a low cost bipv approach for mass market...roof potential vs. activity consumption a low cost bipv...

© C

ourts

yof

Sun

Pow

erC

orp.

A LOW COST BIPV APPROACH FOR MASS MARKETValérick CASSAGNE – TOTAL - New Energies

1

10

100

1 000

10 000

100 000World yearly market (MWp)

World PV Market

Green, humanist,

exploratory era

Financial opportunistic era

Energy era

PV MARKET PERIODS AND EVOLUTION

A low cost BIPV approach for mass market - 06/2016

From 50’s space application

2

PHOTOVOLTAIC IN/ON BUILDINGS

BxPV

Agriculture

Residential collective

CommercialWarehouse

Residential individualIndustry

Public building

Sources: Sunpower, Tenesol

Offices

A low cost BIPV approach for mass market - 06/2016 3

BIPV DEFINITION


●BAPV : Building Added PhotoVoltaic over imposed

●BIPV : Building Integrated PhotoVoltaic 2 functions : energy generation + construction functionality

PV integrated in the construction project

BIP2V : Building Integrated Project PhotoVoltaic

BIP2V – COUNTER EXAMPLE


Green Office Rueil (France)Bouygues Immobilieroffice building, 6 floors, 52 kWh/m2

2000m2 floors, 600 kWp PV + cogen104% consumption covered

PROJECT INTEGRATION


●Project management●Design●Construction

BIP2V is economically motivated

• Costs• Performances

LCOE

LCOE: Levelized Cost of Electricity

PERFORMANCES


ROOF POTENTIAL VS. ACTIVITY CONSUMPTION


Consumption kWh/m2/yrData Center 3000-7000Industry 100-1000Supermarket 400-800Cold Warehouse 200-400Office* 60-300Hospital* 80-100Residential* 30-100School * 25-35Sport hall 15-35Farm 1-100Warehouse 3-30* multi-floors

0 1000 kWh/m2/yr500 kWh/m2/yr

PV production kWh/m2/yrGermany 100-230France 130-315Italy - Spain 160-360

250 kWh/m2/yr

Sources: Total, Ademe

CONSUMPTION OPTIMIZATION

74 kWp PV + 383 kWh battery

65 kWp PV + 266 kWh battery

Source: Total, Sunhive

-20% CAPEX

Service station in Nigeria


Energy Efficiency

ORIENTATION

Roof first

European location


COSTS


PROJECT INTEGRATION


Costs savings

●Co-engineering- Performances optimization- Sizing optimization- Standard elements- Simplified installation design

●Co-construction- Material functionality saving- Construction sharing

SIZING PV OPTIMIZATION


●Sizing criteria- Surface- Power- Costs- Architecture- Communication- Regulation- Economy

Customer objectives• Internal Return Rate (IRR)• Net Present Value (NPV)• Payback time (PBT)• …

SELFCONSUMPTION SCHEME


0

50

100

150

200

250

0:00 3:00 6:00 9:00 12:00 15:00 18:00 21:00 0:00

Power (W

) Saturday Winter 01/11‐20/03Sunday Winter 01/11‐20/03Weekday Winter 01/11‐20/03Saturday Summer 15/05‐14/09Sunday Summer 15/05‐14/09Weekday Summer 15/05‐14/09Saturday Interseason 21/03‐14/05 and 15/09‐31/10Sunday Interseason 21/03‐14/05 and 15/09‐31/10Weekday Interseason 21/03‐14/05 and 15/09‐31/10

Ex: Commercial Germany

Pow

er (a

.u.)

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5

Ratio

(%)

PV power (kWp/MWhcons)

Selfconsumption / Consumption residential

Selfconsumption / PV production residential

Selfconsumption / Consumption Commercial

Selfconsumption / PV production Commercial

ECONOMY VS SIZE


0%

2%

4%

6%

8%

10%

12%

14%

0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800

IRR 100%

equ

ity (%

)

PV power (kWp)

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

‐ €

200 000 €

400 000 €

600 000 €

800 000 €

1 000 000 €

1 200 000 €

1 400 000 €

1 600 000 €

1 800 000 €

2 000 000 €

0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800

Pay ba

ck time (years)

NPV

0@0(€)

PV power (kWp)

[email protected]%PBT

Examples:• commercial building 1 floor 3000 m2 600 kWh/m2

• office building 6 floors x 500 m2 100 kWh/m2

Based in Munich Germany

EX: PV TERTIARY BUILDING


0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

‐ €

200 000 €

400 000 €

600 000 €

800 000 €

1 000 000 €

1 200 000 €

1 400 000 €

1 600 000 €

1 800 000 €

2 000 000 €

0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800

Pay ba

ck time (years)

NPV

0@0(€)

PV power (kWp)

[email protected]%PBT0%

2%

4%

6%

8%

10%

12%

14%

0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800

IRR 100%

equ

ity (%

)

PV power (kWp)

520 kWp520 kWp

SouthOptimizedangle East-West5-10°

290 kWp290 kWp

PV module efficiency: 20%

17% energy

coverage

27% energy

coverage

East-West5-10°

RIGHT EXAMPLE


Source: Wilmotte & Associés

Green Office Rueil (France)Bouygues Immobilieroffice building, 6 floors, 22 kWh/m2

35 000m2 floors, 2700 m2 PV100% consumption covered


Orientation

Easy cabling

Not equipment shadow

Energy efficiency

Construction equipment sharing

Structure adaptation

Optimized sizing

Integrated financing

Dedicated roof surface

Standard PV modules

Roof first

Construction coordination

Over structure

CONCLUSION


BIP2V●Strong integration of PV in the building project:

design, construction

●Performances: energy generation●Costs

- Co-design: sizing, performances, easy installation- Co-construction: coordination, costs sharing- Finances IRR > 10%

PBT < 10 yearsNPV0 ~4000€/m2

Consump coverage > 25%

BACK-UP


IN A NUTSHELL

A low cost BIPV approach for mass market - 06/2016

● Revenue : 189.5 B€● Net income : 10.7 B€● Organic investment 21.3 B€● R&D : 7.1 B$ over 4 years● Operating in 130 countries● 98 800 employees

● 5th ranked international oil and gas company

● Active in photovoltaics since 1983

58%

● Revenue : 2.5 B$● Net income : 41.7 M€● 1 GW/yr capacity● 5 000 employees

● 22.8% modules efficiency

22

Economics

OPTIMIZATION

Expenses• Initial investment: PV system (modules, BOS, installation, engineering, administration and margins)• Replacement of inverters• Maintenance cost• Taxes• Inflation• Interest on loans or negative treasury

Incomes• Feed-in-Tariff• Self-consumption/net metering : savings• Tax credit• Tax delays


0%

100%

200%

300%

400%

500%

600%

R+0 R+1 R+2 R+3 R+4 R+5 R+6 R+7

Yearlyen

ergy

need

coverin

g(%) Energy need cover ‐ Comparaisn nb of levels

Building. 30 000m 2 65 kWh/m 2/yr Paris area. Roof coverage 80% PV

Module multi ‐Si Std 15%

Module HJ Si 18%

Module adv. Si 21%

ROOF UTILISATION

Roof : efficient, available …. But may be not enoughA low cost BIPV approach for mass market - 06/2016 24

ROOF UTILISATION

+6%

+4%

+1 m = +6% surf.

Overlap

Other surfaces: facade, sun shade, shades

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

120%

70% 75% 80% 85% 90% 95% 100% 105% 110%

Yearlyen

ergy

need

coverin

g(%)

PV cover ratio

Energy need coverage ‐ Roof coverage ratioBuilding. 30 000m2 R+6 65 kWhpe/m2/yr Paris area

Module multi‐Si Std 15%

Module HJ Si 18%

Module adv. Si 21%


a low cost bipv approach for mass market...roof potential vs. activity consumption a low cost bipv...

Documents