Loading…

Energy matrices evaluation and exergoeconomic analysis of series connected N partially covered (glass to glass PV module) concentrated-photovoltaic thermal collector: At constant flow rate mode

•Fluid, other than water has been chosen for achieving higher outlet temperature.•Mass flow rate and number of collector have been optimized.•Three PVT systems have been compared for evaluating annual energy and exergy.•Life cycle cost analysis has been evaluated to obtain exergetic cost.•Proposed P...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Energy conversion and management 2017-08, Vol.145, p.353-370
Main Authors: Tripathi, Rohit, Tiwari, G.N., Dwivedi, V.K.
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:•Fluid, other than water has been chosen for achieving higher outlet temperature.•Mass flow rate and number of collector have been optimized.•Three PVT systems have been compared for evaluating annual energy and exergy.•Life cycle cost analysis has been evaluated to obtain exergetic cost.•Proposed PVT systems have been compared on the basis of energy matrices. In present analysis, a comparative study has been carried out to evaluate the annual performances of three systems or cases at constant flow rate, namely: case (i): partially covered (25% PV module) N concentrated photovoltaic thermal collectors connected in series, case (ii): fully covered (100% PV module) N concentrated photovoltaic thermal collectors in series and case (iii): N (0% PV module) convectional compound parabolic concentrator collector connected in series. Comparison for three cases has also been carried out by considering fluid namely: ethylene glycol for higher outlet temperature and better thermal performance which can be applicable for heating and steaming or small industry purpose. The embodied energy, energy matrices, uniform annual cost, exergetic cost and carbon credits are also evaluated for same systems. The energy payback time is found to be 5.58years and energy production factor is to be 0.17 on energy basis for case (iii) which is maximum. The exergetic cost has computed as 17.85Rs/kWh for 30years of life time of the system. It is observed that N conventional compound parabolic concentrator collector [case (iii)] is most suitable for steam cooking or space heating but not self-sustainable to run the dc power motor due to unavailability of electrical power.
ISSN:0196-8904
1879-2227
DOI:10.1016/j.enconman.2017.05.012