Available online at www.sciencedirect.

com
ScienceDirect

Energy Reports 9 (2023) 322–339

www.elsevier.com/locate/egyr

TMREES23-Fr, EURACA 06–08 February 2023, Metz-Grand Est, France

Long-term outdoor performance and degradation evaluation of CIS

PV plant under the semi-arid climate of Benguerir Morocco
Said Elhamaouia,b ,∗, Aboubakr Benazzouza , Abderrazzak Elamima ,
Ibtihal Ait Abdelmoulaa , Khalil Tijania , Abdellatif Ghenniouia , Mohamed El Khailib
a Green Energy Park, Polytechnic University Mohamed VI, Benguerir, Morocco
b IESI Laboratory, ENSET Mohammedia, Hassan II University of Casablanca, Morocco
Received 29 May 2023; accepted 31 May 2023
Available online 14 June 2023

Abstract
The effectiveness of a solar photovoltaic module relies on location related factors, including latitude, seasonal variations,
irradiance levels, clearness index, and similar elements. In compliance with International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC)
standards, performance and degradation assessment studies for photovoltaic (PV) technologies have been conducted in a variety
of geographical areas with diverse climatic conditions in recent years. A comprehensive study of PV systems employing
several technologies will provide some operators and stakeholders with statistically significant findings for assessing system
performance. As a result, long-term and short-term performance and feasibility sur may provide information about the
characterization of next-generation PV panels. The objective of this study is to perform an outdoor performance assessment
and analysis of a 10.44 kWp grid-connected photovoltaic PV system comprised of Copper Indium Selenium (CIS) modules.
This work will investigate how a CIS PV plant performs and degrades in Morocco’s semi-arid climate. The study is performed
in the period between 2018 and 2021. The measured and estimated performance indicators are evaluated with the aim of
assessing the technology’s adaptability and degradation; the methodology applied comprises performance evaluations of the PV
system in accordance with IEC-61724 standard guidelines. After 6 years of outdoor exposure, the CIS system’s output power
declined with a degradation rate of 3.13%/year obtained using linear regression. I–V curve measurements performed in real
test conditions (RTC) determined that power output degradation reached −21.6%, which was more observable in short-circuit
current and varies between −8.1% and −18.1% for individual modules.
© 2023 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license
(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
Peer-review under responsibility of the scientific committee of the TMREES23-Fr, EURACA, 2023.

Keywords: Degradation; Performance analysis; CIS; Solar photovoltaics; Renewable energy; Semi-arid climate

1. Introduction
Pollution from non-renewable fossil fuels, coal, natural gas, and nuclear power now contributes to the acceleration
of global warming [1]. In the future, sustainable energy, particularly solar technology, will serve as the most essential
∗ Corresponding author at: Green Energy Park, Polytechnic University Mohamed VI, Benguerir, Morocco.
E-mail addresses: elhamaoui@greenenergypark.ma, said.elhamaoui-etu@etu.univh2c.ma (S. Elhamaoui).
URL: http://www.saidelhamaoui.com (S. Elhamaoui).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.egyr.2023.05.272
2352-4847/© 2023 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http:
//creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
Peer-review under responsibility of the scientific committee of the TMREES23-Fr, EURACA, 2023.
S. Elhamaoui, A. Benazzouz, A. Elamim et al. Energy Reports 9 (2023) 322–339

Nomenclature
CIS Copper, Indium and Selenium
PV Photovoltaic
IEA International Energy Agency
IEC International Electrotechnical Commission
kW Kilowatts
kWh Kilowatts-hour
GHI Measured Irradiance in Horizontal Plane (W/m2 )
GTI Measured Irradiance in the plan of Array (W/m2 )
EDC Energy output from the array (kWh)
Yr Reference Yield (kWh/kW)
Ya Array Yield (kWh/kW)
Lc Array capture losses (kWh/kW)
FF Fill Factor (%)
ηPV PV Panel Efficiency (%)
PR Performance ratio (%)
PRt-corr Performance ratio corrected for panel temperature (%)
STC Standard Test Conditions
RTC Real Test Conditions
KPI Key Performance Indicator

approach to the energy crisis [2] thus, since it specifies the properties and reactivity of the system to the impacts of
external aspects, such as local weather and climate conditions, system components and other factors, quantitative
data.
Regarding the long-term performance evaluations of photovoltaic (PV) systems are essential [3]. Over the past
ten years, solar power has emerged as a viable alternative for energy generation and a progressive move towards
sustainable progress [4]. The efficiency of solar modules has been improved significantly and now it is reaching 37%
using new technologies [5]. The utilization of cutting-edge emerging technologies in thin-film modules based on
Copper, Indium Gallium, and Selenium (CIGSSe) enables the attainment of cell efficiencies ranging from 14.4%
to 22.4% [6,7]. As a result, the photovoltaic system has evolved into a crucial component of global electricity
generation. Outdoor observation and assessment of photovoltaic (PV) systems, comprising extensive data processing,
are critical in properly forecasting the performance of various PV technologies. This technique is considered
extremely important in analyzing and projecting the efficiency, dependability, and overall efficacy of various solar
energy systems implemented globally [8].
The primary objective of monitoring photovoltaic (PV) systems is to provide valuable insights into their
performance and identify potential areas for enhancing efficiency. To achieve this, it is essential to carefully
choose and regularly update appropriate performance metrics. This approach ensures that relevant and up-to-date
information is available to assess system performance and make informed decisions on optimizing PV system
efficiency [9]. Continuous monitoring is a standard practice in design to identify malfunctions and take precautions.
Electrical output parameters of solar systems are measured at selected intervals. Collected data is validated for
accuracy and summarized for analysis. To account for seasonal variations, it is necessary to collect data for
a minimum of twelve months when evaluating performance. The investigation of PV system performance and
degradation is crucial due to its significant influence on the long-term economic viability of projects.
Given the presence of challenging weather conditions, the degradation of PV modules is a predictable occurrence.
This degradation can arise from various factors, including module mismatching, shading hotspots, as well as external
environmental influences like oxidation, light-induced degradation (LID), cell fracture, cracking, discoloration, and
delamination. These combined factors contribute to the emergence of one or more degradation issues within the
PV modules [9]. Moreover, degradation can manifest at the individual component level within the PV module,
323
S. Elhamaoui, A. Benazzouz, A. Elamim et al. Energy Reports 9 (2023) 322–339

impacting elements such as the glass, interconnections between cells, encapsulating material, diode, Anti-Reflective
coating, protective film, and adhesion glues employed to secure the module’s components together [10,11]. As the
global energy demand continues to grow, the utilization of this energy potential has experienced a significant surge.
Nevertheless, manufacturers have not adequately addressed the in-situ operational factors affecting photovoltaic
modules, including solar radiation, temperature, humidity, UV exposure, dust accumulation and precipitation [10].
Numerous research studies have extensively explored the influence of various external factors on the performance
and degradation of PV system technologies in diverse geographical sites., in [12] Kunaifi et al. conducted an analysis
of a 1MW CIS PV system compared to 5 kW m-Si in the tropical climate of Indonesia, The findings from these
investigations have revealed notable differences between CIS and m-Si technologies. Specifically, CIS exhibited a
superior performance ratio (PR) of 91.7% ± 4%, outperforming m-Si by 12%, where m-Si achieved a PR of 79.8%.
Additionally, the degradation rate (Rd) for CIS was measured at 1.53%, while m-Si experienced a higher degradation
rate of 3.72%. Ramaman et al. [13] In a research conducted in India’s hot and humid climate, a comparative study
was carried out between a CIS PV system and a p-Si system. The study revealed that the CIS PV system achieved a
performance ratio (PR) of 39.1% during winter and 86.73% during summer. In comparison to the p-Si system, the
CIS PV system demonstrated a higher energy yield of +7.61%. Another study conducted by [14] comparing CIS to
4 different technologies in the hot climate in Ghana showed that CIS is the least performant with an average PR of
48.8%. In a study conducted by Carr et al. [15] in the climate of Australia which is considered as tempered climate,
the performance of a 40Wp CIS module was examined. The findings indicated a significant power reduction of
−20% over a period of 19 months. In contrast, silicon-based modules investigated in the same location experienced
degradation ranging from 0.7% to 3.9%.
In a comparable climate (semi-arid) in Algeria, Tahri et al. [16] conducted a degradation analysis of a CIS
module compared to a-Si (amorphous) and the results revealed a degradation rate of −2.34%/year over the studied
period. As referenced in the mentioned studies, the performance of PV system technologies is primarily contingent
on geographical location and subject to considerable impact from climatic variables.
Morocco possesses a substantial solar energy potential, indicated by an approximate average irradiation exceeding
5 kWh/m2 /day [17], This potential is underscored by the country’s ambitious solar energy strategy, which is
considered the most optimistic in Africa and the Mena region [18]. According to [19] solar photovoltaic energy
in Morocco has the capacity to generate a maximum of 356 kWh/m2 /year, assuming an efficiency of 14%.
Consequently, it becomes crucial to carefully select the technology that best aligns with the climatic conditions of
the region. The objective of this research is to conduct a comprehensive analysis of the performance and degradation
of a CIS PV system in a semi-arid climate, comparing it to previous investigations conducted at the module level.
This study is crucial in understanding the impact of Morocco’s harsh climate on thin-film technology and validating
the outcomes through outdoor I–V measurements. Consequently, this study aims to address the following research
inquiries by evaluating the initial test results:
• What is the performance status of a (CIS) based PV plant in Benguerir’s semi-arid climate, and what is the
extent of its degradation over time?
• To what extent do external factors influence the performance and degradation of the (CIS) PV plant?

2. Experimental PV system
The PV system under investigation was installed in 2016 at the Green Energy Park research platform located in
Benguerir, Morocco (latitude: 32.23◦ N, longitude: −7.95◦ W). This region is known for its hot semi-arid climate [20].
he system is connected to the grid and comprises 72 CIS modules (First Solar) with a rated power of 145 Wp. The
modules are mounted on a fixed open rack facing south, inclined at an angle of 32◦ . The following Table 1 provides
detailed specifications of the system being studied.
In this study, a systematic approach was employed to conduct the analysis. The outdoor testing platform utilizes a
data acquisition system to collect system performance data, including electrical parameters (power, current, voltage,
module temperature, etc.), as well as meteorological data obtained from an in-situ high-precision meteorological
station (Fig. 2.b). The meteorological data collected includes Global Tilted Irradiance (GTI), Global Horizontal
Irradiance (GHI), Direct Horizontal Irradiance, Diffuse Horizontal Irradiance (DHI), Direct Normal Irradiance
(DNI), air temperature, wind speed, pressure, precipitation, and more. Data loggers are integrated into the outdoor
testing platform, connected to each individual system, to collect and store data with a precision of 10 s for
324
S. Elhamaoui, A. Benazzouz, A. Elamim et al. Energy Reports 9 (2023) 322–339

Table 1. The 10 kWp CIS PV system characteristics [21].

PV module type Thin-film Copper, Indium, and Selenium (CIS)
Date of installation 01/2016
Total installed power 10.44 (kWp)
Nbr. of arrays 8
Nbr. of modules/Array 9
Module maximum power (Pmax) 145 (Wp)
Voltage at max. open circuit (Voc) 107.0 (V)
Voltage at max. power point (Vmpp) 81.1 (V)
Current at max. short circuit (Isc) 2.2 (A)
Current at max. power point (Impp) 1.8 (A)
Module Efficiency (Eff) 11.8 %
Temperature coefficient of Pmax −0.31 (%/K)
Temperature coefficient of Isc +0.01 (%/K)
Temperature coefficient of Voc −0.30 (%/K)

Fig. 1. Monitoring architecture and data collection of the green energy park platform.

Fig. 2. (a) 10.44 kWp CIS System, (b) High precision in-situ meteorological station.

meteorological parameters and 1 min for electrical measurements. Subsequently, the collected data is carefully
processed, rectified, and cleaned for real-time performance monitoring of the PV system or for generating daily data
analytics. These analytics are essential for developing prediction algorithms and planning operation and maintenance
(O&M) activities. The energy performance of the 10 kWp CIS PV plant was evaluated using key performance
indicators (KPIs) according to the IEC-61724 standard. The architecture of the monitoring platform is depicted in
the accompanying Fig. 1:
The geographical location is renowned for its substantial solar irradiance, which can reach up to 1200 W/m2 ,
along with a peak monthly average tilted irradiance of 5.38 kWh/m2 /day (Fig. 3). The experimental site experiences
an annual average daily temperature of 18.93 ◦ C, with a range of 0.27 ◦ C to 46.66 ◦ C. The relative humidity typically
325
S. Elhamaoui, A. Benazzouz, A. Elamim et al. Energy Reports 9 (2023) 322–339

Fig. 3. Monthly meteorological parameter of Benguerir Morocco.

Table 2. Monthly daily average and annual daily average meteorological parameters Benguerir.
Variable GTI (kWh/m2 /day) GHI (kWh/m2 /day) Tamb (◦ C) RH (%) WS (m/s) Rain (mm)
Jan. 6.45 4.79 14.51 70.79 2.50 2.8
Feb. 6.56 5.24 15.83 66.26 2.58 42.7
Mar. 6.82 5.83 16.98 61.11 3.35 4.4
Apr. 6.72 6.21 17.52 63.72 3.23 0.5
May. 6.68 6.51 21.00 56.32 4.21 18.9
June. 6.91 6.92 20.50 61.63 3.63 9.8
July. 6.85 6.74 24.07 54.23 3.65 9.3
Aug. 6.84 6.29 23.65 56.23 3.37 8.2
Sep 6.54 5.58 20.98 63.66 3.09 1.0
Oct. 6.55 5.11 20.04 59.31 2.43 4.2
Nov. 5.77 4.29 15.69 67.69 2.32 20.7
Dec. 5.58 4.08 16.14 65.78 2.38 10.8
Average 6.35 5.64 18.93 62.30 2.79 11.10

hovers around 62% and reaches a peak of 99.18% during winter. The region is predominantly dry for most of the
year, receiving minimal precipitation. Wind speed is moderate, fluctuating around 2.79 m/s. The monthly average
climatic parameters for the year 2021 at the site are summarized in Table 2 as follows:

3. Methodology and approach

3.1. Data filtering and quality check

To ensure the calculation of precise and reliable key performance indicators for assessing the performance of a PV
system, it is necessary to conduct an initial examination of data quality, synchronization, and data aggregation [22].
Consistent and dependable data can be achieved through the utilization of high-resolution monitoring measurements.
Standard quality checks encompass the identification and exclusion of erroneous observations and the handling of
missing data arising from inaccuracies in measuring sensors [23].
In the existing literature, there is currently no standardized method for data processing, and the choice of
technique typically depends on the volume of records that need to be filled and the extent of data gaps. To address
this, it is recommended to identify incorrect data entries, establish reasonable thresholds, and perform statistical
checks to detect anomalies [24]. When dealing with high-resolution data (such as minute or hourly measurements),
data interpolation is a viable approach. However, for larger data gaps or lower-resolution data (such as daily or
weekly measurements), alternative methods yield better outcomes [25]. Additionally, if other measured parameters
are available (e.g., satellite-based irradiance measurements), statistical or machine-learning models can also be
employed for data processing [26].
326
S. Elhamaoui, A. Benazzouz, A. Elamim et al. Energy Reports 9 (2023) 322–339

Table 3. IEC 61724 standard filters.

Variable Max. value Min. value
Plan of array irradiance (W/m2 ) 1500 20
Ambient temperature (◦ C) 50 −30
Wind speed (m/s) 32 0

In the present study, two distinct techniques are employed to eliminate erroneous data from the system. Firstly, the
PVWatts model, developed by NREL, is utilized as an irradiance-to-power model to forecast the power generation
of the PV systems [22,27]. By comparing the model’s predictions with the actual power output, any abnormal data
points within the system, such as inverter power clipping, can be identified. Furthermore, guidelines outlined in
part three of the standard IEC 61724 [23] offers recommendations for implementing initial minimum filters for
high-resolution monitoring. The most significant guidelines are summarized in Table 3: (see Fig. 6)
The implementation of the PVwatts model is integrated into the pvlib-python library, which utilizes the plane
of array irradiance and cell temperature to calculate the DC output through a specific equation as the following
Eq. (1) [28]:
GT I
PDC = ∗ PST C ∗ (1 + γ ∗ (Tcell − 25)) (1)
1000
where: GTI is the irradiance on the plane of array (in W/m2 )
PST C is the nominal power of the system in the standard test conditions
γ is the temperature coefficient of the panel found in the datasheet (in %/◦ C)
Tcell is the cell temperature of the panel calculated using Eqs. (2) & (3) [29]

Tm = Ta + GT I ex p (a + b ∗ Ws ) (2)
EPOA
Tcell = Tm + ∗ ∆T (3)
1000

With: Tm the back-surface temperature of the module (in ◦ C)

Ta the ambient temperature (in ◦ C)
Ws the wind speed in (m/s)

While a, b and ∆T are constants depending on the panel material and construction found in [29,30] (see Fig. 4)
(see Table 4).

Table 4. Empirically determined module temperature model parameters.

Module type Mount a b ∆T
Glass/cell/glass Open rack −3.47 −0.0594 3
Glass/cell/glass Close roof mount −2.98 −0.0471 1
Glass/cell/Polymer sheet Open rack −3.56 −0.0750 3
Glass/cell/Polymer sheet Insulated back −2.81 −0.0455 0
Polymer/thin-film/steel (*) Open rack −3.58 −0.113 3
22 X Linear concentrator Tracker −3.23 −0.130 13

Fig. 5 demonstrates the modeled (PVwatts) and measured output power compared to global tilted irradiance in
a clear sky (a) and cloudy day (b), while (c&d) show the correlation between output power and irradiance before
and after the filter application, the R2 of raw data is very low (62.5%) while it increases after data cleaning (98.2%)
which is very suitable for any evaluation to be made on the data.
The data was filtered for several anomalous occurrences such as data loss, and inverter failure [Apr. to May. 2021],
energy management system inverter clipping, maintenance, meteorological station calibration and maintenance [Nov.
2019–Mar. 2020], and the results of the filtering are given in Table 5:
327
S. Elhamaoui, A. Benazzouz, A. Elamim et al. Energy Reports 9 (2023) 322–339

Fig. 4. Daily average modeled & measured module temperature vs. Ambient temperature.

Fig. 5. Measured vs. calculated power in (a) Sunny day and (b) Cloudy day; (c) Correlation between GTI and measured power before
filtering (d) Correlation between GTI and measured power after filtering.

3.2. Performance analysis indicators

To evaluate the performance of a grid-connected PV system, multiple approaches can be utilized, such as
the guidelines outlined in PVPS Task 13 (International Energy Agency’s Photovoltaic Power Systems) [8], and
considering the parameters outlined in IEC Standard 61 724 [23] These guidelines and parameters emphasize the
crucial factors for evaluating the performance of grid-connected PV plants. Additionally, software simulations can
be utilized for the purpose of designing the system and predicting its performance [31]. In this study, the following
key performance indicators (KPIs) were utilized for performance assessment:
328
S. Elhamaoui, A. Benazzouz, A. Elamim et al. Energy Reports 9 (2023) 322–339

Table 5. Data availability before and after filtering for the studied period.
Year Data availability (%)
Jan. Feb. Mar. Apr. May. Jun. Jul. Aug. Sep. Oct. Nov. Dec.
Before 98.52 93.60 79.56 64.86 55.64 13.75 86.15 86.02 95.13 94.62 96.38 95.96
2018.
After 92.02 92.55 71.63 54.44 47.31 1.80 68.01 59.81 25.55 28.36 80.41 77.41
Before 89.65 89.43 70.29 59.68 80.64 76.25 42.47 56.45 1.05 36.29 81.80 65.68
2019.
After 83.87 85.71 43.01 57.63 70.96 49.86 30.24 4.56 Nan 5.64 Nan Nan
Before 26.07 30.31 87.50 13.05 94.48 92.63 42.74 73.79 82.91 87.63 74.30 81.58
2020.
After Nan Nan Nan Nan 94.48 88.19 40.72 63.03 80.27 86.42 66.83 70.96
Before 70.16 54.61 95.69 94.72 96.37 88.61 95.83 77.41 92.36 94.08 85.27 94.22
2021
After 63.70 44.19 67.87 Nan Nan 19.16 Nan 54.83 64.02 82.66 61.94 84.00

• Energy Power Output

Daily, monthly, and annual energy production can be determined by summing PV system outputs. It is calculated
using the following Eq. (4) [31]:
i
∑
Ed = Eh (kWh) (4)
1
• System Yields
The system’s yield measurements depict the actual performance of the system in relation to its rated capacity.
The reference yield (YR ) represents the total solar energy received on the array plane at the standard test conditions
(STC) reference irradiance, and it also indicates the duration of daily operation [32]. It can be determined using
Eq. (5) :
GT I kWh
YR = ( ) (5)
GT I ST C kWp
The array yield, denoted as YA , is calculated by dividing the direct current (DC) energy output from the PV
array over a specific timeframe by the rated power of the PV system. This measurement indicates the duration in
hours during which the PV array operates at its maximum capacity [33]. The array yield is determined using Eq. (6)
below:
E DC kWh
YA = ( ) (6)
PST C kWp
• Performance ratio (PR)
The influence of different losses on the system’s rated output is quantified by the solar PV performance ratio
(PR). It evaluates how well a PV system works in actual use, making it possible to compare systems regardless of
elements like location, tilt degree, orientation, and nominal power capacity [34]. The formula is given as Eq. (7):
YA
PR = (%) (7)
YR
• Capture losses (LC )
All energy losses that take place during the conversion of DC energy produced by the array into usable AC
energy are referred to as energy losses in the system (Lc). These losses are the result of factors like conduction
losses, inefficient inverters, and losses in passive circuit components [35]. Eq. (8) below represents the calculation
formula:
kWh
L c = YR − YA ( ) (8)
kWp
• Module Efficiency (Eff)
Module efficiency measures the conversion of module area received irradiance into usable electricity [35]
E DC
Ef f = (%) (9)
Y R ∗ Ar ea
329
S. Elhamaoui, A. Benazzouz, A. Elamim et al. Energy Reports 9 (2023) 322–339

Table 6. Monthly performance ratio (%) [2018–2021].

Year Performance ratio (%)
Jan. Feb. Mar. Apr. May. Jun. Jul. Aug. Sep. Oct. Nov. Dec.
2018. 89.10 88.39 88.95 87.14 83.25 78.14 80.88 80.87 79.95 82.18 83.68 88.67
2019. 88.47 86.96 83.74 85.06 75.26 78.25 72.59 81.57 Nan 85.53 Nan Nan
2020. Nan Nan Nan Nan 80.94 76.27 73.40 80.09 81.72 84.49 85.45 85.61
2021 84.78 82.99 80.62 Nan Nan 70.68 Nan 68.17 69.96 69.60 75.28 76.80

• Degradation rate (RD )

Three primary statistical methods, namely Linear Regression (LR), Classical Seasonal Decomposition (CSD),
and Auto-Regressive Integrated Moving Average (ARIMA), are commonly employed in the literature to estimate
the degradation rate. These methods utilize various performance data obtained from outdoor measurements and
simulation scenarios [10,36]
For the LR method, the equation used for the calculation of the degradation rate RD (%/year) is the following:
β − Y (t) 12 %
RD = × ( ) (10)
β N year
With: Y (t) = αt + β are the regression line parameters.

4. Results and discussions

4.1. Array and reference yield

The analysis of monthly Array yield was conducted over a span of 48 months and is depicted in Fig. 7. The
findings reveal that the maximum daily value of the reference yield ranges from 4.95 kWh/kWp to 8.35 kWh/kWp,
as reported in May 2018, with an average value of 5.78 kWh/kWp. In terms of the highest achievable daily array
yield, the computed value indicates approximately 7.36 kWh/kWp, observed in March 2018. It is observed that
the PV system demonstrates effective operation during months with moderate temperatures, predominantly in the
spring season (see Fig. 7).

4.2. Performance ratio

Fig. 8 depicts the Performance Ratio (PR), which serves as an indicator of the relative efficiency of each
technology. The PR exhibits variations throughout the studied period, ranging from a maximum of 89.10% in
January 2018 to a minimum of 68.17% in August 2021. Over the course of the study, the average PR value shows a
declining trend, decreasing from 89.1% in January 2018 to 76.8% in December 2021. This decline can be attributed
to both system degradation and infrequent cleaning practices. Notably, the highest PR values are observed during
the winter months, likely influenced by the average module temperature. Conversely, lower PR values are observed
during dry and hot periods characterized by elevated temperatures and increased soiling rates. According to the study
conducted by Zitouni et al. [37] in the same location, performance ratio losses due to soiling can reach −6%/day.
Abraim et al. [38] concluded that in the study location, energy losses due to soiling can reach 4.8% monthly. The
notable decrease in the Performance Ratio (PR) from March to June 2021 can be attributed to the failure of the
inverter. This malfunction resulted in the system being exposed to the outdoor environment in an open circuit state
for a duration exceeding two months. Consequently, the performance of the modules was significantly impacted.
When considering the remaining timeframe of the study, it is evident that the degradation line’s slope has also
experienced a substantial decline. As a result, the system’s overall performance decreased by approximately 20%.
The observed degradation is a consequence of photo-degradation resulting from prolonged exposure to open-circuit
conditions in outdoor environments. Similar patterns have been documented by previous studies [15,39], and it
demonstrates that thin-film modules that are remained open-circuit undergo a significant degradation ranging from
21% to 35% (see Table 6).
The daily PR calculated in relation to the highest ambient temperature is graphed in Fig. 9 to evaluate the
temperature’s influence. Despite the CIS modules having a lower temperature coefficient (−0.31%/K), it has been
observed that the system’s PR decreases by 0.25%/◦ C with increasing temperature.
330
S. Elhamaoui, A. Benazzouz, A. Elamim et al. Energy Reports 9 (2023) 322–339

Fig. 6. Flow chart of the methodology followed in the filtering process.

331
S. Elhamaoui, A. Benazzouz, A. Elamim et al. Energy Reports 9 (2023) 322–339

Fig. 7. Max. daily Array & Reference yield kWh/kWp (2018–2021).

Fig. 8. Monthly performance ratio (%) [2018–2021].

Fig. 9. Effect of temperature on performance ratio.

332
S. Elhamaoui, A. Benazzouz, A. Elamim et al. Energy Reports 9 (2023) 322–339

Fig. 10. Monthly module efficiency (%) [2018–2021].

4.3. Module efficiency

Fig. 10 displays the module efficiency of the CIS system, calculated using Eq. (9), which represents the efficiency
of converting received irradiance energy on the module surface into electrical energy. The nominal efficiency of the
modules is approximately 11.8% under STC conditions. Throughout the study period, the average monthly estimated
module efficiency ranges from a maximum of 11.27% in December 2018 to a minimum of 8.15% in August 2021.
The average module efficiency follows the same declining trend observed in the performance ratio (PR) over the
study period, attributed to system degradation and infrequent cleaning cycles, as previously mentioned.

4.4. Degradation rate analysis

The decline in system performance of the CIS modules during the studied period is evident in Fig. 8. Specifically,
between January 2018 and March 2021, there is a degradation rate of 1.35% per year. However, considering the
entire studied period and accounting for the significant degradation resulting from exposure to open circuit operation,
the degradation rate, computed using Eq. (10), is found to be 3.13% per year. It should be noted that the LR technique
is more accurate than CSD when dealing with data gaps, as CSD is less tolerant in this regard (see Table 7).

Table 7. Degradation rate of the system (%/year).

Technique LR CSD
Period 1 Period 2 Period 1 Period 2
A −0.0009464 −0.002234 −0.0016 −0.001975
B 0.839 0.854 0.852 0.855
RD(%/Year) 1.35 3.13 2.29 2.76
* Period 1: Jan 2018–Mar 2021; *Period 2: Jan 2018–Dec 2021.

Several research studies have been carried out to assess the degradation rate of thin-film (CI(G)S) modules in
different climates and locations. It is worth noting that the PV modules used in this study were integrated into a
grid-connected system, whereas other studies focused on individual module exposure. The degradation rate obtained
in this study appears to be higher compared to those reported in the literature for different climates. However, it is
consistent with a similar study conducted in a semi-arid climate in Algeria, which reported a degradation rate of
−2.34% per year. Table 8 provides a summary of the findings from various studies available in literature:
333
S. Elhamaoui, A. Benazzouz, A. Elamim et al. Energy Reports 9 (2023) 322–339

Table 8. Degradation rate studies reported in the literature for thin film modules CI(G)S.
Location Climate Installed Module Monitored Degradation Reference
capacity type period rate
Morocco Semi-arid 10.44 kWp CIS 4 years −3.13 %/year Present study
Spain Continental 80 Wp CIS 5 years −1.07 %/year [40]
Algeria Semi-arid 150 Wp CIS 3 years −2.34 %/year [16]
Spain Mediterranean continental 120 Wp CIGS 6 years −1.00 %/year [41]
Thailand Tropical – CIGS 4 years −1.70 %/year [42]
Singapore Tropical 70 Wp CIGS 3years −6.00 %/year [43]

4.5. Experimental results

To further evaluate the obtained results from the historical data, the electrical characteristics of the system
and individual module samples were analyzed using outdoor I–V curve measurements. The PVPM1040CX I–V
curve tracer was utilized in this investigation to assess the system under real test conditions (RTC). Upon visual
inspection of the modules, observable defects included micro-cracks, delamination, and discoloration of the EVA
(encapsulant). Mechanical stress and inadequate manual cleaning were identified as the primary causes of micro-
cracks. Delamination, on the other hand, resulted from the high temperature and humidity conditions at the site,
leading to the formation of bubbles between the EVA encapsulant and the solar cell. The I–V measurements were
conducted outdoors, and the modules were cleaned prior to the test to minimize the impact of soiling on the system.
In order to conduct measurements under different irradiance and temperature conditions, the IV tracer adjusts
the recorded values to standard test conditions (STC) for comparative analysis. The I–V tracer employs conversion
equations following the guidelines outlined in the IEC-60891 standards [44], and regular sensor calibration is
conducted to ensure accurate measurements. To mitigate the impact of irradiance and temperature fluctuations on
STC conversions, measurements are taken during peak hour irradiance (12 am) under optimal clear sky conditions.
The maximum uncertainty in measurements ranges from ±3% to ±5% for module temperature and irradiance,
respectively. Prior to measurement, the modules are cleaned to minimize the influence of soiling on the electrical
parameters of the system. Each measurement is replicated three times to account for sensor inaccuracies.
The initial measurements are performed on the entire system to assess its performance relative to the historical
data obtained under real test conditions (RTC). These measurements are taken in September 2022, after six years of
exposure, with an irradiance of 922 W/m2 and a module temperature of 50.6 ◦ C. The results, presented in Table 9
and depicted in Fig. 12, are adjusted to STC according to the IEC-60891 standards. They reveal a substantial decline
in power output, reaching approximately −21.9%. The degradation of the modules is particularly evident in terms
of Isc (short-circuit current) and Impp (maximum power point current), which decreased by −19.6% and −18.5%
respectively. Furthermore, the system output voltage (Voc) experienced a decline of −3.4%, while Vmpp (maximum
power point voltage) decreased by −4.7% (see Fig. 11).

Table 9. 10 kWp CIS system PVPM1040CX I–V curve measurement results.

Variable Measured Corrected (STC) Nominal Deviation
Peak power (Wp) 6802.3 8150.1 10 440 −21.9%
Current at maximum power point - Impp (A) 10.82 11.73 14.40 −18.5%
Current at maximum short circuit - Isc (A) 13.05 14.15 17.60 −19.6%
Voltage at maximum power point - Vmpp (V) 628.8 694.7 729.0 −4.7%
Voltage at maximum open circuit – Voc (V) 846.4 930.6 963.0 −3.4%
Fill factor - FF (%) 0.616 0.619 0.627 −0.6%

According to the literature [45], the modules are susceptible to various external factors that contribute to
their degradation. These factors include hot spots, delamination, ribbon discoloration, glass breakage, encapsulant
discoloration, cell breakage, and potential-induced degradation (PID). A previous study conducted at the Green
Energy Park (Study site) [11], which examined the same CIS modules but after three years of exposure, revealed
degradation and performance deterioration. In fact, 40% of the examined modules exhibited severe micro-cracks as
334
S. Elhamaoui, A. Benazzouz, A. Elamim et al. Energy Reports 9 (2023) 322–339

Fig. 11. Outdoor PVPM1040CX I–V curve measurement for system electrical parameters.

Fig. 12. 10 kWp CIS system PVPM1040CX I–V curve measurement.

observed in electroluminescence (EL) images. Considering the results presented in Table 9, it is evident that the
modules have been significantly impacted by harsh environmental conditions.
The decline and deterioration in performance can have various effects on module characteristics and can be
attributed to multiple external factors such as elevated temperatures, accumulation of dirt, humidity levels, wind
speed, and exposure to UV rays, among others [45]. Three module samples were analyzed to assess the degradation
at the module level, as detailed in Table 10. The results indicate a range of power decline from −8.1% to −18.1%,
resulting in mismatching among the series modules within the system. The degradation is particularly pronounced in
Vmpp, with a decrease of −13.6%, and Isc, with a decrease of −16.4%, primarily attributed to prolonged exposure
to open-circuit conditions and the presence of microcracks mentioned earlier (see Fig. 13).

5. Conclusion

In This study focuses on evaluating the performance and degradation of a 10 kWp grid-connected CIS PV system
that underwent long-term outdoor exposure in the semi-arid climate of Benguerir, Morocco, from 2018 to 2021. A
comprehensive methodology was implemented to assess the system’s performance after 6 years of operation, which
involved filtering and quality checking of the monitored data using the statistical model provided by the National
Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) PVWatts and following the guidelines outlined in the IEC-61724 standard.
The study’s main findings are as follows:
335
S. Elhamaoui, A. Benazzouz, A. Elamim et al. Energy Reports 9 (2023) 322–339

Table 10. Individual module samples I–V curve measurement results.

Variable Nominal Module 1 Module 2 Module 3
Measured Deviation Measured Deviation Measured Deviation
Peak power (Wp) 145.0 125.5 −13.4% 133.3 −8.1% 118.4 −18.1%
Impp (A) 1.80 1.78 −1.3% 1.62 −9.7% 1.69 −6.0%
Isc (A) 2.20 2.02 −8.3% 1.84 −16.4% 1.98 −10.1%
Vmpp (V) 81.0 70.7 −12.8% 71.3 −12.0% 70.0 −13.6%
Voc (V) 107.0 97.8 −8.6% 108.8 1.7% 98.5 −8.0%
FF (%) 0.62 0.64 3.5% 0.67 8.1% 0.61 −2.3%
Rs () 22.0 12.8 −41.7% 11.7 −46.6% 18.8 −14.5%
Rp () 1056 3097 193.4% 3591 240.4% 2580 144.4%
* Measured values in this table refer to the STC corrected values.

• Initially, the system demonstrates its highest performance during the winter and spring seasons, achieving a
peak performance ratio (PR) of 89.1%. Conversely, it exhibits its poorest performance during the dry and
summer seasons, with a PR of 68% primarily attributed to elevated levels of soiling.
• The highest recorded array yield is approximately 7.36 kWh/kWp, observed during the spring season. This
favorable outcome can be attributed to the optimal combination of irradiance and temperature conditions
characteristic of that time of year.
• The degradation rate of the system was determined utilizing the linear regression (LR) method. The results
indicate a substantial decline in system output power after 6 years of exposure.
• The LR technique estimates the degradation rate at 1.35%/year following 6 years of outdoor operation.
However, this figure was later revised to 3.13%/year due to module deterioration caused by extended periods
of open-circuit conditions.
• I–V measurements were conducted under real test conditions (RTC) at both the system and module levels, al-
lowing for a comparison with historical data. The findings reveal a reduction in power output by approximately
21.6%.
• Notably, the degradation in the I–V characteristics was particularly evident in the current values, which
experienced a decline of approximately 19%. This degradation can be attributed to observed delamination
and microcracks present in the inspected modules.

Finally, the outcomes of this investigation hold significant value as they offer valuable insights into the
performance and deterioration of thin-film CIS technology within the semi-arid climate of Morocco. Given the
challenging environmental conditions characterized by elevated temperatures and substantial soiling rates in this
region, it is crucial to prioritize regular cleaning practices. This maintenance measure plays a pivotal role in
enhancing module longevity and mitigating the adverse effects of prolonged open-circuit exposure, which can arise
from inverter malfunctions or during initial project installation phases.

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

The data that has been used is confidential.

Acknowledgments

This work is supported by the Green Energy Park research platform, Morocco (Polytechnic University Mohamed
VI Benguerir/ Research Institute in Solar Energy and New Energies IRESEN).
336
S. Elhamaoui, A. Benazzouz, A. Elamim et al. Energy Reports 9 (2023) 322–339

Fig. 13. Module samples I–V measurement curves.

References
[1] Shafiee S, Topal E, Shafiee S, Topal E. When will fossil fuel reserves be diminished? Energy Policy 2009;37(1):181–9, Accessed: Oct.
27, 2022. [Online]. Available: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:eee:enepol:v:37:y:2009:i:1:p:181-189.
[2] Panwar NL, Kaushik SC, Kothari S. Role of renewable energy sources in environmental protection: A review. Renew Sustain Energy
Rev 2011;15(3):1513–24. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/J.RSER.2010.11.037.
[3] Khalid AM, Mitra I, Warmuth W, Schacht V. Performance ratio – Crucial parameter for grid connected PV plants. Renew Sustain
Energy Rev 2016;65:1139–58. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/J.RSER.2016.07.066.
[4] Tahri F, Tahri A, Oozeki T. Performance evaluation of grid-connected photovoltaic systems based on two photovoltaic module
technologies under tropical climate conditions. Energy Convers Manag 2018;165:244–52. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.enconman.2018.
03.065.
337
S. Elhamaoui, A. Benazzouz, A. Elamim et al. Energy Reports 9 (2023) 322–339

[5] Green MA, Emery K, Hishikawa Y, Warta W, Dunlop ED. Solar cell efficiency tables (version 40). Prog Photovolt, Res Appl
2012;20(5):606–14. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/PIP.2267.
[6] Ennaoui A, Eisele W, Lux-Steiner M, Niesen TP, Karg F. Highly efficient Cu(Ga, In)(S, Se)2 thin film solar cells with zinc-compound
buffer layers. Thin Solid Films 2003;431–432:335–9. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0040-6090(03)00155-X.
[7] Kato T, Wu JL, Hirai Y, Sugimoto H, Bermudez V. Record efficiency for thin-film polycrystalline solar cells up to 22.9% achieved
by Cs-Treated Cu(In, Ga)(Se, S)2. IEEE J Photovolt 2019;9(1):325–30. http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/JPHOTOV.2018.2882206.
[8] Woyte A, Richter M, Moser D, Reich N, Green M, Mau S. Analytical monitoring of grid-connected photovoltaic systems: Good
practices for monitoring and performance analysis: IEA PVPS task 13, subtask 2: Report IEA PVPS T13-03: 2014. 2014, p. 1–90,
no. March.
[9] Lillo-Sánchez L, López-Lara G, Vera-Medina J, Pérez-Aparicio E, Lillo-Bravo I. Degradation analysis of photovoltaic modules after
operating for 22 years. A Case Study with Comparisons. Solar Energy 2021;222:84–94. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.solener.2021.04.026.
[10] Ameur A, Berrada A, Bouaichi A, Loudiyi K. Long-term performance and degradation analysis of different PV modules under temperate
climate. Renew Energy 2022;188:37–51. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2022.02.025.
[11] Bouaichi A, et al. In-situ evaluation of the early PV module degradation of various technologies under harsh climatic conditions: The
case of Morocco. Renew Energy 2019;143:1500–18. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2019.05.091.
[12] Kunaifi K, Reinders A, Lindig S, Jaeger M, Moser D. Operational performance and degradation of PV systems consisting of six
technologies in three climates. Appl Sci (Switzerland) 2020;10(16). http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/APP10165412.
[13] Ramanan P, K KM, Karthick A. Performance analysis and energy metrics of grid-connected photovoltaic systems. Energy Sustain Dev
2019;52:104–15. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.esd.2019.08.001.
[14] Quansah DA, Adaramola MS. Economic assessment of a-Si and CIS thin film solar PV technologies in Ghana. Sustain Energy Technol
Assess 2016;18:164–74. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.seta.2016.10.006.
[15] Carr AJ, Pryor TL. A comparison of the performance of different PV module types in temperate climates. Sol Energy
2004;76(1–3):285–94. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.solener.2003.07.026.
[16] Tahri A, Silvestre S, Tahri F, Benlebna S, Chouder A. Analysis of thin film photovoltaic modules under outdoor long term exposure
in semi-arid climate conditions. Sol Energy 2017;157:587–95. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.solener.2017.08.048.
[17] Renewables global status report - REN21. 2022, https://www.ren21.net/reports/global-status-report/ (accessed Oct. 30, 2022).
[18] Solar energy development in Morocco | Policy Commons. 2022, https://policycommons.net/artifacts/1333058/solar-energy-development-
in-morocco/1937298/ (accessed Oct. 30, 2022).
[19] Bennouna A. The increasingly important role of decentralized solar energy in Morocco. Appl J Environ Eng Sci 2021;7(1):7–71.
http://dx.doi.org/10.48422/IMIST.PRSM/AJEES-V7I1.24354, 18-41, Mar. 2021.
[20] el Alani O, Ghennioui A, Merrouni AA, Ghennioui H, Saint-Drenan YM, Blanc P. Validation of surface solar irradiances estimates
and forecast under clear-sky conditions from the CAMS McClear model in Benguerir, Morocco. In: AIP conf proc, 2126. 2019,
http://dx.doi.org/10.1063/1.5117702.
[21] Product Data sheet SF145-S electrical characteristics electrical performance at standard test conditions (STC).
[22] Lindig S, Louwen A, Moser D, Topic M. Outdoor PV system monitoring—Input data quality, data imputation and filtering approaches.
Energies (Basel) 2020;13(19). http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/en13195099.
[23] IEC 61724-1:2017 | IEC Webstore | rural electrification, solar power, solar panel, photovoltaic, PV, smart city, LVDC. 2022,
https://webstore.iec.ch/publication/33622 (accessed Oct. 25, 2022).
[24] Demirhan H, Renwick Z. Missing value imputation for short to mid-term horizontal solar irradiance data. Appl Energy
2018;225:998–1012. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/J.APENERGY.2018.05.054.
[25] Turrado CC, del M, López CM, Lasheras FS, Gómez BAR, Rollé JLC, de FJ, Juez C. Missing data imputation of solar radiation data
under different atmospheric conditions. Sensors 2014;14:20382–99. http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/S141120382, 14 (11) (2014) 20382–20399.
[26] Yagli GM, Yang D, Gandhi O, Srinivasan D. Can we justify producing univariate machine-learning forecasts with satellite-derived
solar irradiance? Appl Energy 2020;259:114122. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/J.APENERGY.2019.114122.
[27] Abdelmoula IA, Elhamaoui S, Elalani O, Ghennioui A, el Aroussi M. A photovoltaic power prediction approach enhanced by feature
engineering and stacked machine learning model. Energy Rep 2022;8:1288–300. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.egyr.2022.07.082.
[28] Dobos AP. PVWatts version 5 manual. 2014, Accessed: Oct. 25, 2022. [Online]. Available: http://developer.nrel.gov.
[29] Zouine M, et al. Mathematical models calculating pv module temperature using weather data: experimental study. Lecture notes in
electrical engineering, Springer Verlag; 2019, p. 630–9. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-1405-6_72.
[30] King DL, Boyson WE, Kratochvil JA. Photovoltaic array performance model. 2003.
[31] AL-Rasheedi M, Gueymard CA, Al-Khayat M, Ismail A, Lee JA, Al-Duaj H. Performance evaluation of a utility-scale dual-
technology photovoltaic power plant at the Shagaya Renewable Energy Park in Kuwait. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2020;133.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2020.110139.
[32] omar Nour-eddine I, Lahcen B, Fahd OH, Amin B, Aziz O. Outdoor performance analysis of different PV technologies under hot
semi-arid climate. Energy Rep 2020;6:36–48. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/J.EGYR.2020.08.023.
[33] Ozden T, Akinoglu BG, Turan R. Long term outdoor performances of three different on-grid PV arrays in central Anatolia – An
extended analysis. Renew Energy 2017;101:182–95. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2016.08.045.
[34] el Hajjam others N. Comparative study of production of three grid-connected PV systems in two cities of Morocco. In: Proceedings of
2021 9th international renewable and sustainable energy conference, IRSEC 2021. 2021, http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/IRSEC53969.2021.
9741207.
[35] Shiva Kumar B, Sudhakar K. Performance evaluation of 10 MW grid connected solar photovoltaic power plant in India. Energy Rep
2015;1:184–92. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.egyr.2015.10.001.
338
S. Elhamaoui, A. Benazzouz, A. Elamim et al. Energy Reports 9 (2023) 322–339

[36] Ozden T, Akinoglu BG, Turan R. Long term outdoor performances of three different on-grid PV arrays in central Anatolia – An
extended analysis. Renew Energy 2017;101:182–95. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2016.08.045.
[37] Zitouni H, et al. Experimental investigation and modeling of photovoltaic soiling loss as a function of environmental variables: A case
study of semi-arid climate. Sol Energy Mater Sol Cells 2021;221. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/J.SOLMAT.2020.110874.
[38] Abraim M, et al. Techno-economic assessment of soiling losses in CSP and PV solar power plants: A case study for the semi-arid
climate of Morocco. Energy Convers Manag 2022;270:116285. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.enconman.2022.116285.
[39] Ye JY, Reindl T, Aberle AG, Walsh TM. Performance degradation of various PV module technologies in tropical Singapore. IEEE J
Photovolt 2014;4(5):1288–94. http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/JPHOTOV.2014.2338051.
[40] Silvestre S, Kichou S, Guglielminotti L, Nofuentes G, Alonso-Abella M. Degradation analysis of thin film photovoltaic modules under
outdoor long term exposure in spanish continental climate conditions. Sol Energy 2016;139:599–607. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.solener.
2016.10.030.
[41] Solís-Alemán EM, de la Casa J, Romero-Fiances I, Silva JP, Nofuentes G. A study on the degradation rates and the linearity of the
performance decline of various thin film PV technologies. Sol Energy 2019;188:813–24. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.solener.2019.06.067.
[42] Limmanee A, et al. Degradation analysis of photovoltaic modules under tropical climatic conditions and its impacts on LCOE. Renew
Energy 2017;102:199–204. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/J.RENENE.2016.10.052.
[43] Ye JY, Reindl T, Aberle AG, Walsh TM. Performance degradation of various PV module technologies in tropical Singapore. IEEE J
Photovolt 2014;4(5):1288–94. http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/JPHOTOV.2014.2338051.
[44] Iec. Iec IEC 60891: Photovoltaic devices - Procedures for temperature and irradiance corrections to measured I-V characteristics. 2021.
[45] Kim J, Rabelo M, Padi SP, Yousuf H, Cho EC, Yi J. A review of the degradation of photovoltaic modules for life expectancy. Energies
2021;14(14). http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/en14144278, MDPI AG.

339