Category
- Products
-
- Wiki
- Contact us
Inverter manufacturers
sales@inverters.cn
Tag:
Total Project Opportunity in INDIA = 4500 talukas x 20 MW solar PV /taluka = 90,000 MW i.e 90 GW (refer my article in Energetica INDIA). But, India has plans to add only 20 GW till 2020, hence, this kind of shared business model with funding and secured business and financial models to offer low cost solutions through state government for the federal autonomy to create large number of jobs and also to increase Agriculture GDP, hence, this approach to team work to create large number of small entrepreneurs in their local taluka place.
Those who have access to Indian State government to realize on this new solar PV project development and also in Middle East, Africa, South East Asia.
Those who have access to Indian State government to realize on this new solar PV project development and also in Middle East, Africa, South East Asia.
Tags: PV system, Solar inverter
Solar PV, Wind (now only GBI good), Biomass power projects should not be promoted with this present regime of Capital subsidy (or Viability Gap Funding) and Accelerated Depreciation which is detrimental to the Economy and Government and hence Common Man....
a). Assume that with the present Capital Subsidy and Accelerated Depreciation policy, a total of 4000 MW of Biomass or Solar PV Power Projects are executed in INDIA till date. Assume the Project cost of Rs. 6.5 Cr/ MW.
So, the Total money invested with 4000 MW Biomass or Solar PV with present policy = 4000 x 6.5 cr/MW = Rs. 26,000 Crores.
a). Assume that with the present Capital Subsidy and Accelerated Depreciation policy, a total of 4000 MW of Biomass or Solar PV Power Projects are executed in INDIA till date. Assume the Project cost of Rs. 6.5 Cr/ MW.
So, the Total money invested with 4000 MW Biomass or Solar PV with present policy = 4000 x 6.5 cr/MW = Rs. 26,000 Crores.
Tags: PV system
Kindly take note that i had written about this Solar PV Generator on Industry roof top in ENERGY BLITZ which was Published in NOV 2012, and we welcome such Decision. All other States shall go for such schemes to compel industries to generate and release the day power for other activities.
Tags: PV system
Anyways, please read the paper and form your own opinions, but my take on this paper is that it sets the minimum benefit of module level MPPT, and ANY additional variables will increase the benefit. Soiling, variable aging, and variable irradiance (shading) are very real considerations for any site which can have very significant effects on harvest. Additionally, without module level monitoring, there is no way to determine whether or not a modules are even meeting their standard deviation specifications.
Soiling and aging effects are especially hard to model, and the paper references establishes some techniques to quantify the potential benefit of microinverters under these conditions through measurements at an actual test site. Although the study did not use any global MPPT inverters, nonmonotoic conditions which "fooled" the inverter were excluded from the results.
Soiling and aging effects are especially hard to model, and the paper references establishes some techniques to quantify the potential benefit of microinverters under these conditions through measurements at an actual test site. Although the study did not use any global MPPT inverters, nonmonotoic conditions which "fooled" the inverter were excluded from the results.
A failure of a roof-mounted micro inverter requires a much larger effort to replace, compared with a wall-mounted string inverter. I expect the cost differential in labor to replace a roof-mounted micro inverter vs. a wall-mounted inverter would be substantial. This may factor into the overall system availability if a homeowner opts to not replace a single failed micro inverter right away.
I have also heard the opposite case to hold true for certain (primarily government) installs where the budget to purchase the PV system is available, but the budget for O&M down the road is zero. In this case, it is expected that the system output degrades gradually over time with individual component failures, versus a complete system failure should a central inverter fail with no budget for repairs.
I do find this installer's claims of having failures on 100% of their installed microinverter systems to be hard to believe. This seems like an outlier to me, not in line with anecdotal evidence that I am hearing from other installers. However, I'm not an expert in reliability, so I'm not going to get into it.
I have also heard the opposite case to hold true for certain (primarily government) installs where the budget to purchase the PV system is available, but the budget for O&M down the road is zero. In this case, it is expected that the system output degrades gradually over time with individual component failures, versus a complete system failure should a central inverter fail with no budget for repairs.
I do find this installer's claims of having failures on 100% of their installed microinverter systems to be hard to believe. This seems like an outlier to me, not in line with anecdotal evidence that I am hearing from other installers. However, I'm not an expert in reliability, so I'm not going to get into it.
Micro Inverters are no the be all end all solution but I feel they do make sense in some smaller applications. For example in small residential systems they do make sense. For a one or 2 module gird tied system micro inverters are likely the only solution. As system size increases above a few kW Micro inverters become too costly.
Another important consideration is the type of installation. In the residential space the roof is typically complex, has obstructions or may be exposed to shading from nearby objects. In these types of scenarios distributed MPPT solutions (micro inverters and DC power optimizers) do make sense. The ability to use different string lengths, different mounting orientations, different size modules, and shade tolerance are all valuable tools in rooftop PV system design. I must disagree with the conclusion that distributed solutions never add energy, and that shading rarely occurs. Shading is common in the residential space and there have been several independent studies that show that where shading occurs distributed technologies add substantial added energy. This makes perfect sense because with distributed MPPT solutions the current of the entire string is not reduced by shading one module in the string.
On the other end of the spectrum are ground mounted utility scale systems. In these types of systems many of the design advantages offered by distributed technologies are of less valuable. String length, module orientation, and module type are all simple inputs to the system design equation. In utility scale system shading is normally not an issue since nearby objects that would create shade are very uncommon. Without shading, the potential for increased energy yield typically comes from module mismatch. With a well matched array the lower efficiency of micros compared to larger inverters makes it difficult to produce additional energy. DC optimizers fare better here since their higher efficiency means that the lost energy recovered from mismatch can be larger than the losses incurred by inserting the optimizers into the system. Well matched is a key phrase since many systems installed during the many "PV booms" around the world are far from well matched.
Another important consideration is the type of installation. In the residential space the roof is typically complex, has obstructions or may be exposed to shading from nearby objects. In these types of scenarios distributed MPPT solutions (micro inverters and DC power optimizers) do make sense. The ability to use different string lengths, different mounting orientations, different size modules, and shade tolerance are all valuable tools in rooftop PV system design. I must disagree with the conclusion that distributed solutions never add energy, and that shading rarely occurs. Shading is common in the residential space and there have been several independent studies that show that where shading occurs distributed technologies add substantial added energy. This makes perfect sense because with distributed MPPT solutions the current of the entire string is not reduced by shading one module in the string.
On the other end of the spectrum are ground mounted utility scale systems. In these types of systems many of the design advantages offered by distributed technologies are of less valuable. String length, module orientation, and module type are all simple inputs to the system design equation. In utility scale system shading is normally not an issue since nearby objects that would create shade are very uncommon. Without shading, the potential for increased energy yield typically comes from module mismatch. With a well matched array the lower efficiency of micros compared to larger inverters makes it difficult to produce additional energy. DC optimizers fare better here since their higher efficiency means that the lost energy recovered from mismatch can be larger than the losses incurred by inserting the optimizers into the system. Well matched is a key phrase since many systems installed during the many "PV booms" around the world are far from well matched.