Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
1
A CRITICAL ASSESSMENT OF BUILDING INTEGRATED PHOTOVOLTAICS (BIPV)
TECHNOLOGIES
By
ARNON KHANTAWANG
A THESIS PRESENTED TO THE GRADUATE SCHOOL
OF THE UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT
OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF
MASTER OF SCIENCE IN CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT
UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA
2020
2
© 2020 Arnon Khantawang
3
To my parents, and to every teacher who has taught me to be the person I am today
4
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
History will remind us time after time that we learn from our mistake and our experience,
and these experiences can be transferred to the new generation.
History will also remind us that there is no such thing as great work without great
support; this thesis would not be done without all the wonderful support I have received.
In particular, to my advisor, Dr. Charles Kibert, I want to say thank you for his
knowledge, expertise, experience and ultimately, his encouragement and belief in me. Since the
time I sat in front of your office to talk about why I wanted to pursue my master’s degree, you
have become my inspiration. Thank you for helping me in every step of the way to complete this
thesis.
Also, this project could not be completed without my other two committee members, Dr.
Ravi Srinivasan and Dr. Robert Ries. Thank you for all the lessons throughout my college career.
And ultimately, this project could not be done without the constant support from my
parents, who have supported everything I have done in my life.
5
TABLE OF CONTENTS
page
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ...............................................................................................................4
LIST OF TABLES ...........................................................................................................................7
LIST OF FIGURES .........................................................................................................................8
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS ........................................................................................................10
ABSTRACT ...................................................................................................................................11
CHAPTER
1 INTRODUCTION ..................................................................................................................13
Aims and Objectives ...............................................................................................................14 Objectives ...............................................................................................................................14
2 LITERATURE REVIEW .......................................................................................................15
Photovoltaic Technology ........................................................................................................18 Monocrystalline Solar Panel............................................................................................19 Polycrystalline Solar Panel ..............................................................................................19 Thin Film Solar Cell ........................................................................................................20
Building – Integrated Photovoltaic .........................................................................................22 BIPV Tile Product ...........................................................................................................25 BIPV Foil Product ...........................................................................................................25 BIPV Module Product .....................................................................................................26 BIPV Solar Glazing .........................................................................................................26
Differences between BIPV and BAPV ...................................................................................27 Design of BIPV .......................................................................................................................27 BIPV’s Barriers in Current Market .........................................................................................29 PV Trends ...............................................................................................................................33
3 METHODOLOGY .................................................................................................................35
Efficiency ................................................................................................................................36 Cost per Watt ..........................................................................................................................37 Durability ................................................................................................................................38 Maintenance and Repair Procedure ........................................................................................38 Optimal Orientation ................................................................................................................39 Constructability .......................................................................................................................39
4 RESULTS ...............................................................................................................................41
6
Efficiency ................................................................................................................................41 Tesla’s Solar Roof V3 .....................................................................................................41 Onyx’s Solar Glass ..........................................................................................................41 Sunpower’s E Series Solar Panel ....................................................................................42 LG’s 365 Q1C .................................................................................................................42
Cost per Watt ..........................................................................................................................43 Tesla’s Solar Roof V3 .....................................................................................................43 Onyx’s Solar Glass ..........................................................................................................44 Sunpower’s E Series Solar Panel ....................................................................................44 LG’s 365 Q1C .................................................................................................................45
Durability ................................................................................................................................46 Tesla’s Solar Roof V3 .....................................................................................................46 Onyx’s Solar Glass ..........................................................................................................47 Sunpower’s E Series Solar Panel ....................................................................................47 LG’s 365 Q1C .................................................................................................................47
Maintenance and Repair Procedure ........................................................................................47 Optimal Orientation ................................................................................................................49 Constructability .......................................................................................................................50
Onyx’s Amorphous Silicon Solar Glass ..........................................................................51 Sunpower’s E Series Solar Panel ....................................................................................51 LG’s 365 Q1C .................................................................................................................52
Analysis ..................................................................................................................................53
5 CONCLUSIONS ....................................................................................................................57
LIST OF REFERENCES ...............................................................................................................60
BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH .........................................................................................................65
7
LIST OF TABLES
Table page
2-1 Positive and negatives aspects of different solar panel types ............................................21
2-2 General differences between BAPV and BIPV .................................................................27
4-1 Selected BIPV and BAPV products’ solar cell efficiency and fill factor ..........................43
4-2 Selected BIPV and BAPV products’ cost per Watt ...........................................................45
4-3 Selected BIPV and BAPV products’ cost included the cost of the roof ............................46
4-4 Comparison of two representative Building Integrated Photovoltaic (BIPV) and two
representative Building Applied Photovoltaic (BAPV) systems based on six criteria ......56
8
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure page
2-1 U.S. primary energy consumption by energy source, 2019 ...............................................16
2-2 Public support on energy resources in 2016 and public support on energy resources
in 2019 ...............................................................................................................................17
2-3 U.S. energy consumption by source and sector 2019 ........................................................17
2-4 Best research cell efficiencies 2020 ...................................................................................22
2-5 European harmonized standard for Curtain wall and Glass in the building ......................24
2-6 Building Integrated Photovoltaic System Classification ...................................................26
2-7 Schematic view of grid-connected BIPV system...............................................................28
2-8 Schematic view of stand-alone BIPV system ....................................................................29
2-9 Overview of support scheme of each countries’ government ............................................31
3-1 Solar cell efficiency (𝜂) ....................................................................................................37
3-2 Fill Factor ...........................................................................................................................37
3-3 Cost per watt ......................................................................................................................37
4-1 Tesla’s solar roof version 3’s Fill Factor ...........................................................................41
4-2 Tesla’s solar roof version 3’s solar cell efficacy ...............................................................41
4-3 Onyx’s solar glass’s Fill Factor .........................................................................................42
4-4 Onyx’s solar glass’s solar cell efficacy ..............................................................................42
4-5 Sunpower’s X series panel’s Fill Factor ............................................................................42
4-6 Sunpower’s X series panel’s solar cell efficacy ................................................................42
4-7 LG’s 365 Q1C’s Fill Factor ...............................................................................................43
4-8 LG’s 365 Q1C’s solar cell efficacy ...................................................................................43
4-9 Tesla’s solar roof V3’s Cost per Watt................................................................................44
4-10 Onyx solar glass’s Cost per Watt .......................................................................................44
9
4-11 Sunpower’s E series solar panel’s Cost per Watt ..............................................................45
4-12 LG’s 365 Q1C’s Cost per Watt ..........................................................................................45
4-13 Operation and maintenance cost in dollar/kW/year of BIPV and BAPV ..........................48
4-14 Efficiency of PV system based on facing direction and tile angle ....................................49
4-15 Decision methodology for BIPV vs BAPV .......................................................................55
10
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS
a-Si Amorphous Silicon
BAPV
BIPV
Building Applied Photovoltaics
Building Integrated Photovoltaics
CdTe Cadmium Telluride
CIGS Copper Indium Gallium Selenide
IPCC Intergovernmental panel on Climate change
Mono c-Si Mono-crystalline silicon
OPV Organic Photovoltaics
Poly c-Si Poly-crystalline silicon
PV
Photovoltaics
11
Abstract of Thesis Presented to the Graduate School
of the University of Florida in Partial Fulfillment of the
Requirements for the Degree of Master of Science in Construction Management
A CRITICAL ASSESSMENT OF BUILDING INTEGRATED PHOTOVOLTAICS (BIPV)
TECHNOLOGIES
By
Arnon Khantawang
August 2020
Chair: Charles Kibert
Major: Construction Management
The term “renewable energy” has been around in our society for a while. In that time,
many innovations and technologies have been invented in order to harness renewable energy.
One of the most promising renewable energy resources is solar energy, harnessing the power
from the sun, and technology such as photovoltaics system has been invented to harness that
power. Conventional photovoltaics has continued to grow, as the technology becomes more
affordable, and more efficient. Recently, a new photovoltaic technology, building integrated
photovoltaic technology, has emerged. The technology has served its dual function as both
building skin and energy generator and answered one of conventional photovoltaics’
imperfections, the aesthetic of the system. Nonetheless, conventional photovoltaics still have an
upper hand in term of efficiency and affordability.
In this thesis, two of the photovoltaics systems, building integrated photovoltaic
technology and conventional photovoltaics, or building applied photovoltaic, are critically
compared for their constructability, efficiency, durability, maintenance and repairing procedures;
cost per Watt; and optimal orientation, respectively, in order to form a better understanding of
12
the technologies and creating a framework for evaluating Building Integrated Photovoltaics
(BIPV) as an alternative solution in building application.
13
CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION
Only a small handful of people would not recognize solar power technology among the
wide range of renewable energy technologies which are currently available in the market. The
device which is able to convert solar radiation and generate electricity is photovoltaic, essentially
turning the user into the producer. Solar energy has been the golden child of renewable energy
for a quite some time, which has led to constant growth in its technology and its popularity. With
the looming threat of climate change and energy crisis, more people have been looking to
implement renewable energy into both existing and new constructions, and solar power solution,
in particular photovoltaic, usually is the answer.
As mentioned above, solar power and photovoltaic has become more prominent, which
results in constant development of the technology, increasing its efficiency and decreasing the
cost. But in the recent years, an emerging photovoltaic system has entered the solar energy
market. Building integrated photovoltaic has been introduced. The technology has combined the
energy generator ability of photovoltaic and structural aspects of envelope of buildings.
Essentially, building integrated photovoltaic technology would replace parts of the conventional
building materials and components, such as the roof tiles, windows and facades, with energy
conversion components (Jelle, B., 2015). The building integrated photovoltaic technology is
considered a functional part of the building structure, which is different when compared to the
conventional photovoltaic, the system for which is only mounted on the existing structure. With
the introduction of building integrated photovoltaic to the solar power market, the conventional
photovoltaic can be classified as building applied photovoltaic. For purposes of this thesis,
conventional photovoltaic will be referred as such throughout.
14
Aims and Objectives
The building integrated photovoltaic technology has brought a unique set of qualities and
opportunities to the construction industry such as on-site renewable energy generation, energy
autonomy, and material multi-functionality (Attoye, D et al., 2018). However, despite its
promising start, the technology has not yet succeeded at larger scale compared to its counterpart,
conventional photovoltaic or building applied photovoltaic, as building applied photovoltaic still
have an edge over the building integrated photovoltaic in term of efficacy and initial cost. This
thesis focuses on determining whether implementing a traditional system such as building
applied photovoltaic or advanced building integrated photovoltaic technology, is the better
system for the building to be installed, by critically comparing both systems in term of
constructability, efficiency, durability, maintenance and repairing procedures., cost per Watt and
optimal orientation.
Objectives
• To explore the options of photovoltaic technology in building application, building
integrated photovoltaic technology and building applied photovoltaic.
• To analyze both photovoltaic systems by critically comparing the newer technology of
building integrated photovoltaic to the traditional technology of building applied
photovoltaic
• To create a framework for evaluating BIPV as an alternative solution in building
application
15
CHAPTER 2
LITERATURE REVIEW
From the start of the industrial revolution to the present day, our society has achieved
incredible milestones as humanity. One of the critical components of the success of the
industrialized revolution is fossil fuel energy and the technologies which are associated with its
usage. Nevertheless, the growth of fossil fuel energy has become a double-edged sword, its
success has brought such costs as the rise of CO2 emission and eventually climate change. In
fact, research suggests that over 60 % of industrial CO2 emission can be traced back to a small
number of major industrial CO2 producers, oil, coal, and naturals gas producers or primarily
fossil fuel energy producers (B. Ekwurzel et al., 2017). With that knowledge, one of the efficient
ways of reducing the CO2 emission would be decreasing the usage of fossil fuel energy and
eventually transitioning away from that type of energy. This is where renewable energy would be
one of the solutions in order to combat climate change.
Renewable energy is the source of energy that would continue to replenish itself
compared to fossil fuel energy, which is substantially limited. Renewable energy can come in
various sources, such as wind, ocean tide, biomass, geothermal and solar resources (Mohtasham,
J., 2015). Even though, solar energy technically is not renewable, but in the point of view of
humanity, the resource is virtually unlimited. These resources and technologies to harness their
power already exist and are integrated as a part of the energy sources in every sector of our
society. However, as shown in Figure 2-1 “U.S Primary energy consumption by energy source”,
petroleum, coal and natural gas are still the primary energy sources. In one of biggest
industrialized nations such as the United States, only 11 % of the whole renewable energy source
was accounted for as being a source of energy for the country. Also, as shown in Figure 2-3,
“U.S energy consumption by sources and sector,” every end-use sector has shown that renewable
16
energy resources are already part of the energy usage. However, the number has shown that
renewable energy resources accounted for less than 10 % of each of the end-use sectors: the
transportation sector, commercial sector, residential sector, and the industrial sector. It is
fortunate that in the past few years, the public has continued to express its approval of renewable
energy over the fossil fuel energy, as shown by research from Pew Research Center (Funk, C., &
Hefferon, M., 2019), which has found that the public continues to be in favor of renewable
energy sources and less favor in mining coal and fracking. This can be seen as a positive sign
that the public continues to view renewable energy as the potential norm and the solution for
society.
Figure 2-1. U.S. primary energy consumption by energy source, 2019 (sources: U.S Energy
Information administration)
17
Figure 2-2. Public support on energy resources in 2016 (left) and public support on energy
resources in 2019 (right) (sources: Pew Research Center)
Figure 2-3. U.S. energy consumption by source and sector 2019 (sources: U.S Energy
Information administration)
18
Photovoltaic Technology
The development of renewable energy has grown exponentially in recent years. Many of
those renewable energy technologies have become one of the mainstream technologies in some
industries (Hussain, A et al., 2017). One of the most prominent and the most popular source of
renewable energy, solar energy, and photovoltaic technology are the main focus of this thesis.
Photovoltaic technology, or PV technology, is named after an effect that describes a process of
converting light to electricity or converting photon into a voltage called Photovoltaic effect
(NERL, 2019). The effect references how a photon of light is able to excite the electrons and turn
it into a higher state of energy when electrons are in this state. They would then be able to act as
charge carriers for electricity (Bhatia, S. C., 2017). Today, PV technology uses this knowledge of
the effect to generate power using the solar modules, the module which contains a solar cell
made from photovoltaic materials. The usage of PV technology has affected all of the sectors in
all industries.
In the transportation sector, the usage of PV solar modules has been associated with
space. One of the examples would be PV panels, which are part of the most significant human-
made satellite, the international space station (Garcia, M., 2017). Other than the use of PV in
space, there is an increasing number of developments in terms of supplementary energy for cars
and ships. Research indicates that solar energy, as the primary source of energy, has not been
much studied. However, researchers suggest that in theory, while installing on-board
photovoltaic to cover only half of an average-size electric car, up to 50 % of the total daily miles
traveled by a person in the U.S. could be driven due to what the on-board photovoltaic generates
(Abdelhamid, M. et al., 2015).
In terms of large-scale solar energy, the utility sector has the highest cumulative number
of solar installations in the US. PV solar farms and solar power plants have been a crucial part of
19
the energy generator, which would feed in the electricity to the grid for quite some time, and the
utility companies have been continuing to construct these facilities (Duke Energy, 2020).
The residential and commercial sectors are those where solar energy has its highest
cumulative share of solar installation in the US, in terms of distributed solar energy by sector.
Moreover, when the public thinks about the photovoltaic system, these two sectors are usually
associated with it. For the usage of the photovoltaic system in these sectors, a conventional
photovoltaic system such as Building Applied Photovoltaics (BAPV) and the BIPV are the main
applications (Tripathy, M et al., 2016).
In the current market, the primary type of photovoltaic panel can be categorized into the
following three different types: Monocrystalline solar panel, Polycrystalline solar panel, and
Thin Film Solar cell.
Monocrystalline Solar Panel
Monocrystalline solar panel, or single crystalline or mono c-Si cell solar panels, are the
most common type of solar panel in the whole PV market (Cerón, I et al., 2013). The
monocrystalline solar panel can be recognized by its dark look and rounded edge, and the cell of
the solar panels are made of silicon wafer. In terms of efficiency rate, Monocrystalline solar
panel has the highest efficiency rate, in the current market of 2020. Monocrystalline solar panels’
average efficiency rate is 20 %. While Monocrystalline solar panel could generate a high
electrical output and trend to be more durable because of its resistance to high heat, this type of
panels would come with a higher cost (Nayak, P. K. et al., 2019).
Polycrystalline Solar Panel
Polycrystalline solar panel, or poly c-Si, can be recognized by being a lighter blue than its
Monocrystalline solar panel counterpart. Polycrystalline solar panel cells also are made of
silicon, but while Monocrystalline solar cell is made of one single silicon, a Polycrystalline solar
20
panel, as the name suggests, are made of multiple silicon types, as those silicones were melted
together to create Polycrystalline solar panel cells. Because of its process, Polycrystalline solar
panel cells take less time in order to manufacture, and the cost of the solar panel would be much
less than Monocrystalline solar panels. Even though the energy output of Polycrystalline solar
panel and Monocrystalline solar panel are generally the same, Polycrystalline solar panels’
average efficiency rate is 15 % (Nayak, P. K. et al., 2019).
Thin Film Solar Cell
Monocrystalline solar panels and polycrystalline solar panels are considered to be the
first-generation PV technique, and the third type of photovoltaic panel, thin film solar cell, is
considered to be the second-generation PV technique. Generally, thin film solar cells can be
made from three different type of materials, two of which are different from both
Monocrystalline solar panel and Polycrystalline solar panel’s materials, and one of which is
made from amorphous silicon, which is similar to the material of the Monocrystalline and
Polycrystalline solar panel. The thickness of the “thin film” is only 1 micrometer (1 x 10-6). The
advantages of thin film solar cells are that they are light weight, flexible, and can be seen as more
aesthetically pleasing, but the disadvantage of this solar cell compared to the other two solar
panel types is its low 10 % efficiency rate.
Thin film solar cells also can be differentiated into three types based on its solar cell
materials, Amorphous silicon thin film solar panels, Cadmium telluride thin film solar panels and
lastly Copper indium gallium selenide thin film solar panels.
In amorphous silicon, or a – Si thin film solar panels, though the material was made from
silicon compositions which is similar to the materials of both Monocrystalline and
Polycrystalline solar panel, the panels are not manufactured of the whole silicon wafer. Instead,
it is made of non-crystalline silicon which would put on top of glass or metal.
21
The second type is Cadmium telluride, or CdTe thin film solar panels. In terms of thin
film panel, this type of the panel is the most common of the three. The panel is made from
placing layer of Cadmium telluride in between layers of transparent conductors.
The third type is Copper indium gallium selenide, or CIGS thin film solar panels. This
type of panel would lay each of the four elements which made up the name of the panels in
between two layers of contactors such as glass or steel (Nayak, P. K. et al., 2019).
Table 2-1. Positive and negatives aspects of different solar panel types
Solar Panel Type Pros Cons Efficiency
Monocrystalline
solar panel
• Highest
efficiency rate
• Durable
• Resistance to high
heat
• High Cost 20 %
Polycrystalline solar
panel
• Lower cost than
Mono c-Si
• Same energy
output as Mono c-
Si
• Lower
Efficiency rate
than Mono c-Si
15 %
Thin Film Solar cell
• Light weight,
flexible
• Aesthetically
pleasing
• Lowest
Efficiency rate
10 %
In terms of development of PV systems, over time the efficiency of solar cells continues
to increase. In 1954, Bell Telephone Laboratories produced a silicon solar cell with the
efficiency of 4 % (Fraas, L. M., 2014). Four percent of solar cell efficiency would be a small
value compared to what scientists can accomplish in 2020, as National Renewable Energy
Laboratory just broke another record for solar cell efficiency by achieving 47.1 % efficiency
with its six-junction solar cell (NREL, 2020). Even though 47.1 % efficiency of six-junction
solar cell can only be achieved in the laboratory, this shows the undeniable growth of the
technology. In the case of crystalline solar cells, a study has shown that in the past 10 years, the
22
average increase of the solar cell efficiency is around 0.4 % per year (Vartiainen, E. et al., 2019).
With the average efficiency of crystalline solar cell in 2018 being 17.2 %, at this rate of
development, by 2050 the average efficiency of crystalline solar cells would reach 30 %.
Figure 2-4. Best research cell efficiencies 2020 (sources: National Renewable Energy
Laboratory)
Building – Integrated Photovoltaic
From the beginning, the idea of building Integrated Photovoltaics seemed to be the result
of the combination of progression and simplification of the traditional Photovoltaic. If the
traditional Photovoltaics principle was built based on the continuation of seeking a more efficient
way to improve the technology, then building Integrated Photovoltaics would be a branch that
grew out of the traditional Photovoltaics to answer the question of the efficiency of the
technology.
This thesis must have a well-defined definition of building Integrated Photovoltaics. The
deep understanding of the definition of building Integrated Photovoltaics can act as a strong
23
foundation for the research. In the article, “A Conceptual Framework for a Building Integrated
Photovoltaics,” the authors have summed the definition of Building Integrated Photovoltaics as
the use of photovoltaic (PV) devices to replace conventional building components of the building
envelope, such as the roof, skylights or facades (D. Attoye et al., 2018). Meanwhile in the article,
“Building Integrated Photovoltaics: A Concise Description of the Current State of the Art and
Possible Research Pathways,” the author has described the technology in term of the whole
system as Building Integrated Photovoltaics system is where solar cells are integrated within the
climate envelopes of buildings and utilizing solar radiation to produce electricity (B. Petter Jelle,
2015). Additionally, in the journal article, “Overcoming technical barriers and risks in the
application of building-integrated photovoltaics (BIPV): Hardware and software strategies,” a
author has summed the definition of BIPV perfectly as a smart energy production system that
incorporates solar PV panels as part of the roof, windows, facades, and shading devices (Yang.
R.J, 2015). Also, the author defines that for PV technology to be considered as BIPV, the PV
needs to be able to perform one or more of these criteria: mechanical rigidity, and structural
integrity, primary weather impact protection including rain, snow, wind, hail, energy economy,
such as shading, daylighting, thermal insulation, fire protection and noise protection (Yang. R.J,
2015).
These definitions of BIPV from these authors are just a few examples of how the
experts in the industry would define the term building-integrated photovoltaics or BIPV. It is
quite clear that the industry as the whole is on the same page in regard to the question of what
constitutes building-integrated photovoltaics.
With the clarity of the definition of BIPV, the role of BIPV in the building is seen as
more than just a solar energy generator. BIPV system is the envelope of the building structure as
24
well. With that being said, BIPV technology needs to be able to comply with both PV system in
the building and also the building structure’s code and standard. For example, figure 2-5,
“European harmonized standard,” shows the product standard for curtain walls, and glass in
building. This standard can serve as a guideline for building construction regulation of BIPV
technology (Osseweijer, F. J, et al., 2018).
Figure 2-5. European harmonized standard for Curtain wall and Glass in the building (sources:
European harmonized standard)
In terms of testing standards of BIPV, prior to 2019, in order to meet the standards, the
BIPV product needed to be tested and evaluated by multiple standards such as, UL1703,
Standard for Flat-Plate Photovoltaic Modules and Panels; UL790, Standard for Standard Test
Methods for Fire Tests of Roof Coverings; and UL1897 or ASTM D3161, Standard for Uplift
Tests for Roof Covering Systems. The introduction of UL7103, Outline of Investigation for
Building-Integrated Photovoltaic Roof Coverings, has made the it much simpler to comply with
the standard (UL, 2019).
Even though the whole industry generally has been on the same page in terms of the
definition of the technology of BIPV, classification of the technology which is in the current
25
market would be crucial in this thesis as well. In this thesis, generally, the BIPV system can be
categorized into three different ways: Photovoltaic technology, Application type, and market
names (Biyik E. et al., 2017). In each of the categories, there are subcategories. Photovoltaic
technology can be separated into silicon-based technology and non-silicon-based technology.
Application types can be separated into two generic types, roof-mounted, and façade mounted.
At the same time, both roof and façade mounted can be further described in more specific
categories by location of the system, skylight system, shingles, and atria system for roof-
mounted system or curtain wall; and shading system for façade mounted counterpart. The third
way to describe the BIPV system would be its market names and its subcategories can be
separated into four different types: BIPV foils product, BIPV tiles product, BIPV modules
product, and BIPV solar cell glazing.
BIPV Tile Product
Building-integrated Photovoltaics tiles product is the subcategories of BIPV products for
which its module resembles and can act as the roof tiles for the whole roof or only a certain area
of the roof of the building. BIPV tiles product is considered to be one of the easiest BIPV
products in terms of retrofitting the old roof into the BIPV roof (Shukla, A., & Sharma, A.,
2018).
BIPV Foil Product
Building integrated Photovoltaics foil product is known for its lightweight and its
flexibility because of the product’s solar cell is usually made of thin film cell. The product also
able to maintain efficiency even with the high temperatures for use on nonventilated roof
(Shukla, A., & Sharma, A., 2018).
26
BIPV Module Product
Building integrated Photovoltaics modules product’s look can be deceiving and confused
with traditional PV modules. But the difference between the advanced BIPV product and the
traditional PV modules is that BIPV modules product is made with weather skin solutions
(Shukla, A., & Sharma, A., 2018).
BIPV Solar Glazing
Building integrated Photovoltaics solar glazing products are the type of BIPV products
which have a large amount in its variety, ranging from windows, glassed facades and tiles
facades. The products can be manufactured into a variety of colors and transparency. And as a
type of BIPV, the product will be able to be used as sun and weather protection. The product
solar cell cane be adjusted to increase or decrease the distance between cells when the product
was manufactured in order to diffuse sunlight, creating shading (Shukla, A., & Sharma, A.,
2018). Classification of BIPV system can be shown in the figure 2-6 below.
Figure 2-6. Building Integrated Photovoltaic System Classification
27
BAPV is the way to apply Photovoltaics as a solution into the existing construction, such
as fitting the PV modules into the existing surface, compared to replacing the envelope of the
building for PV in the case of BIPV system. Essentially BAPV is considered to be a categorized
as a conventional or traditional PV product mounting on the surface of the building rather than
an actual BIPV (Heinstein, P. et al.,2013).
Differences between BIPV and BAPV
As mentioned in the previous section, while both of the systems are capable of generating
energy from solar power, the differences between the two systems lie in how each of the systems
is implemented into the building. While the BIPV system is implemented as an envelope of the
building, acting as the barrier and protection of the building such as windows or roofs would do,
the BAPV system does not have the direct effect to the building structure, since the system is
implemented by mounting on the existing structure of the building (Kumar, N. M. et al, 2019).
Additional differences are highlighted in the table below.
Table 2-2. General differences between BAPV and BIPV
BAPV BIPV
Common in the global PV market Still essentially in the niche market of PV
In the recent year, the system efficiency has
been increased and the cost has been
decreased.
New technologies still are still under the
development phase, and price is not as low as
other PV product.
Durable, can last 25 to 30 years In case of a-Si BIPV, the product could only
last around 10 years
Easy to install, building structure does not
need to be overhauled.
Installing BIPV in the existing structure
would mean “remodeling”
Appearance could be unattractive Blend in as the part of the structure
Placement option could be only the roof or
ground mounted.
Potentially could replace any envelope part of
the building structure
Design of BIPV
In regard to the installation of BIPV system, the technology can choose to be either on-
grid or off-grid. The majority of the installed BIPV system will be connected to the electrical
28
grid, essentially using the grid as the backup power storage. In this type of BIPV system,
inverters need to be in place and comply with the electrical grid the system is connected to
(Kumar, N. M. et al., 2019). A schematic view of grid-connected BIPV system can be seen in
figure 2-7.
Off-grid BIPV system or stand-alone BIPV system is different from the its counterpart,
on-grid system, with the addition of energy storage; since the system needs to fulfil the energy
usage of the building by itself, the size of the system must be calculated to meet the peak demand
of the building to sustain itself (Strong, S., 2016). A schematic view of grid-connected BIPV
system can be seen in figure 2-8.
Figure 2-7. Schematic view of grid-connected BIPV system
29
Figure 2-8. Schematic view of stand-alone BIPV system
BIPV’s Barriers in Current Market
In recent years, both BAPV and BIPV have continued to grow respectively. It has to be
noted that while BAPV has been able to experience enormous results and growth, BIPV is still
considered to be in its beginning phase of development. In terms of its place in the current PV
market, it is still be considered in their niche market (Curtius, 2019). For BIPV technology to
establish its place firmly in the industry, the developers and personnel have to be able to pinpoint
the barriers and develop to surpass those barriers which hamper the spreading of the BIPV
technology to the broader market. With research, the barriers can be determined and separated
into three different barriers: public perception barrier, institutional barrier, and lastly, technical
and product barrier.
First, there is the public perception barrier. To a certain degree, consumers control
the market of the product. If the consumer or the public believes that BIPV technology is not the
solution, the industry development of the BIPV will continue to be delayed, along with its
30
success in the market. A statement can be made that the public perception of BIPV technology
comes from the full public acceptance of renewable energy in general. Such is the case of the
United States, where political climate does play a significant role in terms of public acceptance
of renewable energy and, ultimately, PV and BIPV. Even though the trend of the United States'
population acceptance of renewable energy is continuing toward the positive side, some are in
favor of harvesting older energy sources such as fossil fuel and mining coal. A Pew Research
Center study (Funk, C., & Hefferon, M., 2019)has found that the public continues to be in favor
of renewable energy sources and less in favor of mining coal and fracking, which can be seen as
a positive signs that the public continues to view renewable energy as the potential norm and
solution for society. To continue this growth, it is up to the United States government to try to
close the gap of the knowledge in terms of the subject
The second barrier is institutional. Even though the initial growth of the photovoltaic
system in the market can be linked as the result of Feed-in tariff policies, in recent years, there
are only a handful of nations that would offer a Feed-in tariff, which would be specific to BIPV
system (IEA PVPS, 2019). In figure 2-9, a report from the International Energy Agency, Austria,
China, Spain, and Switzerland are the only four countries that have the incentive policy for the
BIPV system. The governments respectively would allow the Photovoltaics system owners to be
able to use their power, which they generated on-site; therefore, the Feed-in tariff would not be
as effective in the application of BIPV system.
31
Figure 2-9. Overview of support scheme of each countries’ government (sources: International
energy agency)
Another institutional barrier is building code and standards. To install the BIPV system in
the building, building permits need to be filed and obtained, but with the inclusion of the BIPV
system in the building, the permits could be more challenging to obtain. In the case of a specific
area, where the government would like to keep its original character, the product, such as the
BIPV module product on the curtain wall or façade, would be challenging to be implemented in
the building. Lastly, in order to understand the technical feasibility of BIPV, the technical and
product barrier needs to be extensively explored. For the product side of the barrier, building
integrated Photovoltaics does have the edge over its counterpart, Building Applied Photovoltaics,
in term of its aesthetics, results that in part of the building being more appealing in look than the
add-on parts of the building.
Moreover, ultimately the BIPV system would be able to generate power and income.
However, those positive sides of BIPV would come with two major downsides and barriers.
32
First, when compared to the traditional PV or BAPV system, the initial cost of the system is still
higher than its counterparts. In terms of the building contractor, the contractor could provide the
owner with several different prices for the project, one with the BIPV system as part of the
building and one without the BIPV system. The cost could play a significant role for the owner
to accept the plan without the BIPV system. At the same time, the owner could see that in the
BIPV system there is a secondary benefit to the building; for example in the case of BIPV tiles
and shingles products, the owner could spend the cost of the BIPV system in other areas such as
upgrading their kitchen instead of investing in BIPV products.
The second barrier in terms of the product would be the installation of BIPV into the
building; the decision is most likely reserved for the new construction and a major renovation
project. It would be seen as non-sustainable for the owner to replace functional windows for
BIPV glass windows. Even when the owner decides to replace certain parts of the building in
favor of the BIPV system, the question will come as to finding the right manufacturers who
would able to fabricate the right size of the BIPV product to become a part of the building.
This barrier of the product would lead to the first technical side of the barrier: variety,
and BIPV customization. Since the BIPV system is still in its niche market, the fully customized
product would be difficult to find or would be too expensive for the long-term investment of the
BIPV system (Bonomo, P. et al., 2015). The second technical barrier and one of the most
common barriers is the power loss of BIPV. It has to be noted that power loss issues can occur in
all PV systems, but in some areas, it would affect the efficiency of BIPV even more. Power
losses in the BIPV and PV system, in general, can go from particle pollution in the atmosphere to
shading (Azadian, F., & Radzi, M., 2013). Also, it has been known that a large body of clouds in
the sky has the potential to impact severely the efficiency of the system. A study has shown that
33
partial shading could decrease the effectiveness of the BIPV, resulting in 15 to 20 % of energy
output (Ikedi, Chukwuemeka et al., 2010), and a severe technical malfunction can occur such as
creating a hotspot on the system. A hotspot is the heating effect that would happen when a
specific part of the system has been shaded and clouded, not generating power, and while not
generating power, it would cause power excess in the system. The problem of shading and power
losses would happen in the fixed orientation system. With that principle, the system such as
BIPV, where the cell and modules are acting as the envelope of the building, with windows, and
curtain walls, there would be time during the day or specific times during the year, in which the
BIPV of the building will be at the lowest efficiency. The orientation of the system is crucial.
The third area of the technical barrier would be Islanding. Islanding can be described as a
condition when the BIPV system, which has both loads and distributed resources, would
consistently work while being isolated from the rest of the BIPV system. The problem would
occur when a particular part of the system got disconnected from the primary sources, and the
load would still go through the BIPV supply.
The fourth area of the technical barrier would connect to an essential part of any PV
system, the problem with inverters. One of the common factors to determine inverters’ function
would be using Maximum Power Point Tracking, or MPPT. Even though the efficiency of MPPT
can be determined and measured, because of the core of BIPV, the chance that shading can occur
is high, so the measurement would be difficult to measure.
PV Trends
Solar energy as a whole is an ample resource, available to us at the significant
quality. Mastery of harnessing the power itself would be revolutionary to our society. It is known
that only one hour of solar radiation striking the Earth's surface is far beyond the total energy
34
which the world population would consume in a single year. The reward of mastery of the
resource is alluring. There is no doubt that PV technology will continue to grow.
In terms of economics, BIPV is one of the most exciting PV technology in the market; its
market will get even more significant. In the report from EC&M in 2018, the article has shown
the ten years forecast of BIPV market, from 2018 to 2027, with the accounting of analyzing the
demand for BIPV in 13 different regions of the world, the result showed that by 2023, global
BIPV revenue would reach $5.7 billion and by the end of the ten years forecast, the technology
revenue will reach $11.6 billion. The article also noted that even though much of BIPV
opportunities are still in the non-residential sector, but in terms of rate of the growing residential
BIPV growth is 15 % larger than other sectors. The top nations in terms of BIPV technology will
emerge due to their respective mindset, such as the USA, especially in California, with easing in
the mandatory solar energy generated for residential homes (EC&M, 2018). After the extensive
amount of background research in terms of PV and BIPV, certain factors are clear about the
technology. BIPV technology is an exciting new PV technology in the market, with its
innovation of being a component of a building instead of an addition to a building. But because
of the recent surge in the PV technology market, there are not as many data or information for
people who are interested to invest in the technology compared to the conventional PV system or
BAPV. This thesis has observed the gap between the two PV systems, especially in terms of
knowledge available to consumers. This thesis attempts to offer a guideline for solar energy
consumers to evaluate their decision to choose the newer technology such as BIPV as an
alternate solar solution.
35
CHAPTER 3
METHODOLOGY
The purpose of this thesis is to perform a critical assessment by comparing and
contrasting the newer technology of building integrated photovoltaic (BIPV) to the conventional
technology of building applied photovoltaic (BAPV) in order to create a framework for
evaluating BIPV as an alternative solar energy solution in building application. The more
traditional technology PV or BAPV has been around in the market and has received positive
criticism from the market, as the technology is on the steady incline of growth, perceived as
being out of this world technology to one of the affordable renewable energy sources in the
market. This cannot be said for growth of the newer technology of BIPV. Nevertheless, BIPV
has brought its dual functionality to the solar energy market table. Extensive amount of literature
review has been analyzed for the purpose of this thesis. First, the thesis examined the reasons
why BIPV, BAPV and all PV technology in general is considered for implementation in
construction. Renewable energy as the alternative to the traditional fossil fuel energy is the main
driver of continuation growth of all renewable energy and all PV technology. Second, the
research arrived at a solid grasp of the definition of BIPV and how the technology is different
from the conventional PV or BAPV technology. Third, the research recognized that BIPV has
the potential to be an alternative solution PV system in the building application due to its trend.
But throughout all of the literature review data, there is no framework for evaluating BIPV as an
alternative energy solution in the building application. As mentioned, this thesis attempts to
create a framework to evaluate BIPV by comparing the two PV technologies.
In order to perform an assessment comparing the two photovoltaic technologies, both
BIPV and BAPV products are selected to represent their technology respectively. Four
photovoltaic products chosen for this thesis are:
36
1. Tesla’s Solar roof version 3 (BIPV)
2. Onyx’s Solar glass (BIPV)
3. Sunpower’s E series solar panel (BAPV)
4. LG’s 365Q1C (BAPV)
As mentioned above, BIPV products can be categorized by their functions as the
envelope components of the building. Two of the four chosen products, Tesla’s Solar roof
version 3 and Onyx’s Solar glass were selected based on how they would be integrated into the
building, roof integrated, and windows integrated respectively. The two products will represent
the current products of BIPV technology. The other two products, Sunpower’s X series solar
panel and LG’s 365Q1k, are two of the well-known conventional PV panels in the market
(Matasci, S., & Graziotti, P., 2020). They will represent the current products in the market for
BAPV technology.
The critical assessment between BIPV and BAPV technology will be carried out by
comparing and analyzing the two systems using these six criteria: efficiency, cost per Watt,
constructability, durability, maintenance and repairing procedures; and optimal orientation.
Efficiency
Solar cell efficiency refers to the ratio value which the solar cell could have generated
compared to the total amount of solar energy which falls upon the solar cell. The ratio is
calculated with the standardized testing condition or STC. STC mandates an established
condition for all PV products to be tested in order to be able precisely compared and rated PV
product. The three components of STCs are:
• Solar Irradiance – the value of the total amount of solar energy which fall upon the PV
cell. STC’s Solar Irradiance is set at 1,000 W/m2.
• Temperature of the cell - STC’s temperature of the cell is set at 25 degree Celsius or 77-
degree Fahrenheit.
37
• Mass of the air – The name can be deceptive, but the value is referred to amount of the
sunlight which has to travel pass the Earth atmosphere before the light touch the earth
surface. The STC’s mass of the air is 1.5
Under the three conditions of standardized testing condition, solar cell efficiency can be
calculated with the following formula:
Solar cell efficiency (𝜂) = 𝑉𝑜𝑐𝐼𝑠𝑐 𝐹𝑖𝑙𝑙 𝐹𝑎𝑐𝑡𝑜𝑟
𝑃𝐼𝑛𝑝𝑢𝑡
(3-1)
Solar Cell efficiency is calculated by using the product of open circuit voltage or Voc, short
circuit current or Isc and fill factor, over the power input. As mentioned above, power input for
efficiency calculation is set at 1,000 W/m2 or 1 kW/m2, therefore power input for 10,000 mm2
solar cell would be 10 W.
Fill factor is the result value of maximum power point or the Watt-Peak divide by
product of open circuit voltage and short circuit current.
Fill Factor =𝑃𝑚𝑎𝑥
𝑉𝑜𝑐 𝐼𝑠𝑐
(3-2)
BIPV and BAIV technology will be compared and rated against one another in term of its
efficiency with the perimeter of standardized testing conditions.
Cost per Watt
Cost per Watt of BIPV and BAPV is directly associated with the economic aspect of the
PV market. Cost per Watt of PV systems can be calculated by the initial amount of money for
every watt of solar panel being installed. Calculating Cost per Watt can be straightforward in this
thesis paper, the average cost of selected BIPV and BAPV products over the total Watts would
each of the selected BIPV and BAPV products to be installed.
Cost per watt = 𝐼𝑛𝑖𝑡𝑖𝑎𝑙 𝑐𝑜𝑠𝑡 𝑜𝑓 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑠𝑦𝑠𝑡𝑒𝑚
𝑁𝑢𝑚𝑏𝑒𝑟 𝑜𝑓 𝑤𝑎𝑡𝑡𝑠 𝑐𝑎𝑝𝑎𝑐𝑖𝑡𝑦 𝑜𝑓 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑠𝑦𝑠𝑡𝑒𝑚 (3-3)
38
Durability
Durability of PV technology is based on the long-term performance of PV module. It has
to be noted that every BIPV and BAPV product in the market offers some type of their
respective product warranties. The range of each product’s warranties can be varied due to each
of the product’s company policies. Long-term performance of PV module can be varied.
Performance loss can occur, which is the result from various aspects, such as characteristic and
quality of product materials and the location of PV technology. Environmental factor does play a
crucial role in the long-term performance of PV module as temperature surrounding the system
can cause significant power loss.
Additionally, durability is one a significant challenge for BIPV technology, because
BIPV will act as both envelope of the building and energy generating PV system; the BIPV
system need to meet the code and standard as a PV system and as a building product.
The selected BIPV and BAPV products will be compared in relation to warranties,
characteristic of their materials, and their rating, such as hail rating, fire rating and wind rating
respectively.
Maintenance and Repair Procedure
In order for PV technology to maintain its highest level of efficiency and energy
generating capacity, the right amount of maintenance procedure throughout the lifetime of the
technology needs to be made. With the defections which might have occurred, in general, BIPV
and BAPV maintenance procedures can be relatively easy to do.
Even with the best in class materials, or the best PV technology in the market, defection
can happen. Defection can certainly decrease the PV technology efficiency. Some of these
defects can be discovered by visual inspections, such as change of color on the PV caused by hot
spots, or in term of BIPV, broken tiles and glasses can cause by severe weather or unplanned
39
impact. Some defects cannot be discovered by visual inspections such as defection on
connectors. In order to compare BIPV and BAPV in term of maintenance and repair procedure,
this thesis compares the criteria based on each PV system as a whole, not exclusively based on
the selected four BIPV and BAPV technology.
Optimal Orientation
Orientation of the PV module plays a larger role in terms of PV module efficiency and
total energy generated. Even so, installing the PV system in any open area on the building which
the light can shine on will generally produce some energy, but not at the optimal level of energy
generated. Studies have shown that the optimal orientation for PV system southward and the
optimal tilting is at 30 degrees (Yang, L., Liu, X., & Qian, F., 2019). Certainly, in the BIPV
system, retrofitting the PV system on to the existing building and aiming to have the maximum
energy generated with optimal orientation could be difficult. In product such BIPV glass
windows, optimal tilting at 30 degrees would be impossible if the window frame is perpendicular
to the ground.
In this study, optimal orientation of BIPV and BAPV was compared according to the
location where these selected four BIPV and BAPV technology can be installed.
Constructability
Constructability deals with both design and management aspects. It deals with the project
management systems that optimally uses construction knowledge and experience to enhance
efficient project delivery (Othman, A. A., 2011). In the essence of the constructability of PV
products, constructability would be based on the issues which might happen during the planning
and installation phase of the project. The issue of constructability can occur in both of the PV
systems, BIPV and BAPV technology, but the approach of these PV technologies came in two
different directions. For BIPV technology, retrofitting the system into the existing building could
40
be a challenge due to its nature as the envelope of the building; for example, to install BIPV roof
products, the taking out of a well-functioning roof needs to be executed. Also, the design aspect
of the existing building needs to be compatible with the usage of BIPV. For BAPV, the option of
the location to put the system is limited; mounting on the roof is the only option. If the design of
the roof is not favorable to the sun path, energy production would not be at the maximum
capacity.
BIPV and BAIV technology were compared based on their constructability to the project,
especially in the case of the technology planned to be implemented to the existing building. In
terms of new construction, what needs determining is the complexity in the designing phase for
the technology to be a part of the product delivery. After analyzing the six of the assessment
criteria, this study provides the list of advantages and disadvantages of both BIPV and BAPV
system based on the result of each criteria. The thesis then generates the evaluation decision
methodology to assist solar energy enthusiasts with determining their choice of PV system for
their building.
41
CHAPTER 4
RESULTS
Efficiency
Efficiency of the PV products can be calculated using values from each of the products’
technical attributes. These values will be calculated with standardized testing conditions. These
technical attributes are public from each of the four selected products websites.
Tesla’s Solar Roof V3
In terms of technical attributes, according to the specification for Tesla’s solar roof
version 3 from the product specification sheet model “SR60T – 1”, maximum power point per
each tile is at 24 Watts, the roof’s open circuit voltage is at 3.8 while the short circuit current is at
8.4 with the tile dimension of 1140 mm x 430 mm. According to the provided values, solar cell
efficacy and fill factor of Tesla’s solar roof version 3 can be calculated as following.
Tesla’s solar roof version 3’s Fill Factor
24 𝑊
(3.8)(8.4) = 0.752
(4-1)
Tesla’s solar roof version 3’s solar cell efficacy
0.0489 𝑂𝑅 4.9 % = (3.8)(8.4)(0.752)
(1000W𝑚2)(1140𝑚𝑚 𝑋 430 𝑚𝑚)
(4-2)
Onyx’s Solar Glass
According to the specification for Onyx’s amorphous solar glass from the product
specification sheet model, maximum power point per each glass is at 21 Watts, the glass’s open
circuit voltage is at 23 while the short circuit current is at 1.5 with the tile dimension of 1245 mm
x 300 mm. According to the provided values, solar cell efficacy and fill factor of Onyx’s solar
glass can be calculated as following.
42
Onyx’s solar glass’s Fill Factor
21 𝑊
(23)(1.5) = 0.61
(4-3)
Onyx’s solar glass’s solar cell efficacy
0.0565 𝑂𝑅 5.63 % = (23)(1.5)(0.61)
(1000W𝑚2)(1650𝑚𝑚 𝑋 851 𝑚𝑚)
(4-4)
Sunpower’s E Series Solar Panel
According to the specification for Sunpower’s E series panel from the product
specification sheet model SPR-E19-320, maximum power point per each panel is at 320 Watts,
the glass’s open circuit voltage is at 64.8 while the short circuit current is at 6.24 with the tile
dimension of 1558 mm x 1046 mm. According to the provided values, solar cell efficacy and fill
factor of Sunpower’s E series panel can be calculated as following.
Sunpower’s X series panel’s Fill Factor
320 𝑊
(64.8)(6.24) = 0.791
(4-5)
Sunpower’s X series panel’s solar cell efficacy
0.19.6 𝑂𝑅 19.6 % = (64.8)(6.24)(0.791)
(1000W𝑚2)(1558𝑚𝑚 𝑋 1046 𝑚𝑚)
(4-6)
LG’s 365 Q1C
According to the specification for LG’s 365 Q1C from the product specification sheet
model SPR-X21-365, maximum power point per each panel is at 365 Watts, the glass’s open
circuit voltage is at 42.7 while the short circuit current is at 10.79 with the tile dimension of 1700
43
mm x 1016 mm. According to the provided values, solar cell efficacy and fill factor of LG’s 365
Q1C can be calculated as following.
LG’s 365 Q1C’s Fill Factor
365 𝑊
(42.7)(10.79) = 0.781
(4-7)
LG’s 365 Q1C’s solar cell efficacy
0.208 𝑂𝑅 20.8 % = (42.7)(10.79)(0.781)
(1000W𝑚2)(1700𝑚𝑚 𝑋 1016 𝑚𝑚)
(4-8)
Table 4-1. Selected BIPV and BAPV products’ solar cell efficiency and fill factor Product Name 𝜂 Fill
Factor
open
circuit
voltage
short
circuit
current
Dimension Base technology
Tesla’s solar roof
V3
4.9%
0.752 3.8 8.4 1140 mm x
430 mm Monocrysatlline
Silicon Onyx’s solar glass 5.63% 0.610 23 1.5 1245 mm x
300 mm Amorphous thin
film Sunpower’s E
series panel
19.6% 0.791 64.8 6.24 1558 mm x
1046 mm Monocrysatlline
Silicon LG’s 365 Q1C 20.8% 0.781 42.7 10.79 1700 mm x
1016 mm Monocrysatlline
Silicon
Cost per Watt
Tesla’s Solar Roof V3
This thesis has found that even though Tesla’s solar roof V3 is advertising its product as
low as $5.60 per square foot for 10 kW system or roughly $33,950 for the whole system before
BIPV incentives, a report has shown that the real quote does not reflect the amount which is
shown in Tesla website. The report has shown that the total cost of Tesla solar roof for 9.45 kW
system on 1,862 square feet roof is $85,314 (Lambert, F., & Fred., 2020). This quote includes
Tesla power wall which costs $10,500, and installation and roof repair cost of $10,630.
44
Excluding the installation of Tesla power wall, the total of cost per watt of 9.45 kW of Tesla
solar roof can be calculated as the following:
Tesla’s solar roof V3’s Cost per Watt
$85,314−$10,500
9450 𝑤 = $7.92 per Watt
(4-9)
Onyx’s Solar Glass
According to the company website, the cost per square foot of its amorphous silicon glass
is $49 per square foot. In order to make an equally comparison between the two BIPV products,
the total watt capacity will be the same value as the total watt capacity in the case of Tesla solar
roof, which is 9.45 kW system. If the total Watts capacity is 9.45 kW and each of glass’s
maximum power peak is 21 W, the building will need 450 Onyx solar glasses. If each glass
component is 4.02 square feet, the total area of the solar glass is 1809 square feet. If the price is
$49 per square foot, the total cost is $88,641, which does not include the installation cost. An
assumption of $10,630 installation cost can be added and bring the new total to $99,271. The
total of cost per watt of 9.45 kW system of Onyx solar glass can be calculated as the following:
Onyx solar glass’s Cost per Watt
$99,271
9450 𝑤 = $10.50 per Watt
(4-10)
Sunpower’s E Series Solar Panel
The cost per watt of Sunpower’s E series solar panel is rather more straightforward then
previous two BIPV products. The average initial cost to install 9.45 kW system of Sunpower’s E
series solar panel is at $29,484. The total of cost per watt of 9.45 kW system of Sunpower’s E
series solar panel can be calculated as the following:
45
Sunpower’s E series solar panel’s Cost per Watt
$29,484
9450 𝑤 = $3.12 per Watt
(4-11)
LG’s 365 Q1C
The cost per watt of LG’s 365 Q1C is also straightforward as the previous BAPV
product. The average initial cost to install 9.45 kW system of LG’s 365 Q1C is at $30,240. The
total of cost per watt of 9.45 kW system of LG’s 365 Q1C can be calculated as the following:
LG’s 365 Q1C’s Cost per Watt
$30,240
9450 𝑤 = $3.2 per Watt
(4-12)
Table 4-2. Selected BIPV and BAPV products’ cost per Watt Product Name 𝐶𝑜𝑠𝑡 𝑝𝑒𝑟 𝑤𝑎𝑡𝑡
Tesla’s solar roof V3
$7.92
Onyx’s solar glass
$10.50
Sunpower’s E series panel
$3.12
LG’s 365 Q1C $3.2
While considering both PV system purely base on cost per Watt, the BAPV systems are
the clear-cut favorite comparing to the BIPV systems. But one of the advantages of BIPV system
is the multi-functionality ability of the system, which mean that in the case if new construction,
while choosing BIPV system will eliminate the cost of roof because of the system can act as the
roof and PV system. But if the construction chooses the path of BAPV system, the cost of the
construction still needs to consider the cost of the roof as well.
46
In order to maintain the consistency of the size of the roof, the cost of the roof will be
calculated based on the size of Tesla’s solar roof which is 1862 square feet. The national average
cost of simple shingle roof for two story residential construction is 9,073 dollars, while the
national average cost of a simple metal roof for two story residential construction is 19,284
dollars. The cost can be added into the average initial cost for both Sunpower’s E series solar
panel and LG’s 365 Q1C panel.
Table 4-3. Selected BIPV and BAPV products’ cost included the cost of the roof
Durability
Durability of each of the selected BIPV and BAPV products can be compared based on
individual warranties, and other ratings, particularly hail rating, fire rating and wind rating.
Tesla’s Solar Roof V3
Tesla takes pride in terms of its solar roof durability with its power warranty of 25 years
and roof tile warranty of 25 years as well. In terms of rating, Tesla’s solar roof has Class 3 ANSI
FM 4473 hail rating, up to 1.75” diameter hail, class F ASTM D3161 wind rating, up to 130
miles per hour wind and the best fire rating the class, class A UL 790.
One aspect which separates Tesla’s solar roof from other BIPV and BAPV products
would be its decision for the roof tile to be manufactured from quartz glass which is more
durable than other PV products manufactured from metallic objects.
Product Name No seperated roof installation
requiared
with Simple shingle roof
installation
with metal roof installation
Tesla’s solar
roof V3
$85,314 - -
Onyx’s solar
glass
$99,271 - -
Sunpower’s E
series panel
$29,484 $38,557 $48,768
LG’s 365 Q1C $30,240 $39,313 $49,524
47
Onyx’s Solar Glass
For Onyx’s amorphous silicon solar glass, the company only offers a five-year product
warranty from the date of purchase. For its power output warranty, the warranty would guarantee
that the power output will decline to 80 % capacity in the first 10 years of the product life span.
In terms of rating, the product does not specify the rating class on either hail or fire rating. The
product just stated that it complies with UL 1703, Standard for Flat-Plate Photovoltaic Modules
and Panels.
Sunpower’s E Series Solar Panel
Sunpower’s E series solar panel product has offered 25 years warranty on both power and
product warranty. The company has stated that by year 25 of the product usage, the power is 12
% more power compared to average PV products’ power standing with the same amount of time.
In terms of its ratings, Sunpower’s E series solar panel has type 2 fire rating, UL1703 and a hail
rating which can resist the impact of 1-inch hail at the speed of 52 miles per hour.
LG’s 365 Q1C
LG’s 365 Q1C has 25 years warranty for product warranty, and for its power output
warranty, the company has offered a linear warranty, first 5 years 95 % power output and 0.4 %
yearly degradation from year 6 until year 25, for which the company believes that the power
output will not be below 88.4 % in the 25th year. And it has the module fire performance type 1.
The product does not state whether it has a hail rating or not. Lastly, the product states that with
the new reinforced frame design, the product can endure front load up to 6000 Pa and rear up to
5400 Pa.
Maintenance and Repair Procedure
The maintenance requirements for both BIPV and BAPV has been shown to be similar to
one another. As was shown in the section on durability, both BIPV and BAPV products have the
48
potential to withstand the unfavorable weather conditions that might occur in the area of
installation if the project designer has considered the right product for the right environment. In
terms of the basic maintenance, debris and build-up dust can cause the decline in product
efficiency; simply removing those debris and dust by water or blower is sufficient. Also, a
defective PV system such as a cell crack, hotspot and snail trails, can be detected visually
(Băjenescu, T. I., 2020). Another basic maintenance procedure would be performing periodic
system checks; the checking procedure is provided by the manufacturer. In both BIPV and
BAPV system that is grid connected systems, the inverter is a big part of the system. Inverter life
span is around 10 years; replacing the inverter can prevent unwanted drops in the system
efficiency. A report from NERL, “U.S. Solar Photovoltaic system cost,” has shown that inverter
replacement is the largest cost of BIPV and BAPV system’s operation and maintenance cost, as
shown in figure 4-13.
Figure 4-13. Operation and maintenance cost in dollar/kW/year of BIPV and BAPV (source:
national renewable energy laboratory)
BIPV also presents challenges which is unique compared to its counterpart. While a
BAPV system can be replaced and repaired simply by unmounting the system from the building,
the BIPV system cannot do the same as the solar panels are acting as the envelope of the building
49
itself. Overhauling could mean that a certain part of the building shell is open to the outside
environment. Precision and working in a timely manner are essential for the repair workers.
Because of the challenge that the BIPV system has to face, the design phase of BIPV is crucial.
In the design phase, knowing that replacing BIPV may not be convenient, the engineer has to
design the building with enough room for easy maintenance and repair (Peng, C.et al.,2011).
Optimal Orientation
Studies has shown that that there is optimal orientation for PV systems to generate energy
at their highest level. In the Northern Hemisphere, south-facing systems with the optimal tilt
angle of 30 degrees have shown to perform at the highest level. This would become a challenge
which a BIPV system needs to face in the design process and may affect its overall performance.
Especially in the case of retrofitting, the BIPV system has to be installed based on the existing
structure. If the roof of the existing structure does not face south or have the roof pitch which
would complement the optimal tilt angle of 30 degrees, the BIPV system in this retrofit project
will have less than optimal efficiency. The rough estimate of PV efficiency based on orientation
and tilt angle can be seen in figure 4-14.
Figure 4-14. Efficiency of PV system based on facing direction and tile angle
50
The decrease in the efficiency will certainly decrease the energy which the BIPV can
generate, which will cause a reduced economic return on the PV investment. If the design is to
generate enough energy based on the system maximum capacity, a non-optimal orientated
system will not meet the bar of minimum requirements. When comparing the same problem with
the BAPV system, when the BAPV system is to be mounted on the existing structure, a
mounting device can serve as tilt angle adjustment which will allow the BAPV system to
perform better than its counterpart facing the same challenge.
In terms of new construction, designing the system with the best possible direction and
tilt angle for both BIPV and BAPV systems can strive to ensure that the systems will perform at
their highest possible capacity.
Constructability
In every consideration of implementing PV systems, whether it is a BIPV or BAPV
system, into the building project, one main aspect needs to be considered: can the PV system be
able to achieve the lowest energy installed capacity? While it is true that any PV systems will
generate some power for the building, the problem will always come down to the efficiency of
the system. The PV system is a wonderful technology to generate green energy, but not every
building project can utilize the technology mounted on the building at its full capacity.
Constructability is the criterion to determine whether it is feasible for BIPV or BAPV to be
implemented into a building. In the optimal orientation section, it was made clear that location of
the project would play a crucial role which could affect the efficiency of the system. One of the
biggest concerns in PV technology is the impact of shading. Every PV system can only generate
so much energy based on how much solar radiation they receive. In a case such as that of a
single-family two-story house, the owner needs to consider if any of the vegetation would reduce
the amount of solar radiation which the PV system could collect. In case of building projects in
51
an urban area, developers need to consider the effect of shadows from nearby buildings as well.
Constant shadowing from taller buildings will significantly reduce the energy generated even
with the best product.
Another factor which will cause the system’s efficiency to decrease would be
temperature. While standardized testing conditions set the temperature testing condition at 25
degree Celsius or around 77 degrees Fahrenheit, during the summer season, the PV system can
be heated up to 50 degrees Celsius with direct sunlight. Efficiency loss in the system can simply
be calculated with each product’s temperature coefficient. The value of temperature coefficient
which is provided as a part of PV system specification manual represents the percentage of
efficiency loss for every 1 degree Celsius over 25 degree Celsius. While temperature coefficient
of Tesla’s solar roof is not available, other selected BIPA and BAPV products have displayed the
value in their website respectively. Efficiency loss calculation for heated system to 50 degree
Celsius are as follows:
Onyx’s Amorphous Silicon Solar Glass
Temperature coefficient = 0.19 % per degree Celsius
50 degree Celsius - 25 degree Celsius = 25 degree Celsius
25 x 0.19% = 4.75 % efficiency loss
Solar panel output = 21 W
Solar panel output at 50 degree Celsius = (100 - 4.75) % x 21 W = 20.0025 W
Sunpower’s E Series Solar Panel
Temperature coefficient = 0.35 % per degree Celsius
50 degree Celsius - 25 degree Celsius = 25 degree Celsius
25 x 0.35% = 8.75 % efficiency loss
Solar panel output = 320 W
52
Solar panel output at 50 degree Celsius = (100 - 8.75) % x 320 W = 292 W
LG’s 365 Q1C
Temperature coefficient = 0.19 % per degree Celsius
50 degree Celsius - 25 degree Celsius = 25 degree Celsius
25 x 0.30% = 7.5% efficiency loss
Solar panel output = 365 W
Solar panel output at 50 degree Celsius = (100 – 7.5) % x 365 W = 337.625 W
The most common type of PV material, monocrystalline silicon, trends to have the higher
rate of power loss than other materials such as thin film products. While thin film products tend
to have lower solar cell efficiency, their ability to withstand high heat and still maintain the
efficiency is one of the main upsides of the material. Additionally, in the area where temperature
could be an issue, installing a BAPV system would help with the heat gain of the building, as a
mounted PV system would reduce the heat gain, while the system acts as a shading device for the
building from direct solar radiation. Once the surrounding issue is solved, another factor such as
space should be considered. When analyzing the system capacity, enough surface area for BIPV
or BAPV is needed for it to be an effective system. This is true in both PV systems, but in the
case of BIPV, with lower efficiency than BAPV, a system with lower installed Watts may not be
able to successfully generate enough power to meet the project’s goals. In the case of BAPV, a
restriction on available mounting space may also result in less than ideal installed Watts.
While the factors mentioned above are issues which owners need to be concerned about
in every PV project, implementing a PV system in an existing building introduces another set of
issues. One can summarize these issues for PV systems in existing buildings as being as simple
as the building was not designed with PV system as its components. Especially in the case of the
BIPV system, the appeal of the system is it would replace the envelope of the building. While
53
implementing BIPV is quite expensive, it would be financially irresponsible to replace a good
and functional envelope of the building for the BIPV system. An additional issue for BIPV
system in existing building would be the wiring issue. Without having an initial design for the
BIPV system, the component wiring may be visible. Also, there are more than just PV panels in
the system; owners need to account for the space for other components such as an inverter or
power storage.
Analysis
BIPV technology is an exciting PV system in the market, with the ability transform the
envelope of the building into the power generator, and the ability to blend itself into a component
of the building instead of being an additional gadget. The vision of the BIPV system is nothing
short of the technology of tomorrow. While BIPV offers the solar solution an aesthetically
pleasing product, the technology is so new, it still lacks many aspects compared to the older
conventional PV such as BAPV. When comparing the two products in terms of their efficiency
and cost alone, the BAPV system is still way ahead of its newer counterpart. In terms of other
criteria which would affect the systems’ efficiency, while in theory, BIPV should have the wider
range of application in buildings than the BAPV system--as it could replace any envelope
component of the building and BAPV could only be mounted on the roof--the most efficient
place for the BIPV system to replace the building envelope is also the roof area, because the roof
has the best chance for receiving solar radiation. For maintenance and repair, since the BAPV
system is not bound to the building, replacing it would not directly harm the life in the building.
In terms of customers, based on this study, there is less available information and data on BIPV
compared to the BAPV system. Even though both systems offer a renewable energy solution,
one system has not reached its highest potential at the moment. It will take time to develop. If the
BIPV system is going to follow the same steps as the conventional PV system has of increasing
54
the efficiency and decreasing the cost, the BIPV system will eventually catch up. And its
argument of being better in terms of aesthetics will have more weight against which to fight
other perks of the BAPV system. With the consideration based on the criteria, decision
methodology to evaluate BIPV as an alternative PV solution is created and can be seen in the
figure 4-15, Decision methodology for BIPV vs BAPV.
55
Figure 4-15. Decision methodology for BIPV vs BAPV
56
Table 4-4. Comparison of two representative Building Integrated Photovoltaic (BIPV) and two representative Building Applied
Photovoltaic (BAPV) systems based on six criteria
PV Technology Efficiency
Cost per
Watt
Durability
Maintenance and
repair procedure
Optimal Orientation
Constructability
Aesthetic
BIPV systems
Tesla Solar Roof 4.9 % $7.92 25-year warranty
Manufactured from
quartz glass which is
more durable than
other PV products
Removing debris and
dust by water or blower
is sufficient for basic
maintenance
Periodically system
checkup.
Replacement could
mean that a certain part
of the building shell is
open to the outside
environment.
In building retrofits,
BIPV system has to be
installed based on the
existing structure. If the
existing structure does
not face in an optimal
direction or have a tilt
angle, the BIPV system
will have less than
optimal efficiency.
BIPV replaces the envelope of
the building. In theory, a
BIPV system can replace any
envelope component.
In retrofit, and since BIPV is
expensive, it would be
financially irresponsible to
replace a good and functional
envelope of the building with a
BIPV system.
In retrofits, wiring the BIPV
system may be an issue.
While thin film BIPV
technology has lower
efficiency, the efficiency
degrades less at higher
temperatures.
BIPV system
would replace the
envelope of the
building and
blend into part of
the building.
Onyx Solar Glass 5.63% $10.50 5 year warranty
Guarantee that the
power output will
decline to no less than
80% capacity in the
first 10 years
BAPV systems
Sunpower E Series 19.6 % $3.12 25-year warranty
By year 25 the
product will have
12% more power than
the average PV
products’ power
Removing debris and
dust by water or blower
is sufficient for basic
maintenance
Periodic system
checkup.
The BAPV system is
mounted on the existing
structure; a mounting
device can serve as a tilt
angle adjustment which
will allow the BAPV
system to adapt to non-
optimal conditions.
The BAPV system can only be
mounted on open space such
as a roof area.
While monocrystalline and
polycrystalline products are
well known for their high
efficiency, their efficiency is
reduced at higher
temperatures.
The mounted
BAPV system
can hinder the
intended exterior
look of the
building.
LG 365 QIC 20.8 % $3.20 25-year warranty
First 5 years,
minimum 95% power
output and 0.4%
yearly degradation
from year 6 until year
25; power output will
not be below 88.4%
in the 25th year.
57
CHAPTER 5
CONCLUSIONS
Renewable energy has continued to grow in popularity in recent years. Moreover, for the
industry, such as building construction, one particular renewable energy technology has shown
that it could take the spot as the primary energy source. Photovoltaic technology has changed
from being the “future technology” to a standard technology in our society. As the PV system
keeps developing, more PV-related technology continues to emerge. One which has gained a
certain momentum is Building integrated photovoltaic. Building-integrated photovoltaics, like
other PV technology, is technology that transforms energy consumers into energy producers. The
technology gives us a glimpse of the future in which renewable energy is a part of daily life.
Conventional photovoltaic, in some way, is still treated as a novelty system, an additional
component of the building structure. However, BIPV technology shattered that perception of the
PV system in the building entirely, replacing the envelope of the building with the energy
generator system that is blended in as a part of the building. Indeed, the BIPV system has made
an appealing case to be more superior in terms of being aesthetically pleasing compared to
conventional PV or BAPV.
However, this thesis has shown that despite the tremendous growth and positive impacts
of BIPV technology, the system is still far from its full potential. When comparing both systems,
BIPV and BAPV, the BIPV system is not at the same level as its BAPV counterpart in many
significant aspects such as the cost of the products and the system efficiency. In recent years, the
cost and system efficiency of the BAPV system has continued to decrease and increase,
respectively. In the area where BIPV has the potential to gain an edge over BAPV such as
customization, the roof area is one of the few location choices for BAPV system to be installed
in buildings, and in theory, the BIPV system should be able to replace any envelope part of the
58
buildings, but with its low efficiency, the roof BIPV system seems to be the most optimal
location for the project. The BIPV system does not emerge as a clear-cut winner. Additionally,
the figure 4-3, Decision methodology for BIPV vs BAPV, has shown that if chosen BAPV
system does not generate enough energy to meet the generation goal, consider adding a BIPV
system to increase the energy generation. This can be said when first choosing the BIPV system
as well. Utilizing both BAPV and BIPV system in different parts of the building can achieve the
energy goal when a single system could not.
In this current market and in many situations, BAPV would have been evaluated as the
better choice for a PV system in the building. Nevertheless, the BIPV system is still new
compared to its counterpart. It could take years for the technology to mature and develop.
Nevertheless, with the growth in terms of its development and economics surrounding the
technology, the technology will reach heights where it could be comparable or even superior to
conventional PV systems. Furthermore, when it does, it would already be integrated into our
building and our lives right in front of our eyes.
Further Research. This thesis offers a few samples of BIPV and BAPV products in the
current market, but there are plenty of other brands and specifications of PV products, especially
BAPV products. While this project has laid the groundwork on the criteria to evaluate BIPV
technology, more extensive data can be collected to strengthen the result. Selecting more
products to represent both of the PV systems can solidify the means value and identify the
outline value in criteria such as solar cell efficacies and cost per watt. In addition to the sheer
amount of data collected, the broader range of what PV products can accomplish to improve the
trend line can be considered as well. Furthermore, in terms of the criterion of constructability,
59
further investigation is needed on the impact of wiring, parallel, or string wiring, between both
systems.
While this thesis is focused more on crystalline silicon and thin-film products, or first-
generation and second-generation PV cell material respectively, the third generation of PV solar
cell has already emerged in the form of organic PV or OPV and Perovskite PV (Stoichkov, V., &
Kettle, D. J., 2018). While the third-generation PV technology has shown promising potential in
terms of efficiency, its negative aspect, such as lack of stability, has prevented its penetrating the
mainstream PV market. There is no doubt, just as the first-generation and second-generation PV
development has taken some time, the time will arrive relatively soon for third-generation PV to
compete with its predecessors.
As mentioned above, all of the PV technologies will continue to grow; the change will
come. Continued growth is crucial for this thesis as well. While today, BAPV still has the edge
over BIPV, the type of research conducted in this thesis would need to be replicated every five or
ten years to look at the progress of each PV system. Because as long as the industry is
developing answers, research shows that the optimal solution is not set in stone.
60
LIST OF REFERENCES
Abdelhamid, M., Singh, R., & Haque, I. (2015). Role of PV generated DC power in transport
sector: Case study of plug-in EV. 2015 IEEE First International Conference on DC
Microgrids (ICDCM). doi:10.1109/icdcm.2015.7152058
Attoye, D., Adekunle, T., Aoul, K. T., Hassan, A., & Attoye, S. (2018). A Conceptual
Framework for a Building Integrated Photovoltaics (BIPV) Educative-Communication
Approach. Sustainability, 10(10), 3781. doi: 10.3390/su10103781
Azadian, F., & Radzi, M. (2013). A general approach toward building integrated photovoltaic
systems and its implementation barriers: A review. Renewable and Sustainable Energy
Reviews, 22, 527-538. doi:10.1016/j.rser.2013.01.056
Bahr, W. (2014). A comprehensive assessment methodology of the building integrated
photovoltaic blind system. Energy and Buildings, 82, 703–708. doi:
10.1016/j.enbuild.2014.07.065
Băjenescu, T. I. (2020). Some Reliability Aspects of Photovoltaic Modules. Reliability and
Ecological Aspects of Photovoltaic Modules. doi:10.5772/intechopen.88641
Bhatia, S. C. (2017). Advanced renewable energy systems. New Delhi: Woodhead Publishing
India Pvt.
Biyik, E., Araz, M., Hepbasli, A., Shahrestani, M., Yao, R., Shao, L., . . . Atlı, Y. B. (2017). A
key review of building integrated photovoltaic (BIPV) systems. Engineering Science and
Technology, an International Journal, 20(3), 833-858. doi:10.1016/j.jestch.2017.01.009
Bonomo, P., Chatzipanagi, A., & Frontini, F. (2015). Overview and analysis of current BIPV
products: New criteria for supporting the technological transfer in the building sector.
VITRUVIO - International Journal of Architectural Technology and Sustainability, (1),
67. doi:10.4995/vitruvio-ijats.2015.4476
Cerón, I., Caamaño-Martín, E., & Neila, F. J. (2013). ‘State-of-the-art’ of building integrated
photovoltaic products. Renewable Energy, 58, 127–133. doi:
10.1016/j.renene.2013.02.013
Chae, Y. T., Kim, J., Park, H., & Shin, B. (2014). Building energy performance evaluation of
building integrated photovoltaic (BIPV) window with semi-transparent solar cells.
Applied Energy, 129, 217-227. doi:10.1016/j.apenergy.2014.04.106
Curtius, H. C. (2018). The adoption of building-integrated photovoltaics: Barriers and
facilitators. Renewable Energy, 126, 783-790. doi:10.1016/j.renene.2018.04.001
61
Duke Energy. (2020, May 29). Duke Energy Florida announces 3 new solar power plants to
complete 700-megawatt commitment. Retrieved May 31, 2020, from https://news.duke-
energy.com/releases/duke-energy-florida-announces-3-new-solar-power-plants-to-
complete-700-megawatt-commitment?_ga=2.105201603.1136566809.1590962110-
1010974066.1590962110
EC&M. (2018, August 15). Global BIPV Market Will Reach $2.9 Billion in 2018. Retrieved
June 02, 2020, from https://www.ecmweb.com/renewables/article/20903837/report-says-
global-bipv-market-will-reach-29-billion-in-2018
EIA. (2020, May 7). U.S. Energy Information Administration - EIA - Independent Statistics and
Analysis. Retrieved May 30, 2020, from https://www.eia.gov/energyexplained/us-energy-
facts/
Ekwurzel, B., Boneham, J., Dalton, M. W., Heede, R., Mera, R. J., Allen, M. R., & Frumhoff, P.
C. (2017). The rise in global atmospheric CO2, surface temperature, and sea level from
emissions traced to major carbon producers. Climatic Change, 144(4), 579-590.
doi:10.1007/s10584-017-1978-0
Funk, C., & Hefferon, M. (2019, December 30). U.S. Public Views on Climate and Energy.
Retrieved May 22, 2020, from https://www.pewresearch.org/science/2019/11/25/u-s-
public-views-on-climate-and energy/
Garcia, M. (2017, July 31). About the Space Station Solar Arrays. Retrieved May 31, 2020, from
https://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/station/structure/elements/solar_arrays-about.html
Heinstein, P., Ballif, C., & Perret-Aebi, L. (2013). Building Integrated Photovoltaics (BIPV):
Review, Potentials, Barriers and Myths. Energyo. doi:10.1515/energyo.0028.00060
Hussain, A., Arif, S. M., & Aslam, M. (2017). Emerging renewable and sustainable energy
technologies: State of the art. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 71, 12-28.
doi:10.1016/j.rser.2016.12.033
IEA PVPS. (2019). Trends in PV applications 2019. Retrieved May 25, 2020, from https://iea-
pvps.org/trends_reports/2019-edition/
Ikedi, Chukwuemeka & Okoroh, Michael & Dean, A. & Omer, Siddig. (2010). Impact
assessment for building integrated photovoltaic (BIPV). Association of Researchers in
Construction Management, ARCOM 2010 - Proceedings of the 26th Annual Conference.
1407-1415.
Jelle, B. (2015). Building Integrated Photovoltaics: A Concise Description of the Current State of
the Art and Possible Research Pathways. Energies, 9(1), 21. doi: 10.3390/en9010021
Jelle, B. P., Breivik, C., & Røkenes, H. D. (2012). Building integrated photovoltaic products: A
state-of-the-art review and future research opportunities. Solar Energy Materials and
Solar Cells, 100, 69–96. doi: 10.1016/j.solmat.2011.12.016
62
Kumar, N. M., Sudhakar, K., & Samykano, M. (2019). Performance comparison of BAPV and
BIPV systems with c-Si, CIS and CdTe photovoltaic technologies under tropical weather
conditions. Case Studies in Thermal Engineering, 13, 100374.
doi:10.1016/j.csite.2018.100374
Kylili, A., & Fokaides, P. A. (2013). Investigation of building integrated photovoltaics potential
in achieving the zero-energy building target. Indoor and Built Environment, 23(1), 92-
106. doi:10.1177/1420326x13509392
Lambert, F., & Fred. (2020, April 10). Here's a real Tesla Solar Roof quote and the price will
shock you. Retrieved June 07, 2020, from https://electrek.co/2019/06/14/tesla-solar-roof-
quote-price/
Matasci, S., & Jeanty, H. (2020, May 08). Solar Panel Cost In 2020 [State By State Data]:
EnergySage. Retrieved May 27, 2020, from https://news.energysage.com/how-much-
does-the-average-solar-panel-installation-cost-in-the-u-s/
Ming, T., De_Richter, R., Liu, W., & Caillol, S. (2014). Fighting global warming by climate
engineering: Is the Earth radiation management and the solar radiation management any
option for fighting climate change? Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 31, 792-
834. doi:10.1016/j.rser.2013.12.032
Mohtasham, J. (2015). Review Article-Renewable Energies. Energy Procedia, 74, 1289-1297.
doi:10.1016/j.egypro.2015.07.774
NASA. (2020, April 14). The Causes of Climate Change. Retrieved May 30, 2020, from
https://climate.nasa.gov/causes/
National Renewable Energy Laboratory. (2019). Solar Photovoltaic Technology Basics.
Retrieved May 31, 2020, from https://www.nrel.gov/research/re-photovoltaics.html
National Renewable Energy Laboratory. (2020). Best Research-Cell Efficiency Chart. Retrieved
May 27, 2020, from https://www.nrel.gov/pv/cell-efficiency.html
Nayak, P. K., Mahesh, S., Snaith, H. J., & Cahen, D. (2019). Photovoltaic solar cell
technologies: Analysing the state of the art. Nature Reviews Materials, 4(4), 269-285.
doi:10.1038/s41578-019-0097-0
Osseweijer, F. J., Hurk, L. B., Teunissen, E. J., & Sark, W. G. (2018). A comparative review of
building integrated photovoltaics ecosystems in selected European countries. Renewable
and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 90, 1027-1040. doi:10.1016/j.rser.2018.03.001
Othman, A. A. (2011). Improving Building Performance through Integrating Constructability in
the Design Process. Organization, Technology and Management in Construction: An
International Journal, 3(2). doi:10.5592/otmcj.2011.2.6
63
Peng, C., Huang, Y., & Wu, Z. (2011). Building-integrated photovoltaics (BIPV) in architectural
design in China. Energy and Buildings, 43(12), 3592-3598.
doi:10.1016/j.enbuild.2011.09.032
Richardson, L., Cooper, J., & Pearson, B. (2020, March 10). Tesla Solar Roof V3: Complete
Review, Specs, and Cost: EnergySage. Retrieved May 27, 2020, from
https://news.energysage.com/tesla-solar-panel-roof-the-next-solar-shingles/
Saretta, E., Caputo, P., & Frontini, F. (2019). A review study about energy renovation of
building facades with BIPV in urban environment. Sustainable Cities and Society, 44,
343-355. doi:10.1016/j.scs.2018.10.002
Shukla, A. K., Sudhakar, K., & Baredar, P. (2017). Recent advancement in BIPV product
technologies: A review. Energy and Buildings, 140, 188-195.
doi:10.1016/j.enbuild.2017.02.015
Shukla, A., & Sharma, A. (2018). Sustainability through energy-efficient buildings. Boca Raton:
Taylor & Francis, CRC Press.
Solar energy industries association. (2020). Solar Industry Research Data. Retrieved June 01,
2020, from https://www.seia.org/solar-industry-research-data
Sorgato, M., Schneider, K., & Rüther, R. (2018). Technical and economic evaluation of thin-film
CdTe building-integrated photovoltaics (BIPV) replacing façade and rooftop materials in
office buildings in a warm and sunny climate. Renewable Energy, 118, 84-98.
doi:10.1016/j.renene.2017.10.091
Stoichkov, V., & Kettle, D. J. (2018). Degradation and outdoor perfromance monitoring of next
generation solar cells for building integrated applications. Bangor: Prifysgol Bangor
University.
Strong, S. (2016, October 19). Building Integrated Photovoltaics (BIPV) . Retrieved June 07,
2020, from https://www.wbdg.org/resources/building-integrated-photovoltaics-bipv
Tabakovic, M., Fechner, H., Sark, W. V., Louwen, A., Georghiou, G., Makrides, G., . . . Betz, S.
(2017). Status and Outlook for Building Integrated Photovoltaics (BIPV) in Relation to
Educational needs in the BIPV Sector. Energy Procedia, 111, 993-999.
doi:10.1016/j.egypro.2017.03.262
Tadesse, M. (2017). Design and Feasibility Analysis of Building Integrated PV (BIPV)
System: Case Study in Bahir Dar University Lecture Halls Building. American Journal
of Mechanical Engineering, 5(1), 24-32.
Tarbi, L. (2020, March 10). Tesla Solar Roof Cost vs. Solar Panels [2020 Guide]: EnergySage.
Retrieved May 27, 2020, from https://news.energysage.com/tesla-solar-roof-price-vs-
solar-panels/
Tesla. (2020). Solar Roof: Tesla. Retrieved May 27, 2020, from https://www.tesla.com/solarroof
64
Tripathy, M., Sadhu, P., & Panda, S. (2016). A critical review on building integrated
photovoltaic products and their applications. Renewable and Sustainable Energy
Reviews, 61, 451–465. doi: 10.1016/j.rser.2016.04.008
U.S. Energy Information Administration. (2020). U.S. Energy Information Administration - EIA
- Independent Statistics and Analysis. Retrieved May 20, 2020, from
https://www.eia.gov/outlooks/aeo/
UL. (2019, May 13). Building Safety into Building Integrated Photovoltaics. Retrieved June 07,
2020, from https://www.ul.com/news/building-safety-building-integrated-photovoltaics
Vartiainen, E., Masson, G., Breyer, C., Moser, D., & Medina, E. R. (2019). Impact of weighted
average cost of capital, capital expenditure, and other parameters on future utility‐scale
PV levelised cost of electricity. Progress in Photovoltaics: Research and Applications,
28(6), 439-453. doi:10.1002/pip.3189
Yang, L., Liu, X., & Qian, F. (2019). Optimal configurations of high-rise buildings to maximize
solar energy generation efficiency of building-integrated photovoltaic systems. Indoor
and Built Environment, 28(8), 1104-1125. doi:10.1177/1420326x19830755
Yang, R. J. (2015). Overcoming technical barriers and risks in the application of building
integrated photovoltaics (BIPV): Hardware and software strategies. Automation in
Construction, 51, 92-102. doi:10.1016/j.autcon.2014.12.005
Yoon, J., Shim, S., An, Y. S., & Lee, K. H. (2013). An experimental study on the annual surface
temperature characteristics of amorphous silicon BIPV window. Energy and Buildings,
62, 166-175. doi:10.1016/j.enbuild.2013.01.020
Zhang, Qianning & Lau, S.s.Y.. (2019). Review of Net Zero Energy Buildings in Hot and Humid
Climates: Experience Learned from 34 Case Study Buildings. Renewable and Sustainable
Energy Reviews. 114. 10.1016/j.rser.2019.109303.
65
BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH
Arnon Khantawang was born in Bangkok, Thailand in the summer of 1994. He began his
educational at Assumption College, an all-boys school, until he moved to the United States of
America during his ninth-grade year of high school. He was on the varsity team for both tennis
and swimming all four years of his high school career. Arnon began his college career at
University of Florida in the spring of 2013. After a brief stint in the industrial engineering
program, he finally found his calling, sustainability. He then transferred to sustainability and
built environment program and graduated with a Bachelor of Science in fall of 2016 with his
research, “What is the sustainability impact of music festival in small urban area?” In summer of
2018, he began pursuing his master’s degree in construction management with the focus in
sustainable construction. During his time as a graduate student, he was a member of Powell
Center and worked on various green building projects. He graduated in August 2020 and will
start his full-time position at a heavy civil construction company.
