Journal of Environmental Management 346 (2023) 119002

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Journal of Environmental Management

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

Research article

An integrated financial and environmental evaluation framework to

optimize residential photovoltaic solar systems in Australia from
recession uncertainties
Quddus Tushar, Guomin Zhang *, Filippo Giustozzi, Muhammed A. Bhuiyan, Lei Hou,
Satheeskumar Navaratnam
School of Engineering, RMIT University, GPO Box 2476, Melbourne, VIC, 3001, Australia

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Handling Editor: Lixiao Zhang This study assesses the financial viability and environmental evaluation of Photovoltaic (PV) panels from the
perspective of the recent economic recession due to the Russia-Ukraine war. The financial viability of PV
Keywords: installation is calculated based on the estimated price, solar rebates, feed-in tariff, energy supply cost, and other
Grid-connected evaluation parameters available at the assessment time. This calculation implicitly assumes variable discount
Hybrid system
rates (4%, 7%, and 12%) to show how the future will unfold and its correlations with design parameters. Details
Metallurgical-grade (MG)
of economic appraisal integrating current inflation, rebates, and incentives of solar systems have been analyzed
Polycrystalline
Financial assessment for the first time in this study. Financial indicators reveal the advantages of installing a grid-connected solar
Environmental impacts system (SS) over a solar battery storage system (SSWB). Compared to other installation systems, the lowest
payback (PB) and highest internal rate of return (IRR) are observed for a 7 kW grid-connected solar system.
Relative uncertainties of solar installation systems represent the necessity of government subsidies (r = -0.602)
for solar storage batteries. LCA signifies the energy-intensive process of manufacturing metallurgical-grade (MG)
silicon is the primary cause of significant greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and cumulative energy demand (CED)
for PV panels. A potential amount of metal and fossil fuels is depleted for interconnective components of solar
installation systems. Amorphous solar panels exhibit lower impacts than polycrystalline, but further upgradation
in service life is required to become cost-effective and cope with current inflation.

reducing uncertainties in escalating economic development leads to

1. Introduction
Energy scarcity and rising inflation emphasize the importance of
affordable energy with a lower carbon footprint. The recent global en­
ergy crisis is considered the ultimate challenge in nearly 50 years since
such uncertainties shocked the world in 1970 (Đukić, 2022). The hor­
rific reflection of the Russia-Ukraine war resulted in the tragic end of
lives, global food shortage, and severe energy crisis. A significant
portion of natural gas, oil, and coal is imported to other countries from
Russia. Imported gas and liquid natural gas (LNG) accounted for
approximately 40% of total gas consumption by the European Union
(EU) in 2021 (Zhou et al., 2022). In addition to these challenges,
COVID-19 restrictions have eased worldwide, and economic activities
are recovering; energy consumption is increasing sharply, enhancing
demand for available energy sources and highlighting the system’s
vulnerabilities (Belaïd et al., 2023). Responding to these challenges and
rapid extraction and depletion of fossil fuels and resources. Statistical
data underline energy security by estimating that the globally produced
oil and natural gas will be exhausted within the next 50–52 years (Raimi
et al., 2022). To address this, shifting from fossil fuels to renewable
energy sources and diversifying energy supply through photovoltaic
(PV) technology appears viable (Ye et al., 2023). PV, as an alternative
source of electricity generation, not only reduces greenhouse gas emis­
sions but lessens dependence on the national grid while safeguarding the
environment from degradation.
Numerous nations are embracing renewable energy to reduce emis­
sions sustainably. Australia, for instance, has unveiled an ambitious plan
for deep decarbonization, aligning with the Paris Agreement’s 1.5 ◦ C
warming limit. The goal is to achieve 70% renewable energy on the
national grid by 2035 (Murugesan et al., 2023; Tushar et al., 2022b). In
Australia, the production and installation of PV solar panels are rising,
with an impressive annual growth rate of 18%. This rate led to a

* Corresponding author. RMIT University, School of Engineering, 124 La Trobe St, VIC 3000, 3001, Australia.
E-mail address: kevin.zhang@rmit.edu.au (G. Zhang).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2023.119002
Received 8 July 2023; Received in revised form 10 September 2023; Accepted 11 September 2023
Available online 19 September 2023
0301-4797/© 2023 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Q. Tushar et al. Journal of Environmental Management 346 (2023) 119002

Nomenclature PVF Present Value Factor

Ln Liquidation yield
PV Photovoltaic HPM Hedonic Price Method
PB Payback AusLCI Australian National Life Cycle Inventory
SS Grid-connected solar systems LCIA Life Cycle Impact Assessment
SSWB Solar system with batteries HH Human Health
IRR Internal Rate of Return ED Ecosystem Damage
GHG Greenhouse Gas RS Resource Scarcity
SFIT Solar Feed in Tariff CFm Characterization factor at midpoint
NPV Net Present value CFe Characterization factor at endpoint
BCR Benefit Cost Ratio MG Metallurgical Grade
LCA Life Cycle Assessment SG Solar Grade
CED Cumulative Energy Demand DALYs Disability Adjusted Life Years

cumulative capacity exceeding 28,177 MW; in the past year, approxi­ the grid (Wang and Fan, 2021). The trade-offs between solar energy
mately 4258 MW of solar PV installations have been completed (Insti­ reliance and grid independence are crucial to justify options during this
tute, 2023). The government introduced an incentive policy, the solar economic downturn. The innovation of this article is the investigation of
feed-in tariff (SFIT), to promote PV panel manufacturing (Li et al., financial investment in SS and SSWB, considering recession un­
2021). The credit is received by exporting excessive solar energy to the certainties and selecting the suitable option in extent to sustainability.
grid after consumption. The credit rate generally varies between 6 and Moreover, the environmental impact assessment of individual options
12 cents per kilowatt-hour (kWh), differs from state to state, and is for both SS and SSWB is validated for relevant production uncertainties.
usually set up by electricity retailers, as shown in Table 1 (Regulator, The optimized configurations of solar systems have been suggested
2023). The financial appraisal is crucial to compare savings, rate of re­ in two folds: one is to maximize the financial return, and the other is to
turn, and payback of the different solar systems at inflation rates. minimize environmental impacts. SS and SSWB have been compared to
The Australian government has also introduced a specific rebate evaluate the financial indicators such as net present value (NPV),
policy to promote PV installation in residential households. Benchmark benefit-cost ratio (BCR), internal rate of return (IRR), and Payback
prices and rebates have been established to reduce dependency on the period (PB) (James Parkin, 1999; Tushar et al., 2022c). The comparative
national grid and feed-in tariff provisions to return excessive energy to financial and environmental analysis of these two solar installations will
the transmission, as shown in Table 2 (Department of Climate Change assist the government in stimulating this potential sector to be subsi­
et al., 2023). Cumulative PV panel installation has been increased due to dized, tax credits, or financial incentives. Assessing the future-proofing
improved policies and the profitability of the investment (Al Arrouqi aspects and resilience of solar systems aligning with economic, energy,
et al., 2019). PV solar panels’ manufacturing and operation stages have and environmental is crucial. The logical explanation of upfront cost,
several environmental and economic consequences. However, the inflation, energy savings, liquidation yield, and broader economic and
broader financial benefit is unknown to consumers due to the various environmental landscape have been justified to obtain an optimal so­
applications of solar systems. Detailed calculation is essential for lution by conducting an exhaustive sensitivity analysis.
selecting the proper household solar system and supporting a clean Environmental impacts are assessed to compare two major categories
energy development strategy. of PV solar cells: wafer and thin film-based cells, commonly installed as
The current economic recession, energy shortage, and price escala­ solar rooftops. Polycrystalline modules are dictated as wafer-based cells,
tion in Australia arise from the Russia-Ukraine war, resulting in financial whereas amorphous modules are as thin film cells (Kang, 2021). How­
constraints and budget deficiency for investment. A comparison of two ever, both solar cells are developed from metallurgical grade (MG) sil­
viable options, grid-connected SS and solar system with storage battery icon. Structural deferences lie in these two types of formation:
(SSWB), is necessary to identify financially feasible and cost-effective crystalline and amorphous. The crystalline module is composed of
solutions at different inflation rates for individual households and several tiny silicon crystals, where the silicon atom is connected tetra­
policy-making purposes. Installation of these systems has the higher hedrally to four adjacent atoms (Qu et al., 2021). The tetrahedral for­
potential to reduce electricity consumption from the national grid. mation is a well-defined ideal lattice of the crystal. In contrast, the
However, the energy savings cost of these two options depends on the amorphous module is a non-crystalline formation, as shown in Fig. 1.
consumption rates, grid electricity rate, feed-in tariff, and exchange to The existence of dangling bonds results in immobilized silicon atoms at
1019/cm3. Dangling bonds act as trapping centers, subsequently
reducing the carrier lifetime. They hinder the movement of doped
Table 1 charge carriers in both n-type and p-type configurations. However, these
Average per kWh electricity price and feed-in tariff in major Australian cities. limitations can be mitigated by introducing hydrogen into amorphous
City Grid electricity rate Solar feed-in Benefits of self- silicon
(cents per KWh) rate (cents per consumption (cents per Return on solar investment largely depends on the extended service
kWh) kWh) life of solar panels. A longer service life contributes significantly to
Adelaide 35 12 23 electricity generation, maximizing energy savings, reducing greenhouse
Brisbane 26 9 17 gas emissions, and offering a sustainable and reliable electricity source
Canberra 17 8 9
over many years. However, thin film-based amorphous silicon cells are
Darwin 26 26 0
Hobart 26 9 17
prone to degradation, resulting in a shorter lifespan of 10–15 years
Melbourne 26 11.3 14.7 compared to polycrystalline panels, which can last 25–30 years (Soares
Perth 27 8 19 et al., 2018). The life cycle assessment (LCA) approach provides insight
Sydney 24 6 18 into identifying and measuring the sustainability of the production
Mean 26 11 15 process (Tushar et al., 2023). This study considers the formation of
Std 4.88 6.28 7.14 wafer and thin film-based cells, materials characteristics, energy

2
Q. Tushar et al. Journal of Environmental Management 346 (2023) 119002

Table 2
Solar systems prices and applicable rebates in major Australian cities.
Solar system prices in major Australian cities Applicable solar rebates to the system

3 kW 5 kW 7 kW 10 kW 3 kW 5 kW 7 kW 10 kW

Adelaide 4283 5638 6782 10,275 1558 2622 3458 5244

Brisbane 4313 5688 6848 10,375 1558 2622 3458 5244
Melbourne 4313 5689 6849 10,377 1330 2242 2964 4484
Perth 4193 5488 6584 9975 1558 2622 3458 5244
Sydney 4223 5538 6650 10,075 1558 2622 3458 5244

Mean 4265 5608 6743 10,215 1512 2546 3359 5092

Std 54 91 120 182 102 170 221 340

Fig. 1. Schematic Structural Formation of conventional Photovoltaic (PV) solar cells.

Fig. 2. Overlay visualization network of current research trends on PV solar panels since 2017.

3
Q. Tushar et al.
consumption, GHG emissions, and degradation to provide valuable in­
sights into longevity, durability, and the overall importance of service
life for cost-effectiveness. The findings of this study will assist in
developing an improved generation of photovoltaic solar cells with
required parameters.
Bibliometric network reveals emerging research trends of solar
panels to be prioritized for strategic decision-making. The network uses
text-mining functionality to visualize and create co-occurring networks
of significant terms from the scientific literature, such as journals,
research articles, or individual publications (Huang et al., 2020; Van Eck
and Waltman, 2011). Over 1500 selected research works have been
networked and clustered into seven (7) groups using design parameters
and advanced state-of-the-art techniques using VOSviewer, as follows in
Fig. 2. The purpose of this bibliometric network is to represent the visual
and structured network of solar panels’ scholarly landscape over vari­
able time phases from 2017 to 2020. Solar systems’ life cycle cost (LCC)
analysis and environmental impacts (e-impact) assessment have been
identified as potential sectors to be explored. The optimal solar system
and its relative uncertainties from LCC and environmental perspectives
have been analyzed in this study following the dynamic pattern of ac­
ademic research.
2. Methodology
PV solar panel installation has been promoted by introducing a feed-
in tariff and incentive policy to improve energy security. However,
selecting a suitable solar system as a substitute for grid electricity is now
a prime concern. A detailed financial evaluation of variable solar sys­
tems’ NPV, PB, BCR, and IRR has been suggested in selecting an
appropriate solar system. The financial viability of installing solar sys­
tems has been justified before evaluating environmental impacts.
Feasibility of the financial appraisal is essential to ensure the decision-
making process is beneficial. Conducting LCA is deemed logical after
having positive economic aspects. This study balances financial
appraisal with environmental assessment, covering the broader sus­
tainability perspective and creating a holistic, informed decision.
First, the feasibility of the photovoltaic installation is assessed based
on the estimated electricity price, solar incentives, feed-in tariff, backup
battery, and other component costs. This analysis assumes applicable
discount rates (4%, 7%, and 12%) to show the feasible outcome of the
investment and their correlations with the input parameters. However,
the future is uncertain, and the reasons for the uncertainties vary widely
over time. PV solar panels as an alternative energy source alleviate the
uncertainties of the energy crisis. Therefore, the economic evaluation of
PV solar panels’ on-grid and off-grid connection with battery storage has
been justified through sensitivity analysis of its service life.
Second, environmental rationality is the sole criterion for designing
and developing PV solar systems. Greenhouse gas emissions are reduced
significantly by avoiding electricity generation using fossil fuels. An
optimized economical solution has been further evaluated to assess the
environmental impacts of PV solar systems, including solar panels,
battery storage, and inverter. LCA compares relative cumulative energy
demand (CED) and greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions of crystalline
photovoltaic solar panels to amorphous solar panels. Comparative
impact analysis of the national electricity grid generation and
manufacturing of solar panels and other components are identified to
optimize critical energy management.
Finally, an overview of the methodological framework has been
proposed to compare optimized PV solar systems’ financial and envi­
ronmental assessment, as shown in Fig. 3. This assessment is very
beneficial for decision-making in designing a particular household’s
solar system. A comprehensive environmental and economic evaluation
of the grid-connected and hybrid solar systems (3 kW, 5 kW, 7 kW, and
10 kW) has been conducted at variable discount rates. Additional
environmental assessments of solar panels, including batteries, in­
verters, and other components, are considered to reduce dependency on
4
Journal of Environmental Management 346 (2023) 119002
the national grid.
Relevant and representative data on economic factors, such as
inflation, exchange rates, capital investment, operation, maintenance,
and liquidation, are required to be adopted in the proposed framework.
Sensitivity indices of financial and environmental evaluation validate
and facilitate the applicability of this methodological framework irre­
spective of the specific location. Moreover, the variations of input fac­
tors in conducting sensitivity analysis in LCA tools SimaPro 9.4 make
the environmental assessment meaningful globally.
2.1. Case study residential dwelling
The energy consumption of the residential house is challenging to
determine as it varies per location, residents’ behavior, and other fac­
tors. Average household energy consumption (over 20 kW h) has been
used in this study based on the report of the Australian Energy Regulator
(Regulator, 2020; Speidel and Bräunl, 2016). For instance, the average
winter electricity consumption is 31.7 kW h per day, which is higher in
Melbourne and nearby locations due to the heating of houses. It is quite
the opposite for those living in Brisbane, where the highest electricity
consumption is 24.6 kW h per day in summer, as shown in Table 3
(Government, 2023). A better understanding of electricity usage is
necessary to achieve an optimized solar system solution (Tushar et al.,
2019). Energy Made Easy’s tool has been adopted for this study to
compare and set a benchmark for average Australian household energy
consumption.
2.2. Benefits over self-consumption and feed-in tariff
The benefits of self-consumed solar energy are higher than exporting
it to the grid in exchange for a feed-in tariff, as shown in Table 1. Pur­
chasing electricity from the national grid costs more than sending it back
to the transmission line. Hence, the feed-in tariff and capital investment
play an essential economic role in determining the suitable solar system
for residential household systems. Solar energy generation varies
depending on the location and systems. Generally, the conventional
solar systems of 3 kW, 5 kW, 7 kW, and 10 kW generate around 12.18,
20.3, 26.78, and 40.6 kW h per day successively across Australian cli­
matic conditions. Generally, a solar system of 5 kW generates about
20.3 kW h per day in Australian climatic conditions. Energy credit of AU
$ 2.23 (20.3 × 0.11) will be received for a 5 kW system if the total
generated energy is back to the grid, whereas the credit is AU$ 3.04
(20.3 × 0.15) for self-consumption using a storage battery. However, for
a grid-connected solar system, energy credit is earned in two feasible
ways: one from the self-consumption of AU$ 1.215 (8.12 × 0.15) and the
other from feeds-in tariffs of AU$ 1.339 (12.18 × 0.11), a summation of
AU$2.56 per day, the annual benefit of AU$ 934, as shown in Equation
(1).
∑
∞
E (Grid connected solar energy) = (Benefits of self − consumed)
n=0
∑
∞
+ ((Export to the grid)
n=0
∑
∞
E= (Grid electricity rate − Feed in tariff) × Self consumption
n=0
∑
∞
+ Feed in tarrif × Exchange to grid (1)
n=0
This approach aims to avoid purchasing expensive grid electricity
and maximize the utilization of solar power rather than merely
exporting surplus electricity to the grid for minimal compensation. The
percentage of self-consumption (%) is influenced by daily electricity
usage (kWh), consumption patterns, and the capacity of the installed
solar system (kW). The study evaluates the self-consumption ratio of
Q. Tushar et al. Journal of Environmental Management 346 (2023) 119002

Fig. 3. Methodological framework of solar systems economical and environmental evaluation.

5
Q. Tushar et al. Journal of Environmental Management 346 (2023) 119002

Table 3
Energy consumption of a typical household of 3–5 persons in major Australian cities.

Seasonal electricity consumption in Summer Autumn Winter Spring Total annual

major cities of Australia (December–February) (March–May) (June–August) (September–November) consumption

Adelaide average household energy consumption

Per day (kWh) 21.0 20.1 26.5 19.2 21.2

Per season (kWh) 1901.5 1832.5 2437.9 1746.7 7918.6
Brisbane average household energy consumption

Per day (kWh) 24.6 22.1 22.0 21.1 22.9

Per season (kWh) 2214.7 2037.8 2022.7 1950.5 8225.6
Melbourne average household energy consumption

Per day (kWh) 18.2 20.7 31.7 21.1 22.9

Per season (kWh) 1639.4 1902.7 2914.1 1916.7 8372.9
Perth average household energy consumption

Per day (kWh) 24.9 23.2 22.8 21.3 23.1

Per season (kWh) 2241.7 2139.2 2096.2 1968.9 8446.1
Sydney average household energy consumption

Per day (kWh) 21.1 20.0 26.7 19.4 21.8

Per season (kWh) 1902.7 1841.4 2453.9 1769.7 7967.8

established solar systems (3 kW, 5 kW, 7 kW, and 10 kW) using an
analytical matrix (Martin, 2022). The highest self-consumption ratio has
been recommended in this analysis to get the optimized solar system for
residential households.
⎛ ⎞ ⎛ ⎞⎛ ⎞ 2.3.2. Net present value (NPV)
3 kW 25% 38% 46% 53% 5 − 9 kWh
⎜ 5 kW ⎟ ⎜ 17% 26% 34% 40% ⎟ ⎜ 10 − 14 kWh ⎟
⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟⎜
⎝ 7 kW ⎠ = ⎝ 13% 20% 26% 32% ⎠ ⎝ 15 − 19 kWh ⎠
⎟ net benefit (present value of benefits-the present value of costs) over the
10 kW 9% 15% 20% 24% 20 − 24 kWh
2.3. Financial appraisal of the solar system
In this financial appraisal, feed-in tariffs and capital subsidies for PV
solar systems are taken into account, considering various service life
durations (ranging from 10 to 30 years). The selection of PV solar sys­
tems is vital for addressing current inflation and energy scarcity issues.
This study evaluates the economic efficiency of existing policies to
streamline diverse household solar systems and determine the optimal
choice. Economic optimization of online (SS) and offline (SSWB) sys­
tems will identify consumers’ investment in adopting the suitable
strategy. Consumers’ decisions are believed to be driven solely by the
rational parameter of economic evaluation. This section considers eco­
nomic indicators such as NPV, IRR, PB, and BCR at price escalation over
the solar panel’s service life.
2.3.1. Discounting mechanism
Solar panels have a finite service life and yield economic benefits
over time. These benefits, linked to self-consumption and feed-in tariffs,
are received at various points. A discounting mechanism is used to assess
and compare the net benefits over time by converting future expenses
and benefits into their present value, as illustrated in Equation (2).
∑ (1 + i)n − 1
n
1
PVF(i,n) = m = (2)
m=1
(1 + i) i(1 + i)n
PVF (i,n) indicates the present value factor, considering discount
rates (i) and service life (n). Future costs and benefits values are strongly
associated with the nominal discount rate (Tushar et al., 2022c). How­
ever, choosing the right nominal discount rate is complex due to various
interacting factors. These factors include disruptions caused by the
COVID-19 pandemic, such as supply chain interruptions, government
policies, labor shortages, and semiconductor shortages. Additionally,
the recent Russian invasion of Ukraine has been identified as a signifi­
cant factor driving sharp increases in energy prices and raw materials.
Australia’s annual inflation rate has surged from 6.1% to 7.3% within a
year, surpassing the market forecast of 7.0% (Statistics, 2022). The
current recession is the highest since 1990, influenced by higher con­
struction costs for new dwellings, fuels, and food.
NPV is the financial indicator of calculating the current value of the
project service life (Abdelhady, 2021). The present value of the future
benefit stream is estimated considering online and offline grid connec­
tions at variable discount rates such as 4%, 7%, and 12%. Generally, a
project with a higher positive NPV is worth comparing the other viable
alternatives, while a project with a negative NPV is avoidable. Service
life, solar rebates, and feed-in tariffs justify the compatibility of capital
budgeting for solar investment, as shown in Equation (3).
Net present value (NPV) = − I0 + (B − C) PVF(i,n) +
Ln
(3)
(1 + i)n
where Io is the initial investment of the solar system, (B–C) is the self-
consumption and savings, PVFi,n the present value factor, Ln is the
liquidation yield (resale value), i the discount rate, and n is the service
life. For example, a 5 kW solar system with an initial investment of
$5608 and annual benefit of $934 for a service life of 25 years, a dis­
count rate of 7%, and a 10% liquidation yield generate a present value
factor of 11.65 (PVF 7%) and AU$ 5379.77 (NPV 7%).
2.3.3. Internal rate of return (IRR)
In the discounted cash flow analysis, the IRR is the discount rate at
which the NPV of the projected cash flow becomes zero (Magni, 2010).
The Cost-effectiveness of potential investment is justified by using IRR in
the financial cash flow, as shown in Equation (4). The highest IRR is
considered the best possible option in investment compared to other
options. The advantage of IRR is to show the effects of possible inflation
before investing in solar panels. Limitations of IRR calculation have been
avoided by considering the investment of solar panels and battery sys­
tems at the project initiation.
( )
in+1 − in
Internal rate of return (IRR) = in − NPVn (4)
NPVn − NPVn+1
2.3.4. Benefit-cost ratio (BCR)
The BCR represents the discounted benefit to the cost at present
values. The relative measure determines how much or whether the
benefits’ current value exceeds the capital investment, as shown in

6
Q. Tushar et al. Journal of Environmental Management 346 (2023) 119002

Equations 5 and 6. At the same time, NPV provides a single numerical
representation of the net present value of benefits and costs without
detailing cash flow volume and ratio (Shively and Galopin, 2013).
Therefore, this study employs BCR to complement missing calculation
information. A BCR greater than one (BCR >1) indicates that discounted
benefits exceed the present value of the capital cost. A higher BCR value
suggests more profit from the solar investment. Conversely, the dis­
counted benefits are less than the corresponding investment cost when
BCR is less than one (BCR <1). Pursuing investments with a BCR of less
than one is not advisable.
Present value of annual benefits
Benefit cost ratio (BCR) = (5)
Present value of cost
Ln
(B − C) PVFi,n + (1+i)
n
Benefit cost ratio (BCR) = (6)
I0
2.3.5. Payback period (PB)
The discounted payback period (PB) has been calculated in the
number of years identifying the break-even point after the initial in­
vestment incurred, as shown in Equation (7). Capital budgeting de­
termines project profitability by discounting cash flows and realizing the
time value of money (Gorshkov et al., 2018; Mahlia et al., 2011). The
feasibility of project profitability is assessed using the payback period
matrix. The shorter the discounted PB, the faster a project will generate
cash flow to cover the initial investment.
Initial investment (Io ) or Capital cost
Payback period (PB) = (7)
Discounted annual benefit (B − C)
components.
2.4.2. Life cycle inventory (LCI)
Environmental impacts of the solar system have been assessed based
on industrial data provided by AusLCI. The Australian National Life
Cycle Inventory Database (AusLCI) is a reliable, comprehensive source
of products and services throughout the lifecycle (Grant, 2016). Indi­
vidual design components of this inventory are disassembled to obtain
separate LCI for each analyzed element. LCI accounts for raw materials
extraction and processing of those materials to form the silicon grade,
assembly of panels, chemicals, and transportation. Input materials and
their relevant units are assessed for environmental impacts of generating
amorphous and polycrystalline solar panels, as shown in Table 4 and
Fig. 7.
In addition, an updated database version of Ecoinvent 3.4 is used to
model the impact assessment of the solar module and its connectivity
inverter (Vandepaer et al., 2019). Lithium-ion (Li) batteries are the most
widely grid-connected solar energy reserve system. LCA of Li batteries is
modeled using the database provided by the manufacturer and imported
into Simapro (SimaPro, 2013). Lithium iron phosphate (LiFePO), the
principal chemical component of these batteries, is taken into account. A
detailed Australian mixed electricity generation inventory has been used
Table 4
Materials scheme of relevant components to manufacture solar panels as per AU
U (Australian Unit) and AusSD U (Australian Standard Unit) where tkm indicates
ton-kilometer.
Inputs (Materials/Fuels) Amount Unit

2.3.6. Liquidation yield (Ln) of solar panels Glass, flat, at plant/AU U production per ton
The study applies the Hedonic Price Method (HPM) to estimate the Dolomite, at plant/AU U 0.153 ton
residual value at service life’s end (Gaterell and McEvoy, 2005). The Sodium chloride, powder, at plant/AU U 0.005 ton
developed regression model on HPM expresses the linear parametric Soda ash, at plant/AU U 0.156 ton
Sand, at mine/AU U 0.503 ton
relationship of improving energy efficiency. The model has been adop­
Limestone, milled, at plant/AU U 0.019 ton
ted across the USA and Europe to assess renewable green technologies’ Electricity, high voltage, Australian/AU U 0.52 GJ
externalities and associated factors. In Australia, the Department of Energy, from natural gas/AU U 6.98 GJ
Environment, Water, Heritage, and the Arts (DEWHA) implements HPM Transport, truck, 28t, fleet average/AU U 0.0603 tkm
to assess the liquidation yield (Ln), improving energy efficiency mea­ Polycrystalline ribbon wafer cells, at plant/AU U production per kg

sures (Soriano, 2008). The residual value or liquidation yield (Ln) is Electricity, low voltage, Australian/AU U 419 MJ
considered 0.01 of the investment cost in this financial evaluation. An Ln Silicon, solar grade, at plant/AU U 1.34 kg
Silicon film, at plant/AU U production per kg
of 0 is applied when there is no remaining value at the end of the life­
span. Analysis of reference studies reveals that Ln values vary, ranging Electricity, low voltage, Australian/AU U 1122 MJ
from a minimum of 2% (0.02) to a maximum of 21% (0.21). Silicon, solar grade, at plant/AU U 1.06 kg
Silicon, solar grade, at plant/AU U production per kg

Electricity, low voltage, Australian/AU U 358 MJ

2.4. Environmental performance MG-Silicon, at plant/AU U 1.04 kg
Hydrochloric acid, from Mannheim process, at plant/AU U 4 kg
Transport, truck, 28t, fleet average/AU U 0.25 tkm
Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) quantifies the environmental impacts of MG-Silicon, at plant/AU U production per kg
all life cycle phases, including raw materials extraction, manufacturing,
Oxygen, liquid, at plant/AU U 0.02 kg
transportation, and operational uses (Hoxha et al., 2017; Tushar et al., Sand, at mine/AU U 2.7 kg
2021). However, the recycling of panels at the end of the life cycle has Electricity, low voltage, Australian/AU U 11 kWh
not been further processed by closing the loop, converting it into a Petroleum coke/AU U 1.5 kg
cradle-to-cradle (Llorach-Massana et al., 2015). Relative configurations Transport, truck, 28t, fleet average/AU U 0.157 tkm
Petroleum coke, at refinery/AusSD U production per kg
of grid-connected and battery-connected solar panels are assessed to
justify the associated burden of the system. Solar panels and inverters Energy, from diesel/AU U 0.8 MJ
Crude oil, australian average, at refinery/AU U 1.2 kg
are evaluated in terms of kW, whereas battery storage and mixed elec­
Transport, freight, rail/AusSD U 0.0047 tkm
tricity generation are calculated as per kWh. Aluminium, at plant/AU U production per ton

Aluminium oxide, at plant/AU U 1950 kg

2.4.1. Goal and scope of the study
Aluminium fluoride, at plant/RER U/Adapted/AU U 13 kg
This study aims to perform a cradle-to-grave LCA to quantify the Pitch, at plant/AU U 92 kg
environmental impacts of variable grid-connected solar design systems Petroleum coke/AU U 384 kg
and emphasize the design component to improve PV generations. The Polyvinylchloride, granulate, at plant/Aus SD U production per kg
manufacturing and operation stages of PV panels are considered design Polyvinylchloride, emulsion polymerised, at plant/Aus SD U 0.1276 kg
variables. Installation of residential PV solar systems with other ele­ Polyvinylchloride, suspension polymerised/Aus SD U 0.8723 kg
ments to the site is counted from an independent view. Sensitivity Transport, lorry >16t, fleet average/Aus SD U 0.1 tkm
Transport, freight, rail/Aus SD U 0.2 tkm
indices of design variables express relative uncertainties of design

7
Q. Tushar et al. Journal of Environmental Management 346 (2023) 119002

to compare and evaluate PV solar panels. Ecoinvent 3.4 provides the
impact of the national grid electricity generation, transmission, and
distribution. LCI of associated components of solar panels, such as
storage battery, inverter, and charge controller, assists in identifying the
depletion of metals and fossil fuel depletion. Relevant environmental
footprints of these components are estimated from materials, chemicals,
and transportation distance.
3. Results and discussion
The study presents the financial evaluation of available solar systems
over their service life. The investment cost of installing solar panels has
been justified by considering two scenarios: the SS and the SSWB. The
appraisal comprises four crucial financial indicators: NPV, BCR, IRR,
and PB.

2.4.3. Life Cycle Impact Assessment (LCIA) 3.1. Financial appraisal

Life Cycle Impact Assessment (LCIA) interprets LCA studies by con­
verting resource extractions and emissions into several environmental The net benefits of these variable solar projects are compared, and
impact categories. Impacts are assessed based on emissions and re­ their relative economic desirabilities are assessed. Financial indicators
sources used per unit of raw materials extraction, manufacturing, are carried out using a set of investment criteria over a service life of 25
transportation, and other processes. Characterization factors are the years. The outcomes of alternative solar projects are presented in
basis of deriving these impacts into two mainstream consequences: one Table 5. Positive financial indicators are observed for an SS to analyze
at the midpoint (CFm) and the other at the endpoint (CFe). Midpoint solar reference systems (3 kW, 5 kW, 7 kW, and 10 kW) with variable
impacts are identical along the impact pathway assigned to climate discount rates. 10 kW grid-connected SS provides the highest NPV over
change, acidification, eutrophication, and other factors directly (Tushar the service life of 25 years with values of AU$17851, AU$10623, and AU
et al., 2022a). The parametric level of the endpoint characterization $3683 at successive rates of 4%, 7%, and 12%. However, higher values
factor corresponds to three protection areas: human health (HH), of BCR, IRR, and lower PB indicate the suitable provision of using a 7 kW
ecosystem damage (ED), and resource scarcity (RS). Midpoints and grid-connected solar system, as shown in Fig. 4.
endpoints complement each other, with a relatively lower uncertainty The initial investment cost of a SSWB is more than grid-connected SS
associated along the midpoint impacts trajectory. In contrast, environ­ by a factor of higher than 2. Enhanced solar system capacity with battery
mental relevance flow is conveyed through the endpoint characteriza­ storage requires additional expense, hence higher payback with a lower
tion with higher uncertainty levels. CFe is obtained directly from CFm by rate of return. NPV of the SSWB increases with a larger storage capacity
multiplying a constant factor per each impact category in Equation (8). in proportion to generating energy by AU$1981, AU$5702, AU$8904,
CFex,c,a = CFmx,c × FM→E,c,a (8) and AU$14309 respectively, at a discount rate of 4% for 3 kW, 5 kW, 7
kW, and 10 kW. However, compared to the grid-connected solar sys­
Whereby x presents the impact per unit of a selected specimen, c denotes tem’s similar capacity, the battery system’s economic feasibility is less
the cultural perspective, and a is for three protected areas, and FM→E,c,a , than the grid-connected. For example, the payback period of a 7 kW
is the conversion factor of the endpoint from the midpoint as per cultural solar system is 7.39 years, whereas, in the case of SSWB, it is 17.5 years
and protection zones. at a 7% discount rate.
This study applies the ReCiPe 2016, version 1.1, the most updated Weighting factors of financial indicators are used in multi-criteria
and latest version of Life Cycle Impact Assessment (LCIA), to compare decision-making to represent the overview of a comprehensive assess­
the environmental impacts of solar panels and connective components ment. This study equally weights the representative indicators (NPV,
such as inverters, charge controllers, and storage batteries (Huijbregts
et al., 2016). Furthermore, all the significant categories have been Table 5
assessed to categorize into two pathways and considered the most Financial appraisal of on-grid connected and hybrid solar systems over a service
comprehensive LCIA method. life of 25.
Financial Discount rates
2.4.4. LCIA interpretation and sensitivity analysis Indicators
Grid-connected system Hybrid system
Performed LCA fulfills the relevant checklists mentioned in the ISO
3 kW Solar panels 3 kW Solar panels with battery
14044 standards (Fthenakis et al., 2011). Proper distribution of envi­
ronmental impact and Monte Carlo simulations have been performed to 4% 7% 12% 4% 7% 12%
calculate the possible uncertainties of variable references and express NPV (AU$) 5002 2607 307 1981 − 832 − 3534
the results in statistical indicators such as a range of confidence in­ IRR (%) 12.67 12.67 12.67 5.46 5.46 5.46
tervals, mean, and standard deviations (Mooney, 1997; Tushar et al., PB (years) 8.83 10.61 18.56 19.72 Over Over SL
SL
2018). BCR 2.17 1.61 1.07 1.22 0.91 0.61
The pedigree matrix has been performed in SimaPro to score relative 5 kW Solar panels 5 kW Solar panels with battery
uncertainties of solar processing systems (Hu and Ameta, 2013). Each 4% 7% 12% 4% 7% 12%
data point is evaluated on six uncertainty criteria, depending on the data NPV (AU$) 9193 5380 1717 5702 1062 − 3394
type of input-output emissions, reliability, completeness, temporal cor­ IRR (%) 14.34 14.34 14.34 8.19 8.19 8.19
relations, geographical correlations, and other technological correla­ PB (years) 7.01 8.06 11.26 14.6 21.27 Over SL
tions, as shown in Equation (9) (Mejia et al., 2018). The confidence BCR 2.64 1.96 1.31 1.47 1.09 0.73
7 kW Solar panels 7 kW Solar panels with battery
interval of the probabilistic distribution is identified using the 4% 7% 12% 4% 7% 12%
mentioned factors. Carbon-di-oxide (CO2) emissions are observed to be
NPV (AU$) 12,256 7366 2669 8904 2809 − 3045
reasonably accurate and easily comparable against fuel intake. How­
IRR (%) 14.84 14.84 14.84 9.4 9.4 9.4
ever, the relative uncertainties are assumed to be higher for particulate PB (years) 6.49 7.39 9.9 12.89 17.5 Over SL
matter (PM 10 and PM 2.5), heavy metals, and combustion emissions. BCR 2.82 2.09 1.4 1.61 1.19 0.8
10 kW Solar panels 10 kW Solar panels with
∑
6
battery
σ 2n (Squared geometric standard deviation) = (Uncertainty criteria) (9) 4% 7% 12% 4% 7% 12%
n=1
NPV (AU$) 17,851 10,623 3683 14,309 5082 − 3780
IRR (%) 14.65 14.65 14.65 9.87 9.87 9.87
PB (years) 6.68 7.64 10.34 12.26 16.3 Over SL
BCR 2.75 2.04 1.37 1.67 1.24 0.83

8
Q. Tushar et al. Journal of Environmental Management 346 (2023) 119002

Fig. 4. Financial appraisal of the grid-connected solar system (SS) and solar system with battery (SSWB).

9
Q. Tushar et al. Journal of Environmental Management 346 (2023) 119002

Table 6 over 25 years is an acceptable project criterion. Acceptability of the

Rank position of attractive solar investment for variable solar systems. hybrid solar system with battery project relies extensively on capital
Solar The rank score for financial Total Weighting Rank investment, service life, and satisfactory discount rates.
∑
Components indicators score (R/ R) position

NPV IRR PB BCR

R 3.1.3. BCR uncertainties over the service life
Solar investment’s BCR has been justified as the function of relative
3 kW SS 6 4 4 4 18 0.125 4th
3 kW SSWB 8 8 8 8 32 0.222 8th
annual benefit and initial investment uncertainties. Performance of the
5 kW SS 3 3 3 3 12 0.083 3rd grid-connected solar system over its service life of 25 years shows BCR
5 kW SSWB 7 7 7 7 28 0.194 7th over one, even at a higher discount rate. Compared with SS, solar sys­
7 kW SS 2 1 1 1 5 0.035 1st tems with batteries always show below one, hence non-acceptable. BCR
7 kW SSWB 5 6 6 6 23 0.160 6th
varies substantially depending on the energy prices, investment, and
10 kW SS 1 2 2 2 7 0.049 2nd
10 kW SSWB 4 5 5 5 19 0.132 5th residual cost uncertainty. Fig. 6 illustrates a 7 kW grid-connected solar
system with the highest BCR irrespective of discount rates. However,
conducted sensitivity on the variations of capital cost and energy prices
IRR, PB, and IRR) and ranks them in consequence from 1 to 8 per su­ scenarios indicates satisfactory BCR is achievable only by investigating
perior benefits, as shown in Table 6. A total score of financial indicators the larger solar systems with storage.
has been obtained by adding the scores for relative solar components.
The ranking of solar installations has been assigned to various solar 4. Environmental evaluation
investment options by evaluating the lowest weighting factor as the
most suitable option. Grid-connected 7 kW SS and 10 kW SS ranked 1st 4.1. Characterization of electricity generation
and 2nd; installation strategies seem attractive based on investment
return. Life cycle assessment (LCA) is a scientific tool to assess environ­
mental performance, promote sustainable production, optimize design,
3.1.1. Sensitivity analysis of financial indicators and manage renewable technology. Photovoltaic (PV) solar panels are
Sensitivity analysis has been performed on deterministic NPV models considered the most prominent renewable and clean energy source.
to rank input design variable that affects specified output for the SS and However, their production process consumes significant energy and
SSWB. These input values are scaled over a meaningful cost variation for generates emissions, which needs to draw attention (Wong et al., 2016).
the established solar system, indicating the uncertainty of each. The environmental impacts caused by PV power generation at the
operation stage are almost pollution-free. Compared to PV, fossil fuels
3.1.1.1. Investment and energy cost scenario. Relative uncertainties of contribute 71% of the Australian national grid electricity generation. It
solar investment have been performed by conducting Monte Carlo comprises coal (51%), natural gas (18%), and oil (2%), and the
simulations over the series of capital investments and acquired profit­ remaining 29% is accounted for renewable sources such as hydro, wind,
ability. The NPV model is recalculated for each selected value, and new and solar. The evolvement of solar radiation in generating PV electricity
data is recorded for all identified outputs. Annual benefit (r = 0.78) reduces emissions, pollutants, and other impacts significantly, as shown
indicates NPV is highly correlated for grid-connected SS systems, as in Table 8.
shown in Fig. 5. However, the initial capital investment negatively
correlates (r = − 0.37) with NPV, which is comparatively weaker than 4.2. PV solar panels manufacturing
the annual benefit. On the contrary, both input indicators, capital in­
vestment (r = 0.60) and yearly annual benefit (r = 0.71), have a mod­ Cumulative energy demand (CED) from fossil fuels is a prime
erate correlation with NPV for hybrid SSWB. This data represents the concern for producing two conventional PV solar panels, as shown in
requirements of the government subsidies for the solar energy storage Table 9. Fabrication of amorphous and polycrystalline solar modules
system. Higher investment for SSWB requires to be mitigated by with some of the components and their relative GHG emissions are
providing an allowance for battery connection. precisely articulated in Fig. 7. Higher demand for fossil fuels, renew­
The probabilistic distribution of possible NPV outcomes is sensible in ables, and other energy sources is observed to manufacture the poly­
SSWB and ranges from (− ) 14,405 AU$ to 15,562 AU$ (5th percentile- crystalline module panel. Therefore, the environmental consequences of
95th percentile). However, the likelihood of the occurrence represents a PV solar panels rely extensively upon the production processes. The
lower uncertainty level for grid-connected variables such as (− ) 4966AU operation phase of PV energy generation is almost free of environmental
$ to 15683AU$. Moreover, the adopted distribution is a much more pollution.
practical method to describe the association of higher uncertainty (r = - Fabrication processes of silicon-based PV solar modules include pe­
0.60) with an initial investment for SSWB. Raising discount rates (r = troleum coke extraction, refining of metallurgical grade (MG) silicon,
− 0.74) tends to decrease the value of money over time, reducing cash solar grade (SG) silicon generation, crystalline wafer cell production,
flow and lowering NPV. Higher NPV is generated over the extended and assembly of solar panels (Peng et al., 2013). MG silicon is obtained
service life of the solar investment. Therefore, the calculation will assist by putting it into an arc furnace and further purified to convert it into SG
homeowners in justifying their investment in the solar system. in a reactor chamber. The purification process is known as the Siemens
process, where hydrogen (H2) and trichlorosilane (SiHCl3) are heated at
3.1.2. NPV analysis over time-horizon 1100–1200 ◦ C. Polycrystalline wafer cells are produced by the Czo­
NPV of solar panels investment increases over the extended service chralski process, where growing crystals are slowly removed from the
life in proportion to generating excessive energy and supplying to the melting point (Friedrich et al., 2015). The silicon ingots are then cut into
grid. 10 kW grid-connected solar system shows the most significant in­ columns with a definite cross-sectional area as per wafer specifications.
crease in NPV from AU$4848 (10 years) to AU$11908 (30 years) @4% Successively, the required CED and GHG of the Polycrystalline solar
discount rate, as shown in Table 7. However, possible inflation and module 60 W are 1682 MJ and 139 kg CO2 eq. The amorphous module
higher discount rates in the shortest period, like ten (10) years, do not needs much fewer materials than the polycrystalline solar module. The
carry positive NPV. 7 kW grid-connected solar system surprisingly manufacturing process is relatively simple without a high temperature,
produces a positive NPV of 37 even at a higher discount rate of 12% and consuming 932.80 MJ per amorphous module 60 W.
lower service life of 10 years. The observed NPVs of design scenarios Manufacturing of the amorphous silicon film contributes less GHG
indicate that the extended service life of solar systems with batteries emission and lower CED; thus, it is acknowledged as 2nd generation

10
Q. Tushar et al. Journal of Environmental Management 346 (2023) 119002

Fig. 5. Sensitivity indices of the output and input design variables.

11
Q. Tushar et al. Journal of Environmental Management 346 (2023) 119002

Table 7 4.2.2. Endpoint environmental impact assessment

NPV of solar investment for variable discount rates. Resource scarcity is observed as the most significant category to be
Discount rates 4% 7% 12% 4% 7% 12% affected by the production of solar panels and their connectivity, as
shown in Table 11. Increased fossil fuel extraction leads to higher costs
3 kW grid-connected SS 3 kW hybrid-sytem SSWB
by 66% due to enhanced solar panels capacity of 3 kW–10 kW. The LCA
10 years 752 47 − 971 − 2764 − 3636 − 4997 damage model assumes that metal and fossil depletion are extracted at
15 years 2454 1199 − 294 − 864 − 2374 − 4223
20 years 3853 2022 90 698 − 1474 − 3784
the lowest cost from the available ore at the first time. Increased
25 years 5002 2607 307 1981 − 832 − 3534 extraction of minerals for manufacturing solar panels leads to a higher
30 years 5948 3025 431 3037 − 375 − 3393 cost due to shifting to a more expensive location or changing production
5 kW grid-connected SS 5 kW hybrid-sytem SSWB techniques. Projected future extraction of raw components surplus
10 years 2346 1237 − 331 − 2271 − 3682 − 5825 upfront cost of solar installation materials. Hence, a 7 kW grid-
15 years 5088 3102 753 928 − 1541 − 4534 connected SS leads to a potential cost of 737.15 US$, additionally
20 years 7341 4432 1368 3557 − 15 − 3802 combining with anticipated future extraction. Moreover, the forecasted
25 years 9193 5380 1717 5702 1062 − 3394
30 years 10,716 6056 1916 7494 1850 − 3151
future cost increased by 31% (969.10 US$) for installing a 7 kW SSWB.
7 kW grid-connected SS 7 kW hybrid-sytem SSWB An annual 4258 MW hybrid solar system production affected around
19,870 people’s health by disability, accident, or disease and caused the
10 years 3446 2028 37 − 1670 − 3507 − 6260
15 years 6973 4431 1430 2564 − 664 − 4558 loss of 97 local species over a year. However, the valuable utilization of
20 years 9873 6144 2220 6044 1364 − 3593 solar panels over their lifespan reduces the impact significantly,
25 years 12,256 7366 2669 8904 2809 − 3045 considering the electricity consumption from the national grid.
30 years 14,215 8236 2923 11,256 3840 − 2734
10 kW grid-connected SS 10 kW hybrid-sytem SSWB
4.2.2.1. Sensitivity analysis of impact assessment. A (log) normal distri­
10 years 4848 2750 − 203 − 1759 − 4530 8660
−
bution of allocated data assumes the best guess value and relative un­
15 years 10,054 6294 1854 4668 − 208 − 6081
20 years 14,333 8822 3021 9951 2873 − 4618
certainties of GHG emissions and CED by applying the Monte Carlo
25 years 17,851 10,623 3683 14,309 5082 − 3780 simulation techniques, as shown in Table 12. The distribution expresses
30 years 11,908 4059 20,741 17,862 6637 − 3316 the variation in data as the standard deviation (SD) and covers the 95%
confidence interval (2.5%–97.5%). Manufacturing energy demand var­
ies between 45,040 and 138,495 MJ for 3 kW solar system installation,
photovoltaic system. However, the conversion efficiency of the amor­
whereas as per estimated conversion efficiency, the annual electricity
phous module (AM) is 2–3% less than traditional polycrystalline solar
generation is 16,002 MJ. The intended scope of conducting LCA shows
panels (18–24%). Moreover, the degradation rate of the amorphous
the feasible advantage for PV solar systems with an average energy re­
module is higher than polycrystalline. The degradation rate of solar
covery time of 5.25 years and 5.78 years for SS and SSWB successively.
panels depends upon four contributing factors: ultraviolet ray exposure,
Uncertainty analysis demonstrates the range between 2.81 and 8.65
thermal cycling, freezing humidity, and damp heat. The efficiency of
years for overall energy demand at the production stage as input and
solar modules is expected to degrade by 0.5–3% each year. The leading
yearly energy generation as output.
polycrystalline solar module manufacturer provides a warranty of 25–30
On the other hand, Greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions vary between
years. Therefore, the study suggests developing cost-effective next-
8114 and 26632 kg CO2 eq for module fabrication of 7 kW panels. The
generation solar modules with longer service life and higher efficiency.
average GHG emission of a 7 kW solar battery storage (SSWB) system is
In addition, manufacturing facilities need to be modified to lower energy
17,393 kg CO2 eq. In contrast, at the operation stage, annual GHG
consumption, reduce greenhouse gas emissions, and process products at
emission reduction is 11,533 kg CO2 eq feasible for generating elec­
lesser heat conduction.
tricity of 9774 kW h annually rather than consuming it from the national
grid. Thus, the recovery of carbon footprint is less than two years. Even
4.2.1. Midpoint environmental impact assessment
in the worst-case scenario, the value of the carbon recovery period lies
Eighteen (18) midpoint impact categories have been identified for
between 0.93 and 2.31 years. Exhaustive levels of uncertainty conclude
the available four types of solar systems (3 kW, 5 kW, 7 kW, and 10 kW)
that installing solar panels contributes to a sustainable solution
and their relative components, such as inverters, lithium-ion storage
considering the hypothesis of 25–30 years of solar panels’ life span.
batteries, and charger controllers, as shown in Table 10. Translating
these midpoint impacts into three endpoints represents the overall
5. Conclusion and policy implications
environmental benefits in a simplified manner.
Results show that the manufacturing of solar panels is responsible for
A methodological framework has been developed in this study to
significant GHG emissions due to the extraction of raw materials such as
compare grid-connected solar systems (SS) and hybrid systems with
silicon, glass, and metals. Relative life cycle impacts show an 8.18%
battery storage (SSWB) in terms of financial and environmental evalu­
carbon emissions increase for installing 7 kW SSWB compared to the
ation. The innovative approach compares the conventional solar systems
grid-connected 7 kW SS. Similar increasing trends are also observed for
(3 kW, 5 kW, 7 kW, and 10 kW) investment on current inflation due to
other potential impacts like ozone depletion, acidification, and eutro­
the Russia-Ukraine conflict to provide optimal configurations of solar
phication. Moreover, the emission of toxic substances (kg 1,4-DB eq)
installations. The optimal installation system has been justified using the
that cause potential harm to human health through inhalation rises from
case study of 3–5 inhabitants of Australian residential dwellings.
1024.79 to 2175.04 for 10 kW SSWB. The substantial influence of
This study calculates financial indicators of different scenarios by
resource depletion is notified on the impact assessment of SSWB
combining subsidy and feed-in tariff policies to promote suitable PV
compared to the SS. Metal depletion of SSWB leads to a potential con­
installation. Internal rate of return (IRR) shows a higher discount rate
sumption of resources (kg Fe eq.) in 1004, 1775, 2444, and 3550 for 3
negatively affects the substitution of grid electricity with the PV battery
kW, 5 kW, 7 kW, and 10 kW SSWB successively. Thus, the grid-
storage system. In the context of financial uncertainties, grid-connected
connected SS is a suitable provision promoting a circular economy and
7 kW SS provides the highest IRR (14.84%), considering variable factors
reducing resource consumption compared to SSWB, even from the
such as solar systems, locations, market values, government incentives,
embodied phase of the life cycle.
and overall current inflation (7.3%). On the contrary, the annualized
IRR for SSWB ranges between 5.46% and 9.87%, showing possible risk

12
Q. Tushar et al. Journal of Environmental Management 346 (2023) 119002

Fig. 6. Uncertainty analysis of Benefit-cost ratio (BCR) for solar systems at variable discount rates.

to earning over the capital investment cost during its service life. The
time value of money offers the shortest PB (7.39 years) for an investment
of 7 kW SS at a 7% discount rate over other solar installments.
The profitability of a solar investment project is assessed by calcu­
lating the NPV of the projected cash flow at variable discount rates over
the service life of 10, 15, 20, 25, and 30 years. Grid-connected SS always
generates a positive NPV over the service life of 20 years compared to
SSWB, indicating the financial viability of a SS investment. Higher
recession and less service life result in negative NPV values for selecting
solar panels with batteries. The comparative analysis assesses the in­
vestment option for renewable solar energy, emphasizing the incentives
for battery storage and feed-in tariffs.

13
Q. Tushar et al. Journal of Environmental Management 346 (2023) 119002

Fig. 7. Manufacturing amorphous and polycrystalline solar modules with principal components and relative greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions.

Table 8
Environmental impacts and emission ranges of generating per kWh from the Australian national electricity grid and PV solar panels.
Impacts categories Unit Mixed electricity generation Solar-based electricity generation

Midpoint impacts Mean 2.5% 97.5% Mean 2.5% 97.5%

Climate change kg CO2 eq 1.180 1.126 1.241 7.34E-04 3.10E-04 1.56E-03

Ozone depletion kg CFC-11 eq 1.02E-09 5.18E-10 1.94E-09 1.78E-12 6.69E-13 3.76E-12
Terrestrial acidification kg SO2 eq 7.07E-03 6.72E-03 7.41E-03 3.64E-06 1.48E-06 8.09E-06
Freshwater eutrophication kg P eq 2.21E-06 1.17E-06 4.68E-06 1.96E-08 3.78E-09 8.6E-08
Marine eutrophication kg N eq 1.50E-04 1.39E-04 1.64E-04 9.87E-08 4.14E-08 2.02E-07
Human toxicity kg 1,4-DB eq 2.13E-01 7.55E-02 5.62E-01 1.45E-04 5.09E-05 3.67E-04
Metal depletion kg Fe eq 1.28E-03 9.13E-04 1.78E-03 1.20E-04 4.86E-05 2.27E-04
Fossil depletion kg oil eq 0.288 0.274 0.303 2.00E-04 8.35E-05 4.29E-04
Endpoint impacts Mean 2.5% 97.5% Mean 2.5% 97.5%

Human Health DALY 2.32E-06 2.16E-06 2.56E-06 1.4E-09 5.15E-10 3.4E-09

Ecosystems species.yr 1.05E-08 9.78E-09 1.13E-08 7.31E-12 2.61E-12 1.7E-11
Resources US$ 0.048 0.045 0.050 4.11E-05 1.58E-05 9.12E-05

Relative uncertainties of SS and SSWB have been verified by per­
forming exhaustive Monte Carlo simulations over the series of capital
investments and acquired profitability. Sensitivity indices of SSWB
design variables show a negative correlation (r = - 0.60) of capital in­
vestment with NPV. Higher investment in the storage battery is required
to be mitigated by providing subsidies for hybrid SSWB. Rising discount
rates (r = − 0.74) at higher inflation reduce the value of money over time
and lower the value of NPV. Analyzing the sensitivity indices of financial
inputs serves as a rationale for committing to a solar energy system,
thereby enabling the prioritization of subsidies, allowances, or feed-in
tariffs. This analysis aids in making well-informed and timely de­
cisions regarding solar investments.
A comprehensive and comparative LCA on PV solar modules has
been conducted to assess mid- and long-term environmental impacts.
During the operation stage, PV electricity generation is environmentally
friendly, with minimal emissions compared to fossil fuel-based grid
electricity. However, the energy-intensive manufacturing processes of
amorphous and polycrystalline solar modules release significant emis­
sions and require substantial energy. Comparative analysis shows that
producing a single 60 W polycrystalline module requires cumulative
energy demand (CED) of about 1681.60 MJ, which is nearly 80% higher
than that of a 60 W amorphous module. Energy efficiency and cost-
effectiveness are the strategies for developing next-generation PV
panels, ensuring a lower degradation rate, prolonging service life, and
integrating less energy-intensive technologies.
Resource scarcity ($) seems to be the most affected criterion at the
endpoint damage assessment. The extraction of fossil fuels for fabri­
cating solar panels leads to a potential surplus cost for extracting fossil
fuels. For example, damage of 1392 US$ is determined for
manufacturing 10 kW hybrid solar panels with storage batteries. Human
health is the second impacted arena by installing the solar system.
Around 19,870 people’s health is affected by disability or disease from
the emissions of 4258 MW solar installations annually. The logical
advantage of installing PV solar panels is visible, with an average energy
recovery time of 5.25 years. Detailed uncertainty analysis of the overall
manufacturing process and annual energy generation demonstrates the
range of energy payback time varies between 2.81 and 8.65 years.
In summary, feed-in tariffs and subsidies promote PV panel instal­
lation as a substitute for national grid electricity in these crucial in­
flations. However, the storage of PV-generated energy is assessed as not

14
Q. Tushar et al. Journal of Environmental Management 346 (2023) 119002

Table 9
Cumulative Energy Demand (CED) and Greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions of Amorphous and Polycrystalline module.
Solar panel’s general components Amorphous module 60 W Polycrystalline module 60 W

Glass-flat PVC granulate Aluminium Silicon Film Amorphous panel Polycrystalline cells Polycrystalline panel

Cumulative Energy Demand - by energy type. V2.02/MJ by fuel source

Total 49.49 12.20 36.75 834.37 932.80 1583.17 1681.60
Renewables 0.42 0.06 1.41 31.53 33.41 58.52 60.40
Fossil fuels as an energy source
Oil 3.31 2.57 6.72 25.38 37.97 80.75 93.35
Gas 37.24 7.71 5.16 138.13 188.25 257.84 307.95
Coal 8.49 1.50 23.38 637.06 670.44 1181.71 1215.08
Others energy sources
Biomass 0.024 0.011 0.069 2.017 2.121 3.86 3.967
Nuclear 0.003 0.355 0.003 0.250 0.610 0.48 0.845
Other/Unknown − 1.2E-10 − 1.1E-12 − 1.7E-11 − 1.17E-08 − 1.18E-08 − 4.40E-08 − 4.413E-08
Greenhouse, IPPC 1990,- distinguish main gases V1.01/kg CO2e
Total 3.579 0.398 3.237 69.459 76.673 130.639 138.853

Carbon dioxide 3.345 0.337 2.789 67.265 73.736 126.508 133.979

Methane 0.227 0.058 0.087 1.832 2.206 3.420 3.794
Nitrous oxide 6.35E-03 1.61E-03 4.06E-02 3.53E-01 4.02E-01 6.93E-01 7.42E-01
Land transformation 7.84E-07 6.04E-04 4.36E-07 9.60E-06 6.15E-04 2.18E-05 6.27E-04
Other 2.34E-04 1.02E-04 3.19E-01 8.60E-03 3.28E-01 1.79E-02 3.37E-01

Table 10
Midpoint impacts of the grid-connected and hybrid solar system with storage battery.
Midpoint impact categories and their relevant units Solar system (SS) grid-connected Solar system with battery (SSWB))

(Solar panels with inverter) (Solar panels with storage battery, inverter, and charge controller)

3 kW 5 kW 7 kW 10 kW 3 kW 5 kW 7 kW 10 kW

1 Climate change (kg CO2 eq) 6930 11,503 16,077 23,007 7479 12,453 17,393 24,906
2 Ozone depletion (kg CFC-11 eq) 1.3E-05 2.2E-05 3.2E-05 4.5E-05 8.1E-05 1.4E-04 1.9E-04 2.8E-04
3 Terrestrial acidification (kg SO2 eq) 37.5 62.2 86.9 124.3 42.0 70.2 97.9 140.4
4 Freshwater eutrophication (kg P eq) 8.6E-02 1.4E-01 2.0E-01 2.8E-01 3.4E-01 6.0E-01 8.3E-01 1.2 E+00
5 Marine eutrophication (kg N eq) 0.85 1.41 1.97 2.82 0.97 1.62 2.27 3.25
6 Human toxicity (kg 1,4-DB eq) 308.67 512.40 716.12 1024.79 626.58 1087.52 1503.18 2175.04
7 Photochemical oxidant formation (kg NMVOC) 21.13 35.08 49.03 70.16 23.52 39.24 54.78 78.47
8 Particulate matter formation (kg PM10 eq) 10.72 17.79 24.86 35.58 12.38 20.73 28.91 41.46
9 Terrestrial ecotoxicity (kg 1,4-DB eq) 0.13 0.22 0.30 0.43 0.29 0.50 0.69 1.00
10 Freshwater ecotoxicity (kg 1,4-DB eq) 1.63 2.71 3.79 5.42 2.41 4.04 5.64 8.08
11 Marine ecotoxicity (kg 1,4-DB eq) 2.72 4.52 6.31 9.04 7.41 12.83 17.75 25.66
12 Ionising radiation (kBq U235 eq) 0.39 0.65 0.90 1.29 8.38 15.23 20.82 30.47
13 Agricultural land occupation (m2a) 147 244 341 489 198 331 462 663
14 Urban land occupation (m2a) 277 460 644 921 295 491 686 982
15 Natural land transformation (m2) 8.8E-02 1.4E-01 2.1E-01 2.9E-01 1.5E-01 2.6E-01 3.6E-01 5.2E-01
16 Water depletion (m3) 19 32 45 64 32 54 76 109
17 Metal depletion (kg Fe eq) 147 244 342 489 1004 1775 2444 3550
18 Fossil depletion (kg oil eq) 1857 3082 4308 6165 2007 3342 4668 6684

Table 11
Endpoint impacts of the grid-connected and hybrid solar system with storage battery.
Endpoint impact categories and their relevant units Solar system (SS) grid-connected Solar system with battery (SSWB)

(Solar panels with inverter) (Solar panels with storage battery, inverter, and charge
controller)

3 kW 5 kW 7 kW 10 kW 3 kW 5 kW 7 kW 10 kW

1 Human Health damage Disability-adjusted life years (DALYs) 1.3E-02 2.1E-02 2.9E-02 4.2E-02 1.4E-02 2.4E-02 3.3E-02 4.8E-02
2 Ecosystems damage 6.3E-05 1.1E-04 1.5E-04 2.1E-04 6.8E-05 1.1E-04 1.6E-04 2.3E-04
Species lost over the years (species. yr)
3 Resources scarcity in Dollars ($) 317.74 527.44 737.15 1054.88 412.69 696.09 969.10 1392.1

cost-effective due to the higher cost of this technology. An optimal
economic and environmental benefit is achievable through government
subsidies or cost reduction in the solar storage battery. Moreover, the
sensitivity of solar investments results in relative uncertainties of NPV
over variable discount rates (4%, 7%, and 12%) and time horizons (10,
15, 20, 25 and 30 years). Sensitivity indices of capital expenditure,
present value factor (PVF), net benefit, service life, and liquidation yield
are integrated to pursue sophisticated integration of solar appliances for
future project appraisal. The framework of this study is applicable
irrespective of climatic diversity and the specific location and is ex­
pected to extend this cost implication and impact assessment for
approving advanced technology.
Author credit roles
Quddus Tushar: Conceptualization, Methodology, Software, Data

15
Q. Tushar et al. Journal of Environmental Management 346 (2023) 119002

Table 12
Sensitivity indices of variable solar systems for Greenhouse gas (GHG) and Cumulative energy demand (CED).
Solar Size Solar system (SS) grid-connected Solar system with battery (SSWB)

Greenhouse, IPPC 1990,- distinguish main gases V1.01/kg CO2e, confidence interval: 95%

Mean SD 2.5% 97.5% Mean SD 2.5% 97.5%

1.3 kW 6930 2122 3443 11,623 7479 2116 3847 12,047

2.5 kW 11,503 3408 5838 19,846 12,453 3402 7693 20,592
3.7 kW 16,077 4665 8114 26,632 17,393 4667 10,807 26,704
4.10 kW 23,007 7039 12,014 37,902 24,906 7015 15,119 38,644
Cumulative Energy Demand - by energy type. V2.02/MJ by fuel source, confidence interval: 95%
Mean SD 2.5% 97.5% Mean SD 2.5% 97.5%

1.3 kW 84,081 24,875 45,040 138,495 89,485 24,855 55,977 139,948

2.5 kW 140,134 41,931 76,944 223,462 150,553 41,772 93,792 226,921
3.7 kW 196,187 57,754 110,185 337,024 214,593 57,761 135,468 330,686
4.10 kW 280,267 86,165 151,627 487,194 307,211 86,136 190,269 487,585

Curation, Investigation, Writing – Original Draft; Guomin Zhang: Su­
pervision, Validation, Visualization, Investigation, Writing – Review &
Editing; Filippo Giustozzi: Supervision, Validation, Resources, Writing –
Review & Editing; Muhammed A. Bhuiyan: Supervision, Visualization,
Investigation, Writing – Review & Editing; Lei Hou: Supervision, Writing
– Review & Editing; Satheeskumar Navaratnam: Supervision, Writing –
Review & Editing.
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.
Data availability
No data was used for the research described in the article.
Acknowledgments
The author would like to acknowledge the School of Engineering
(Civil & Infrastructure), RMIT University, Melbourne, Australia, for
providing financial support for this research. The author would like to
thank the participating solar industry that helped by providing data and
technical support for this study. This article also acknowledges sus­
tainability Victoria, SimaPro, AusLCI database, and Palisade Decision
Tools to provide valuable suggestions and information regarding simu­
lations and implications.
Appendix A. Supplementary data
Supplementary data to this article can be found online at https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2023.119002.
References
Abdelhady, S., 2021. Performance and cost evaluation of solar dish power plant:
sensitivity analysis of levelized cost of electricity (LCOE) and net present value
(NPV). Renew. Energy 168, 332–342.
Al Arrouqi, R.A., Ellabban, O., Rasheed, M.B., Al-Fagih, L., 2019. An assessment of
different electricity tariffs on residential photovoltaic system profitability: Australian
case study. In: 2019 2nd International Conference on Smart Grid and Renewable
Energy (SGRE). IEEE, pp. 1–6.
Belaïd, F., Al-Sarihi, A., Al-Mestneer, R., 2023. Balancing climate mitigation and energy
security goals amid converging global energy crises: the role of green investments.
Renew. Energy 205, 534–542.
Đukić, P., 2022. Global post-pandemic recovery (?) and innovations in the light of
geopolitical aggravation. ECONOMICS-INNOVATIVE AND ECONOMICS RESEARCH
JOURNAL 10.
Friedrich, J., von Ammon, W., Müller, G., 2015. Czochralski Growth of Silicon Crystals,
Handbook of Crystal Growth. Elsevier, pp. 45–104.
Fthenakis, V., Frischknecht, R., Raugei, M., Kim, H.C., Alsema, E., Held, M., de Wild-
Scholten, M., 2011. Methodology guidelines on life cycle assessment of photovoltaic
electricity. IEA PVPS Task 12.
Gaterell, M.R., McEvoy, M.E., 2005. The impact of energy externalities on the cost
effectiveness of energy efficiency measures applied to dwellings. Energy Build. 37,
1017–1027.
Gorshkov, A., Vatin, N., Rymkevich, P., Kydrevich, O., 2018. Payback Period of
Investments in Energy Saving. Magazine of Civil Engineering.
Government, A., 2023. Energy Made Easy.
Grant, T., 2016. AusLCI Database Manual. Australian Life Cycle Assessment Society
(ALCAS).
Hoxha, E., Habert, G., Lasvaux, S., Chevalier, J., Le Roy, R., 2017. Influence of
construction material uncertainties on residential building LCA reliability. J. Clean.
Prod. 144, 33–47.
Hu, Y., Ameta, G., 2013. Life cycle assessment and eco-design of a wireless TV/VCR
remote. In: International Design Engineering Technical Conferences and Computers
and Information in Engineering Conference. American Society of Mechanical
Engineers, V02AT02A049.
Huang, T., Wu, H., Yang, S., Su, B., Tang, K., Quan, Z., Zhong, W., Luo, X., 2020. Global
trends of researches on sacral fracture surgery: a bibliometric study based on
VOSviewer. Spine 45, E721–E728.
Huijbregts, M., Steinmann, Z., Elshout, P., Stam, G., Verones, F., Vieira, M.,
Hollander, A., Zijp, M., Van Zelm, R., 2016. ReCiPe 2016: a Harmonized Life Cycle
Impact Assessment Method at Midpoint and Endpoint Level Report I:
Characterization.
Institute, A.P., 2023. Australian PV Market since April 2001.
James Parkin, D.S., 1999. Infrastructure Planning.
Kang, H., 2021. Crystalline silicon vs. amorphous silicon: the significance of structural
differences in photovoltaic applications. In: IOP Conference Series: Earth and
Environmental Science. IOP Publishing, 012001.
Li, H.X., Zhang, Y., Li, Y., Huang, J., Costin, G., Zhang, P., 2021. Exploring payback-year
based feed-in tariff mechanisms in Australia. Energy Pol. 150, 112133.
Llorach-Massana, P., Farreny, R., Oliver-Solà, J., 2015. Are Cradle to Cradle certified
products environmentally preferable? Analysis from an LCA approach. J. Clean.
Prod. 93, 243–250.
Magni, C.A., 2010. Average internal rate of return and investment decisions: a new
perspective. Eng. Econ. 55, 150–180.
Mahlia, T.M.I., Razak, H.A., Nursahida, M., 2011. Life cycle cost analysis and payback
period of lighting retrofit at the University of Malaya. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev.
15, 1125–1132.
Martin, J., 2022. What size battery do I need?: a quick guide. Solar Choice. https://www.
solarchoice.net.au/learn/calculators/residential-solar-battery-system-size-calc
ulator.
Mejia, A., Harwatt, H., Jaceldo-Siegl, K., Sranacharoenpong, K., Soret, S., Sabaté, J.,
2018. Greenhouse gas emissions generated by tofu production: a case study.
J. Hunger Environ. Nutr. 13, 131–142.
Mooney, C.Z., 1997. Monte Carlo Simulation. Sage.
Murugesan, M., Reedman, L., Brinsmead, T.S., Rifkin, W., Gordon, J., Megharaj, M.,
2023. Modelling least-cost technology pathways to decarbonise the New South
Wales energy system by 2050. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Transition 3,
100041.
Peng, J., Lu, L., Yang, H., 2013. Review on life cycle assessment of energy payback and
greenhouse gas emission of solar photovoltaic systems. Renewable and sustainable
energy reviews 19, 255–274.
Qu, X., He, Y., Qu, M., Ruan, T., Chu, F., Zheng, Z., Ma, Y., Chen, Y., Ru, X., Xu, X., 2021.
Identification of embedded nanotwins at c-Si/a-Si: H interface limiting the
performance of high-efficiency silicon heterojunction solar cells. Nat. Energy 6,
194–202.
Raimi, D., Campbell, E., Newell, R., Prest, B., Villanueva, S., Wingenroth, J., 2022.
Global Energy Outlook 2022: Turning Points and Tension in the Energy Transition.
Resources for the Future Report, Washington, DC.
Regulator, A.E., 2020. In: economics, F. (Ed.), Residential Energy Consumption
Benchmarks.
Regulator, A.E., 2023. Retail Pricing Information.

16
Q. Tushar et al.
Shively, G., Galopin, M., 2013. An Overview of Benefit-Cost Analysis. http://www.
agecon. purdue. edu/staff/shively/COURSES/AGEC406/reviews/bca. htm.
SimaPro, 2013. SimaPro Database. Manual Methods Library.
Soares, W.M., Athayde, D.D., Nunes, E.H., 2018. LCA study of photovoltaic systems based
on different technologies. Int. J. Green Energy 15, 577–583.
Soriano, F., 2008. Energy Efficiency Rating and House Price in the ACT. Modelling the
Relationship of Energy Efficiency Attributes to House Price: the Case of Detached
Houses Sold in the Australian Capital Territory in 2005 and 2006. Department of the
Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts, Canberra.
Speidel, S., Bräunl, T., 2016. Leaving the grid—the effect of combining home energy
storage with renewable energy generation. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 60,
1213–1224.
Statistics, A.B.o., 2022. Australia Inflation Rate. https://www.abs.gov.au.
Department of Climate Change, E., the Environment, Water. Rebates and Assistance.
https://www.energy.gov.au/rebates/electricity-feed-tariff.
Tushar, Q., Bhuiyan, M., Sandanayake, M., Zhang, G., 2019. Optimizing the energy
consumption in a residential building at different climate zones: towards sustainable
decision making. J. Clean. Prod.Volume 233, 1 October 2019, Pages 634-649.
Tushar, Q., Bhuiyan, M., Zhang, G., Sandanayake, M., 2018. Correlation of Building
Parameters with Energy Reduction.
Tushar, Q., Bhuiyan, M.A., Zhang, G., Maqsood, T., 2021. An integrated approach of
BIM-enabled LCA and energy simulation: the optimized solution towards sustainable
development. J. Clean. Prod. 289, 125622.
Tushar, Q., Bhuiyan, M.A., Zhang, G., Maqsood, T., Tasmin, T., 2022a. Application of a
harmonized life cycle assessment method for supplementary cementitious materials
in structural concrete. Construct. Build. Mater. 316, 125850.
17
Journal of Environmental Management 346 (2023) 119002
Tushar, Q., Salehi, S., Santos, J., Zhang, G., Bhuiyan, M.A., Arashpour, M., Giustozzi, F.,
2023. Application of recycled crushed glass in road pavements and pipeline bedding:
an integrated environmental evaluation using LCA. Sci. Total Environ. 881, 163488.
Tushar, Q., Santos, J., Zhang, G., Bhuiyan, M.A., Giustozzi, F., 2022b. Recycling waste
vehicle tyres into crumb rubber and the transition to renewable energy sources: a
comprehensive life cycle assessment. J. Environ. Manag. 323, 116289.
Tushar, Q., Zhang, G., Bhuiyan, M.A., Giustozzi, F., Navaratnam, S., Hou, L., 2022c. An
optimized solution for retrofitting building façades: energy efficiency and cost-
benefit analysis from a life cycle perspective. J. Clean. Prod., 134257
Van Eck, N.J., Waltman, L., 2011. Text mining and visualization using VOSviewer.
Digital Libraries ((cs.DL),). https://arxiv.org/abs/1109.2058.
Vandepaer, L., Treyer, K., Mutel, C., Bauer, C., Amor, B., 2019. The integration of long-
term marginal electricity supply mixes in the ecoinvent consequential database
version 3.4 and examination of modeling choices. Int. J. Life Cycle Assess. 24,
1409–1428.
Wang, Z., Fan, W., 2021. Economic and environmental impacts of photovoltaic power
with the declining subsidy rate in China. Environ. Impact Assess. Rev. 87, 106535.
Wong, J., Royapoor, M., Chan, C., 2016. Review of life cycle analyses and embodied
energy requirements of single-crystalline and multi-crystalline silicon photovoltaic
systems. Renewable and sustainable energy reviews 58, 608–618.
Ye, H., Peng, H., Li, C., Li, Y., Li, Z., Yang, Q., Chen, G., 2023. A demonstration
concentrating solar power plant in China: carbon neutrality, energy renewability and
policy perspectives. J. Environ. Manag. 328, 117003.
Zhou, C., Zhu, B., Davis, S.J., Liu, Z., Halff, A., Arous, S.B., de Almeida Rodrigues, H.,
Ciais, P., 2022. Natural gas supply from Russia derived from daily pipeline flow data
and potential solutions for filling a shortage of Russian supply in the European Union
(EU). Earth Syst. Sci. Data Discuss. 1–19.