The location-dependent performance of bifacial solar panels significantly affects their overall cost-effectiveness through variations in energy yield and system costs influenced by geographic and environmental factors.
Impact of Location on Bifacial Panel Performance
- Sunlight Availability and Reflectivity: Bifacial panels perform best in locations with abundant direct sunlight and high ground reflectivity (albedo). Regions with high albedo surfaces like snow or sand can increase the rear-side energy capture, boosting overall output. Conversely, areas with low albedo (vegetation/soil ~0.25) see smaller gains in bifacial performance, typically up to about 10% increase compared to monofacial panels.
- Latitude Effects: Studies show that at latitudes above 30 degrees, fixed-tilt bifacial installations often outperform tracking monofacial panels by 5-15% in energy yield due to better utilization of diffuse and reflected light. Below 30 degrees latitude, bifacial modules coupled with single-axis trackers oriented east-west can increase yields by up to 45%, demonstrating significant location-specific optimization potential.
- Climate Factors: Temperature, cloud cover, and humidity impact bifacial performance. For example, hot and humid climates like Houston, Texas, can reduce efficiency during summer months, which necessitates local climate consideration when designing systems.
- Shading and Obstructions: Since bifacial panels capture sunlight from both sides, shading on the rear side (from trees, buildings, etc.) disproportionately reduces their performance, highlighting the importance of site-specific layout planning.
Cost-Effectiveness Considerations
- Energy Yield vs. Cost: Although bifacial panels can increase energy generation by up to 25% under ideal conditions, the gains are highly dependent on local conditions. For typical ground albedo values, bifacial panels deliver a 5-15% increase in yield, impacting the levelized cost of energy (LCOE).
- System Costs: The overall cost of bifacial systems tends to be slightly higher than monofacial ones, mainly due to more expensive mounting structures, installation, and O&M costs. However, when paired with single-axis trackers, bifacial systems achieve higher yields with only marginally increased costs, resulting in the lowest LCOE for approximately 93% of land areas analyzed.
- Optimization of System Design: Optimal tilt, tracker orientation, and plant layout must be tailored to each location to maximize energy gain and cost-effectiveness. For example, north-south tracker orientation enhances winter yield in mid-latitudes, while east-west orientation is better for summer yield at lower latitudes.
Summary
| Factor | Effect on Performance & Cost-Effectiveness |
|---|---|
| High sunlight & high albedo | Increases bifacial gain (up to ~25%), improves cost-effectiveness |
| Latitude >30° | Fixed-tilt bifacial outperforms monofacial tracking by 5-15% |
| Latitude <30° | Single-axis east-west trackers with bifacial increase yields up to 45% |
| Climate (temp, humidity, clouds) | Can reduce efficiency, requiring system optimization |
| Shading | Significantly reduces rear-side performance |
| System cost | Slightly higher for bifacial, but higher yields offset costs |
| System design optimization | Critical for maximizing cost-effectiveness |
In essence, the cost-effectiveness of bifacial panels is highly location-dependent. Locations with favorable sunlight conditions, high ground reflectivity, and optimal system design see significant energy yield gains that justify the higher upfront and operational costs. Conversely, in less ideal locations, the gains shrink, potentially reducing the economic advantages of bifacial technology. Therefore, precise modeling and tailored system design are essential to maximize the benefits in each specific location.
Original article by NenPower, If reposted, please credit the source: https://nenpower.com/blog/how-does-the-location-dependent-performance-of-bifacial-panels-affect-their-overall-cost-effectiveness/
