
greatly during the year
On days withisathe percentage
partly cloudy of
skyshading
(Figurerequired to have the
13), the shading by same
the PVinternal
panels
solar
mustradiation.
be instantlyOn days withtoa the
adapted partly cloudysolar
external sky (Figure 13),and
radiation the the
shading by the
set limit forPV panels
the must
internal be
solar
instantly
radiation. adapted to the external solar radiation and the set limit for the internal solar radiation.

1000 100
W/m2
900 90
%
800 80

700 70

600 60

500 43 50
41 41
37
400 40
31
26
300 22 24 30

200 13 20
9 11
100 10
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
h
Internal solar radiation External solar radiation Internal solar radiation (0% shading) Shading percentage PV energy production

Figure13.
Figure 13.Daily
Dailytrend
trendof
ofthe
theshading
shadingpercentage
percentagewith
withpartly
partlycloudy
cloudysky
skyon
onMay
May23.
23.

The
The shading
shading of of the
the PVPV panels
panels adapts
adapts instantaneously
instantaneously to to the
the variations
variations in in the
the external
external solar
solar
radiation:
radiation: it must be null when the internal solar radiation is less than or equal to the set limit,and
it must be null when the internal solar radiation is less than or equal to the set limit, and
must
mustgradually
graduallyincrease
increasetotoremain
remainequal
equaltotothetheset
setlimit
limitfor
forthe
theinternal
internalsolar
solarradiation.
radiation.
The
Thetrends
trendsin inthe
theelectricity
electricityproduction
productionof ofthe
thePVPVpanels
panelson onrepresentative
representativedays days(sunny
(sunnydaysdaysof of
different lengths and partly cloudy days) are shown in the corresponding figures,
different lengths and partly cloudy days) are shown in the corresponding figures, depending on the depending on the
external
externalsolar
solarradiation
radiationand andabove
aboveallall
ononthethe
shading
shading of the panels.
of the panels.TheThe
electricity production
electricity productionof the
of PV
the
panels is null
PV panels in the
is null infirst and last
the first and hours of the
last hours ofday, where
the day, the panels
where are aligned
the panels to thetorays
are aligned the of theofsun
rays the
like
sunmirrors; it grows
like mirrors; with increasing
it grows shading
with increasing up to about
shading up to65 Wm−2
about 65inWmthe−2central
in the hours
centralofhours
the dayof on
the
the
daysummer solstice. Table
on the summer 1 shows
solstice. Tablethe total daily
1 shows values
the total of the
daily electricity
values of the produced
electricity by the PV panels
produced by the
expressed MJ m−2 din
PV panelsinexpressed
−1 .
MJ m−2d−1.

Table 1. External and internal solar daily radiation of the prototype and electricity production of the
Table 1. External and internal solar daily radiation of the prototype and electricity production of the
PV panels.
PV panels.
ExternalSolar
External Solar Internal
Internal Solar
Solar PV Energy
PV Energy PV Energy
PV Energy
Day Radiation Radiation Production Efficiency
Day Radiation
(MJ m−2 d(MJ
−1 ) Radiation
(MJ m−2 (MJ
d−1 ) Production
(MJ m−2 (MJ
d−1 ) Efficiency
(%)
m−2d−1) m d )
−2 −1 m d )
−2 −1 (%)
June 21, clear sky 29.5 16.8 1.44 4.9
June21,
March 21,clear
clear
skysky 29.5
18.8 16.812.7 1.44 0.63 4.9 3.3
March 21, clear
February 21, clear sky 13.3 10.4 0.25 1.9
May 23, partly cloudy sky 18.8
20.6 12.713.8 0.63 0.67 3.3 3.2
sky
February 21, clear
13.3 10.4 −2 0.25 1.9
On clear days,
sky with the internal threshold of 400 Wm , the daily electricity production varied
from 0.25 to 1.44
May MJ m−2 d−1 with a maximum efficiency percentage of 4.9%. In cloudy conditions
23, partly
20.6 13.8 0.67 3.2
the production
cloudy of sky
electricity was lower and in any case extremely variable with the distribution and
intensity of cloudiness. To immediately adapt the shading to the required conditions, the panel
movement system
On clear days,(manual
with theininternal
the prototype)
thresholdcould
of 400beWm
easily automated
−2, the and associated
daily electricity productionwith the
varied
centralized greenhouse management system. The value of internal solar radiation
from 0.25 to 1.44 MJ m d with a maximum efficiency percentage of 4.9%. In cloudy conditions the
−2 −1 was established
based on the of
production needs of the cultivated
electricity was lowerplants.
and inBased on the
any case value of variable
extremely external solar
with radiation measured,
the distribution and
the automatic
intensity control system
of cloudiness. To obtained the percentage
immediately adapt theofshading
shadingto and therefore
the theconditions,
required angle that the
thepanels
panel
must take with
movement respect
system to the in
(manual pitch.
the The automated
prototype) management
could system alsoand
be easily automated controlled the angle
associated of
with the
the mirrors, which
centralized must always
greenhouse be aligned
management withThe
system. the value
sun’s rays.
of internal solar radiation was established
based on the needs of the cultivated plants. Based on the value of external solar radiation measured,
the automatic control system obtained the percentage of shading and therefore the angle that the
panels must take with respect to the pitch. The automated management system also controlled the
angle of the mirrors, which must always be aligned with the sun’s rays.
Energies 2019, 12, 2589 11 of 15

Energies 2019, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW 11 of 15

The energy exchanges of the proposed prototype, including the radiative exchanges in the
night period,Thewere
energystudied
exchangesin the energy
of the balance
proposed [36].including
prototype, In the winter months,
the radiative shading
exchanges and
in the nightelectricity
production were drastically reduced to become negligible, as the solar energy that reaches the ground
period, were studied in the energy balance [36]. In the winter months, shading and electricity
production
is just enough forwere drastically
cultivated reduced
plants. to become
Without plantnegligible, as the
cultivation, solar energy
however, that reaches
the shading would the be the
ground is just enough for cultivated plants. Without plant cultivation, however, the shading would
maximum possible (78%), as would the production of electricity.
be the maximum possible (78%), as would the production of electricity.
Another possible use of this prototype could be to entrust the modification of the shading to the
Another possible use of this prototype could be to entrust the modification of the shading to the
strong variation of theofangle
strong variation of the
the angle solar
of the solarrays,
rays, keeping
keeping thethephotovoltaic
photovoltaicpanelspanels
fixed fixed and horizontal.
and horizontal.
This working method
This working method of the prototype
of the prototypewill be the
will be thesubject
subject
of of further
further studies
studies and research.
and research.
Rotation
Rotation is stillisnecessary
still necessary
for theformirrors,
the mirrors,
which which
must must always
always be be aligned
aligned to to sunlight.ItItisisa avariation
sunlight.
variation
of passive of passive
shading, without shading,
energy without energy consumption
consumption for the
for the control andcontrol and handling
handling systemssystems
(Figure 14).
(Figure 14).

Figure
Figure 14. 14. Shading
Shading ininclear
clearsky
sky conditions
conditions with
withhorizontal PV panels.
horizontal PV panels.

The shading obtained is favorable for crop requirements: maximum in summer, minimum during
the winter.
Energies 2019, 12, 2589 12 of 15

4. Conclusions
This study shows the feasibility of changing the degree of shading inside a greenhouse based on
the available solar radiation and on plant needs, thanks to a dynamic system of photovoltaic panels.
The advantages of this innovation are evident, because the mobile photovoltaic panels positioned on
the roof allow optimization the agricultural production (varying the amount of solar radiation that
reaches the plants) and the production of electrical energy (thanks also to the presence of the mirrors).
Finally, the shading can be almost completely removed: the photovoltaic panels can rotate to cancel
their projection on the floor and not interfere with the lighting.
With a set optimal limit of internal solar radiation for the plant cultivated, all the PV panels,
initially aligned with the mirrors to the solar rays, can begin to rotate to increase the shading in such
a way that the internal solar radiation is maintained at the established optimal value (constant or
variable). With a partly cloudy sky, the shading by the PV panels can be instantly adapted to the
external solar radiation and the set limit for the internal solar radiation.
Therefore, this prototype is a dynamic and flexible system that easily adapts to agricultural and
energy production demands.

Author Contributions: Conceptualization, S.M. and A.M.; methodology, A.M.; software, S.M.; validation,
S.M.; formal analysis, S.M. and A.M.; investigation, S.M. and A.M.; resources, A.M.; data curation, S.M.;
writing—original draft preparation, S.M.; writing—review and editing, S.M.; visualization, S.M.; supervision,
A.M.; project administration, A.M.; funding acquisition, A.M..
Funding: This research received no external funding.
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References
1. Dias, G.M.; Ayer, N.W.; Khosla, S.; Acker, R.V.; Young, S.B.; Whitney, S.; Hendricks, P. Life cycle perspectives on
the sustainability of Ontario greenhouse tomato production: Benchmarking and improvement opportunities.
J. Clean. Prod. 2017, 140, 831–839. [CrossRef]
2. Sethi, V.P.; Sharma, S.K. Survey and evaluation of heating technologies for worldwide agricultural greenhouse
applications. Sol. Energy 2008, 82, 832–859. [CrossRef]
3. Kim, K.; Yoon, J.Y.; Kwon, H.J.; Han, J.H.; Son, J.E.; Nam, S.W. 3-D CFD analysis of relative humidity
distribution in greenhouse with a fog cooling system and refrigerative dehumidifiers. Biosyst. Eng. 2008,
100, 245–255. [CrossRef]
4. Islovich, I. Optimal control strategy for greenhouse lettuce: Incorporating supplemental lighting. Biosyst. Eng.
2009, 103, 57–67. [CrossRef]
5. Korner, O.; Van’t Ooster, A.; Hulsbos, M. Design and performance of a measuring system for CO2 exchange
of a greenhouse crop at different light levels. Biosyst. Eng. 2007, 97, 219–228. [CrossRef]
6. Al-Helal, I.M.; Alhamdan, A.M. Effect of arid environment on radiative properties of greenhouse polyethylene
cover. Sol. Energy 2009, 83, 790–798. [CrossRef]
7. Yano, A.; Kadowaki, M.; Furue, A.; Tamaki, N.; Tanaka, T.; Hiraki, E. Shading and electrical features of
a photovoltaic array mounted inside the roof of an east-west oriented greenhouse. Biosyst. Eng. 2010,
106, 367–377. [CrossRef]
8. Mesmoudi, K.; Soudani, A.; Zitouni, B.; Bournet, PE.; Serir, L. Experimental study of the energy balance of
unheated greenhouse under hot and arid climates: Study for the night period of winter season. J. Assoc.
Arab. Univ. Basic. Appl. Sci. 2010, 9, 27–37. [CrossRef]
9. Li, Z.; Yano, A.; Cossu, M.; Yoshioka, H.; Kita, I.; Ibaraki, Y. Electrical energy producing greenhouse shading
system with a semi-transparent photovoltaic blind based on micro-spherical solar cells. Energies 2018,
11, 1681. [CrossRef]
10. Hassanien, R.H.E.; Li, M.; Yin, F. The integration of semi-transparent photovoltaics on greenhouse roof for
energy and plant production. Renew. Energy 2018, 121, 377–388. [CrossRef]
11. Panwar, N.; Kaushik, S.; Kothari, S. Solar greenhouse an option for renewable and sustainable farming.
Renew Sustain. Energy Rev. 2011, 15, 3934–3945. [CrossRef]
Energies 2019, 12, 2589 13 of 15

12. Squatrito, R.; Sgroi, F.; Tudisca, S.; Trapani, A.M.D.; Testa, R. Post feed-in scheme photovoltaic system
feasibility evaluation in Italy: Sicilian case studies. Energies 2014, 7, 7147–7165. [CrossRef]
13. Blanco, I.; Anifantis, A.S.; Pascuzzi, S.; Mugnozza, G.S. Hydrogen and renewable energy sources integrated
system for greenhouse heating. J. Agric. Eng. Res. 2013, 44, 226–230. [CrossRef]
14. Russo, G.; Anifantis, A.S.; Verdiani, G.; Mugnozza, G.S. Environmental analysis of geothermal heat pump
and LPG greenhouse heating systems. Biosyst. Eng. 2014, 127, 11–23. [CrossRef]
15. Al-Shamiry, F.M.S.; Ahmad, D.; Sharif, A.R.M.; Aris, I.; Janius, R.; Kamaruddin, R. Design and development
of a photovoltaic power system for tropical greenhouse cooling. Am. J. Appl. Sci. 2007, 4, 386–389. [CrossRef]
16. Al-Ibrahim, A.; Al-Abbadi, N.; Al-Helal, I. PV greenhouse system—System description, performance and
lesson learned. Acta Hortic. 2006, 710, 251–264. [CrossRef]
17. Juang, P.; Kacira, M. System dynamics of a photovoltaic integrated greenhouse. Acta Hortic. 2014,
1037, 107–112. [CrossRef]
18. Ntinas, G.K.; Neumair, M.; Tsadilas, C.D.; Meyer, J. Carbon footprint and cumulative energy demand
of greenhouse and open-field tomato cultivation systems under Southern and Central European climatic
conditions. J. Clean. Prod. 2017, 142, 3617–3626. [CrossRef]
19. Sonneveld, P.J.; Swinkels, G.L.A.M.; van Tuijl, B.A.J.; Janssen, H.J.J.; Campen, J.; Bot, G.P.A. Performance of
a concentrated photovoltaic energy system with static linear fresnel lenses. Sol. Energy 2011, 85, 432–442.
[CrossRef]
20. Wang, T.; Wu, G.; Chen, J.; Cui, P.; Chen, Z.; Yan, Y.; Zhang, Y.; Li, M.; Niu, D.; Li, B.; et al. Integration of
solar technology to modern greenhouse in China: Current status, challenges and prospect. Renew. Sustain.
Energy Rev. 2017, 70, 1178–1188. [CrossRef]
21. Dupraz, C.; Marrou, H.; Talbot, G.; Dufour, L.; Nogier, A.; Ferard, Y. Combining solar photovoltaic panels and
food crops for optimising land use: Towards new agrivoltaic schemes. Renew. Energy 2011, 36, 2725–2732.
[CrossRef]
22. Li, Z.; Yano, A.; Cossu, M.; Yoshioka, H.; Kita, I.; Ibaraki, Y. Shading and electric performance of a prototype
greenhouse blind system based on semi-transparent photovoltaic technology. J. Agric. Meteorol. 2018,
74, 114–122.
23. Vadiee, A.; Yaghoubi, M. Exergy analysis of the solar blind system integrated with a commercial solar
greenhouse. Int. J. Renew. Energy Res. 2016, 6, 1189–1199.
24. Al Dakheel, J.; Aoul, K.T. Building applications, opportunities and challenges of active shading systems:
A state-of-the-art review. Energies 2017, 10, 1672. [CrossRef]
25. Aroca-Delgado, R.; Pérez-Alonso, J.; Callejón-Ferre, A.J.; Velázquez-Martí, B. Compatibility between crops
and solar panels: An overview from shading systems. Sustainability 2018, 10, 743. [CrossRef]
26. García, M.L.; Medrano, E.; Sánchez-Guerrero, M.C.; Lorenzo, P. Climatic effects of two cooling systems
in greenhouses in the Mediterranean area: External mobile shading and fog system. Biosyst. Eng. 2011,
108, 133–143. [CrossRef]
27. López-Marín, J.; Gálvez, A.; González, A.; Egea-Gilabert, C.; Fernández, J.A. Effect of shade on yield, quality
and photosynthesis-related parameters of sweet pepper plants. Acta Hortic. 2012, 956, 545–552. [CrossRef]
28. Mashonjowa, E.; Ronsse, F.; Mhizha, T.; Milford, J.R.; Lemeur, R.; Pieters, J.G. The effects of whitening and
dust accumulation on the microclimate and canopy behaviour of rose plants (Rosa hybrida) in a greenhouse
in Zimbabwe. Sol. Energy 2010, 84, 10–23. [CrossRef]
29. Martínez, D.L.V.; Ureña, L.J.B.; Aiz, F.D.M.; Martínez, A.L. Greenhouse Agriculture in Almería. A Comprehensive
Techno-Economic Analysis; Cajamar Caja Rural: Andalusia, Spain, 2016; ISBN 9788495531759.
30. Abdel-Ghany, A.M.; Picuno, P.; Al-Helal, I.; Alsadon, A.; Ibrahim, A.; Shady, M. Radiometric characterization,
solar and thermal radiation in a greenhouse as affected by shading configuration in an arid climate. Energies
2015, 8, 13928–13937. [CrossRef]
31. Hassanien, R.H.E.; Li, M. Influences of greenhouse-integrated semi-transparent photovoltaics on microclimate
and lettuce growth. Int. J. Agric. Biol. Eng. 2017, 10, 11–22. [CrossRef]
32. Liu, W.; Liu, L.; Guan, C.; Zhang, F.; Li, M.; Lv, H.; Yao, P.; Ingenhoff, J. A novel agricultural photovoltaic
system based on solar spectrum separation. Sol. Energy 2018, 162, 84–94. [CrossRef]
33. Ahemd, H.A.; Al-Faraj, A.A.; Abdel-Ghany, A.M. Shading greenhouses to improve the microclimate, energy
and water saving in hot regions: A review. Sci. Hortic. 2016, 201, 36–45. [CrossRef]
Energies 2019, 12, 2589 14 of 15

34. Lorenzo, P.; Sánchez-Guerrero, M.C.; Medrano, E.; García, M.L.; Caparrós, I.; Giménez, M. External
greenhouse mobile shading: Effect on microclimate, water use efficiency and yield of a tomato crop grown
under different salinity levels of the nutrient solution. Acta Hortic. 2003, 609, 181–186. [CrossRef]
35. Yano, A.; Furue, A.; Moriyama, T.; Ide, O.; Tsuchiya, K. Development of a greenhouse shading screen
controller driven by photovoltaic energy. J. Jpn. Soc. Agric. Mach. 2007, 69, 57–64.
36. Marucci, A.; Cappuccini, A. Dynamic photovoltaic greenhouse: Energy balance in completely clear sky
condition during the hot period. Energy 2016, 102, 302–312. [CrossRef]
37. Kadowaki, M.; Yano, A.; Ishizu, F.; Tanaka, T.; Noda, S. Effects of greenhouse photovoltaic array shading on
Welsh onion growth. Biosyst. Eng. 2012, 111, 290–297. [CrossRef]
38. Ureña-Sánchez, R.; Callejón-Ferre, Á.J.; Pérez-Alonso, J.; Carreño-Ortega, Á. Greenhouse tomato production
with electricity generation by roof-mounted flexible solar panels. Sci. Agric. 2012, 69, 233–239. [CrossRef]
39. Colantoni, A.; Monarca, D.; Marucci, A.; Cecchini, M.; Zambon, I.; Battista, F.D.; Maccario, D.; Saporito, M.G.;
Beruto, M. Solar radiation distribution inside a greenhouse prototypal with photovoltaic mobile plant and
effects on flower growth. Sustainability 2018, 10, 855. [CrossRef]
40. Marrou, H.; Dufour, L.; Guilioni, L.; Salles, J.M.; Loisel, P.; Nogier, A.; Wery, J. Designing farming systems
combining food and electricity production. In Proceedings of the 4th International Symposium for Farming
Systems Design, Ganus Science and Technology Press, Lanzhou, China, 19–22 August 2013.
41. Marrou, H.; Wéry, J.; Dufour, L.; Dupraz, C. Productivity and radiation use efficiency of lettuces grown in
the partial shade of photovoltaic panels. Eur. J. Agron. 2013, 44, 54–66. [CrossRef]
42. Cantagallo, J.E.; Medan, D.; Hall, A.J. Grain number in sunflower as affected by shading during floret growth,
anthesis and grain setting. Field Crop. Res. 2004, 85, 191–202. [CrossRef]
43. Dinesh, H.; Pearce, J.M. The potential of agrivoltaic systems. Renew. Sust. Energy Rev. 2016, 54, 299–308.
[CrossRef]
44. Fu, J.; Li, C.H.; Zhao, J.-R.; Ma, L.; Liu, T.X. Shade-tolerance indices of maize: Selection and evaluation.
Yingyong Shengtai Xuebao 2009, 20, 2705e9.
45. Worku, W.; Skjelvåg, A.; Gislerød, H. Responses of common bean Phaseolus vulgaris L. to photosynthetic
irradiance levels during three phenological phases. Agronomie 2004, 24, 267–274. [CrossRef]
46. Kim, J.J.; Kang, M.; Kwak, O.K.; Yoon, Y.J.; Min, K.S.; Chu, M.J. Fabrication and characterization of
dye-sensitized solar cells for greenhouse application. Int. J. Photoenergy 2014, 2014, 376315. [CrossRef]
47. Allardyce, C.S.; Fankhauser, C.; Zakeeruddin, S.M.; Grätzel, M.; Dyson, P.J. The influence of
greenhouse-integrated photovoltaics on crop production. Sol. Energy 2017, 155, 517–522. [CrossRef]
48. Emmott, C.J.M.; Röhr, J.A.; Campoy-Quiles, M.; Kirchartz, T.; Urbina, A.; Ekins-Daukes, N.J.; Nelson, J.
Organic photovoltaic greenhouses: A unique application for semi-transparent PV? Energy Environ. Sci. 2015,
8, 1317–1328. [CrossRef]
49. Yang, F.; Zhang, Y.; Hao, Y.; Cui, Y.; Wang, W.; Ji, T.; Shi, F.; Wei, B. Visibly transparent organic photovoltaic
with improved transparency and absorption based on tandem photonic crystal for greenhouse application.
Appl. Opt. 2015, 54, 10232–10239. [CrossRef]
50. Dos Reis Benatto, G.A.; Corazza, M.; Roth, B.; Schütte, F.; Rengenstein, M.; Gevorgyan, S.A.; Krebs, F.C.
Inside or outside? Linking outdoor and indoor lifetime tests of ITO-free organic photovoltaic devices for
greenhouse applications. Energy Technol. 2017, 5, 338–344. [CrossRef]
51. Tani, A.; Shiina, S.; Nakashima, K.; Hayashi, M. Improvement in lettuce growth by light diffusion under
solar panels. J. Agric. Meteorol. 2014, 70, 139–149. [CrossRef]
52. Kavga, A.; Trypanagnostopoulos, G.; Zervoudakis, G.; Tripanagnostopoulos, Y. Growth and physiological
characteristics of lettuce (Lactuca sativa L.) and rocket (Eruca sativa Mill.) plants cultivated under photovoltaic
panels. Not. Bot. Horti Agrobot. 2018, 46, 206–212. [CrossRef]
53. Buttaro, D.; Renna, M.; Gerardi, C.; Blando, F.; Santamaria, P.; Serio, F. Soilless production of wild rocket as
affected by greenhouse coverage with photovoltaic module. Acta Sci. Pol. Hortorum Cultus 2016, 15, 129–142.
54. Pérez-Alonso, J.; Pérez-García, M.; Pasamontes-Romera, M.; Callejón-Ferre, A.J. Performance analysis and
neural modelling of a greenhouse integrated photovoltaic system. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2012,
16, 4675–4685. [CrossRef]
55. Fatnassi, H.; Poncet, C.; Bazzano, M.M.; Brun, R.; Bertin, N. A numerical simulation of the photovoltaic
greenhouse microclimate. Sol. Energy 2015, 120, 575–584. [CrossRef]
Energies 2019, 12, 2589 15 of 15

56. Marucci, A.; Monarca, D.; Colantoni, A.; Campiglia, E.; Cappuccini, A. Analysis of the internal shading in a
photovoltaic greenhouse tunnel. J. Agric. Eng. 2017, 48, 154–160. [CrossRef]
57. Marucci, A.; Zambon, I.; Colantoni, A.; Monarca, D. A combination of agricultural and energy purposes:
Evaluation of a prototype of photovoltaic greenhouse tunnel. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2018, 82, 1178–1186.
[CrossRef]
58. Yano, A.; Onoe, M.; Nakata, J. Prototype semi-transparent photovoltaic modules for greenhouse roof
applications. Biosyst. Eng. 2014, 122, 62–73. [CrossRef]
59. Cossu, M.; Yano, A.; Li, Z.; Onoe, M.; Nakamura, H.; Matsumoto, T.; Nakata, J. Advances on the
semi-transparent modules based on micro solar cells: First integration in a greenhouse system. Appl. Energy
2016, 162, 1042–1051. [CrossRef]
60. Marucci, A.; Monarca, D.; Cecchini, M.; Colantoni, A.; Cappuccini, A. Analysis of internal shading degree
to a prototype of dynamics photovoltaic greenhouse through simulation software. J. Agric. Eng. 2015,
46, 144–150. [CrossRef]
61. Marrou, H.; Guilioni, L.; Dufour Dupraz, C.; Wery, J. Microclimate under agrivoltaic systems: Is crop growth
rate affected in the partial shade of solar panels? Agric. For. Meteor. 2013, 177, 117–132. [CrossRef]
62. Marucci, A.; Cappuccini, A. Dynamic photovoltaic greenhouse: Energy efficiency in clear sky conditions.
Appl. Energy 2016, 170, 362–376. [CrossRef]
63. Duffie, J.A.; Beckman, W.A. Solar Engineering of Thermal Processes; Wiley: New York, NY, USA, 1991.

© 2019 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access
article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution
(CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).