alectris solarplaza solar om na event presentation
DESCRIPTION
asasasTRANSCRIPT
v.1-09.03.2014-G
Improving Solar Plant Performance
Turning Under-Performing Solar Plants Into Revenue Stars
Overview
Overview of the presentation:
i. Classification of Solar PV Plants
ii. Selection of KPIs
iii. Methodology
iv. ACTIS Management Platform
v. Case Study
CLASSIFICATION OF
SOLAR PV PLANTS
i
iClassification
i. Good or Adequately Performing
ii. Clearly Distressed
iii. Apparently Good Performing
Classification of Solar PV Plants
iClassification
Good Performing Plants:
Good Performing Plants are the ones that perform according to or
above the Owners’ expectations. Such expected energy output is
calculated on the basis of average scenarios and by no means does it
provide the maximum achievable performance.
Improvement through:
More efficient response and shorter resolution times
Predictive maintenance
Cure of systemic faults
Technical improvements also in case of faults due to external
factors (e.g. grid fluctuations)
iClassification
Clearly Distressed Plants:
Clearly Distressed Plants perform below the Owners’ expectations
and in some cases may lead to a default if such underperformance is
not remedied. Such situations are encountered in cases where serious
faults exist in engineering, construction and maintenance, especially
in markets that have imploded.
Improvement through:
Immediate identification and cure of acute problems
First priority is Availability. Performance comes next.
As soon as plants are stabilized, step-by-step approach in
necessary, similar to Good Performing Plants
iClassification
Apparently Good Performing Plants:
Apparently Good Performing Plants are Plants that seem to be
operating in a satisfactory manner, but only because performance
measurements are false or falsified. The underperformance is not so
severe to create cash flow problems, but the room for improvement
is not evident from the current measurements.
Improvement through:
Installation of a reliable monitoring system to understand actual
status
Further troubleshooting similar to Good Performing or Clearly
Distressed category
SELECTION OF KPIs
ii
Selection of KPIs
iiKPI Selection
i. Number of Incidents Handled
ii. Performance Ratio
iii. Availability
iv. Uptime
v. Lost Energy
METHODOLOGY
iii
Improvement Effort Chart
iiiMethodology
The closer to the optimum, the more effort is
required to increase further performance and/or sustain it at high levels.
iiiMethodology
Step 1
• Documentation Review
• Historical Data
• Very quick and low to zero cost
Step 2
• First Level technical survey
• Low level measurements on site
• Quick but some cost involved
Step 3
• Second Level technical survey
• In-depth measurements by skilled personnel
• Slower process, costs involved
First Phase – Clearly Underperforming
iiiMethodology
Step 1
• Installation of reliable monitoring system
• Installation and/or replacement of additional sensors
Step 2• Collection and analysis of telemetry data
• Discovery of “hidden” issues
Step 3
• Drafting of action plants with priorities
• Calculation of cost & benefit
• Implementation and monitoring of progress
Second Phase – Apparently Good Performing
iiiMethodology
Third Phase – Continuous Improvement
• Medium to long term process
• Gathering information and data from DAS (Data Acquisition System) but also day-to-day activities and observations
• Statistical evaluation of data (usually on yearly basis)
• Action plan and prioritization based on impact of (set of) failures
ACTIS MANAGEMENT
PLATFORM
iv
iiiACTIS Platform
? What is the difference between a Monitoring System and a
Management Platform?
Management Platform
Monitoring System
Measurements
Device Log Files
Connectivity/Comms
Security System
Alerts
Activity Information
Incidents
Service Activities
Field Checks & Measurements
Incident Impact
As-built/Structured information
Response/Resolution times
Spare Parts handling
Personnel training and evaluation
Service costs
Knowledge base
iiiACTIS Platform
? What is the difference between a Monitoring System and a
Management Platform?
A Monitoring System passively captures the outcome
BUT
A Management Platform actively helps manage efforts to improve the outcome
iiiACTIS Platform
With ACTIS
• Activities are correlated to the outcome
• A holistic view on the plant operation is achieved by storing all relevant information in one structured database
• Full activity history is stored helping to understand the possible root causes of failures
• Optimization potentially is easily identified and quantified leading to informed decisions
• Helps create transparency and trust between Owner and O&M Provider
iiiACTIS Platform
ACTIS Screenshots
CASE STUDY
v
Plant Identity
iiiCase Study
Size: 1 MWpLocation: Puglia, ItalyType: Ground, fixedInverters: EEI 250Panels: ECW 240
Situation
iiiCase Study
1. Plants constructed in extreme time pressure
2. EPC Contractor had limited or no experience in solar PV
3. Poorly planned and/or executed preventive maintenance
4. Delayed intervention, security breaches, sloppy planning & execution of corrective maintenance
5. O&M neglected their activities and obligations due to financial difficulties
• High costs of continuous interventions
• Low PR (<66%)• Low Uptime(<93%)• Low IRR
Process
iiiCase Study
• Disabled strings
• Defective wires
• Insufficient grounding
• Insufficient ventilation system
• Defective MV circuit breakers
• Defective UPS
• Critical events for inverters which
limit/stop their production (e.g. insulation
errors)
• Inverters in very bad shape
• Immediate replacement of
defective string cables
• Isolation of defective strings
• Replacement if defective MC4
connectors
• Replacement of defective
control board at Inverter 3
• Replacement of faulted MPPT
2 at one Inverter.
• Replacement of defective
current sensor at MPPT 3 of
Inverter 2
• Replacement of defective
display at Inverter 4.
• All UPS have been duly fixed
and connected to remote
monitoring.
Availability of 98% reached
Process
iiiCase Study
• Hotspots on 2.6% of the plants’ panels
• Low insulation of 12% backbones
• Differentiations of the operation voltage between
inverters’ strings.
• Inverters shutdown due to over temperature in
cabins
• Inverters’ plants showed values of efficiency not
always within the manufacturer’s guaranteed
values and this was mainly due to the
sensitiveness to grid oscillations.
• Current feeder protectors malfunctions
• Mounting system damaged
• ....
• Insulation fixing
• Cabins ventilation re-engineering
• Low Voc at strings fixing and plants
rearrangement
• Low Voc at strings fixing and plants
rearrangement
• Replacement of feeder protectors
• Repairing of mounting structure
• Calibration of Energy Meters and
pyranometers
• …..
PR of >82% reached
Process
iiiCase Study
• Dramatic decrease of intervention times• Identification of tendencies of failures before they actually
occur• Prioritization of intervention (biggest impact comes first)• Discovered hidden problems with:
o UPS batterieso Transformer over temperatureso Underperforming stringso Panel mismatch
• Series of minor improvements that make a big difference cumulatively
Process
iiiCase Study
Already planned:
• Replacement of modules affected by hot-spots
• Installation of an accurate string monitoring system in order achieve even better and more proactive identification and resolution of issues
• Implementation of new technologies to increase performance even above the average expected for good operating plants
Further actions:
• Statistical analysis of repetitive failures and targeted interventions
• Predictive maintenance
Outcome
iiiCase Study
0
5.000
10.000
15.000
20.000
25.000
30.000
35.000
Lost Energy in kWh per Month
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
Number of Plant Failures per Month
Significant decrease of Plant failure frequency
Impressive decrease of lost energy through failures
Outcome
iiiCase Study
• Yield increase: + 38% • Optimized returns: payback time of 2 months • Further plans (implementation of the further actions) : +3-7% PR
60%
65%
70%
75%
80%
85%
90%
95%
100%
Apr 13 May 13 Jun 13 Jul 13 Aug 13 Sep 13 Oct 13 Nov 13 Dec 13 Jan 14 Feb 14
Overall Performance Timeline (PR & Uptime combined)
Customer’s Quote
iiiCase Study
“Finally I am glad to say that I found a good and professional O&M contractor. I was
extremely skeptical at the beginning due to a very bad previous experience. Alectris
immediately took steps to improve the production of my PV plans following a rigorous
analysis, and the benefits were notable, significant and durable. We have being
working together for more than a year now and I am completely satisfied.”
Michele Romanin – Jacur, General Manager GRU.CO. S.r.l.
Contact persons:
Cyprus
155 Spyrou Kyprianou Avenue
Ersi Court, Office 201, 3083
Limassol
Greece
Industrial Area
of Thessaloniki
57022 Sindos
Italy
Via Senato 20
20121 Milano
USA
1200 Brickell Avenue
Suite 1800
Miami, FL 33131
Cinzia Maga [email protected]
Country Manager – Italy Mobile: +39-339-2585880
Marco Lopez [email protected]
Sales Manager – US & LATAM Mobile: +1 (650) 296 8782
Direct: +1 (650) 492 5202
Vassilis Papaeconomou [email protected]
Managing Director Mobile: +30-6944-464679
Direct: +30-2311-998698
For further info, please visit alectris.com
Cyprus
155 Spyrou Kyprianou Avenue
Ersi Court, Office 201, 3083
Limassol
Greece
Industrial Area
of Thessaloniki
57022 Sindos
Italy
Via Senato 20
20121 Milano
USA
1200 Brickell Avenue
Suite 1800
Miami, FL 33131
Thank You!