Active surfaces selection method for building-integrated photovoltaics (BIPV) in renovation projects based on self-consumption and self-sufficiency

Question

1. What have the authors contributed in "Active surfaces selection method for building-integrated photovoltaics (bipv) in renovation projects based on self-consumption and self-sufficiency" ?

2. How many kWh/day are needed for the archetype 1?

3. Where can The authorget a PVAC CEPT EDM ANUS CRIP T-?

4. What is the recommended irradiation threshold for archetype 2?

Accepted Answer

Motivated by the current barriers and misconceptions that withhold a widespread integration of BIPV, particularly regarding financial implications and solar exposure levels that are believed to be unfavourable, this paper aims at bringing new knowledge and a rigorous and adaptable method to inform decision-making and promote the use of BIPV in urban renewal processes.. Focusing on the architectural design, the authors here present a methodology to select active ( BIPV ) surfaces during the retrofitting process based on a trade-off between the self-consumption ( SC ) and self-sufficiency ( SS ) of a building.. The outcomes of this new approach for addressing building renovation projects in the urban context can help architects, designers and engineers to better size the installation and the repartition of active surfaces in the renovated thermal envelope.

Accepted Answer

For archetype 1, 40 kWh/day (oil-boiler) and 84 kWh/day (heat-pump) lead to a total battery capacity of 54 and 122 kWh respectively.

Accepted Answer

In northern latitudes like Switzerland, irradiation levels close to the STC can be achieved only when installing PVAC CEPT EDM ANUS CRIP T- 5 -elements on the roof.

Accepted Answer

For archetype 2, the recommended threshold is 800 kWh/m2·year (oil-boiler) and 690 kWh/m2·year (heat-pump), leading to 87 and 136 MWh/year of on-site production respectively with 70% and 62% of SC and SS respectively.

Accepted Answer

The use of BIPV elements in renovation projects remains undervalued due to the lack of good examples and clear methodologies to develop this kind of projects specifically from the design phase, when architects, designers and engineers define the envelope concept [23].

Accepted Answer

To further help the integration of PV in buildings, the Centre Suisse d’Electronique et Microtechnique (CSEM) [63] has developed coloured panels using one of the most promising low-cost customisation techniques.

Accepted Answer

Results show that it is important to take into account a larger range of irradiation levels to choose the active surfaces, especially in high-rise buildings with a greater proportion of façade than roof.

Accepted Answer

For that building, the selection procedure indicates that more façade surfaces must be rendered active, despite the fact that more efficient panels are installed on the roof (compared to archetype 1).

Accepted Answer

Motivated by the current barriers and misconceptions that withhold a widespread integration of BIPV, particularly regarding financial implications and solar exposure levels that are believed to be unfavourable, this paper aims at bringing new knowledge and a rigorous and adaptable method to inform decision-making and promote the use of BIPV in urban renewal processes.

Accepted Answer

In addition, the market is changing rapidly and the decrease of prices, the improvement of PV efficiency and the emergence of new customisation techniques [22,38–41] suggest that it is a good idea to not limit the sizing method to these two irradiation thresholds [37].

Accepted Answer

Based on the literature review, the main motivations for this paper are thus that: a) existing methods to address PV integration are far from the design-decision process and are highly time-consuming; b) common sizing objectives do not take into account the current BIPV requirements in terms of energy utilisation; and c) reference values historically used to select building surfaces on which to fix PV panels are too restrictive in light of current and emerging technologies and their associated cost.

Accepted Answer

This is the design concept applied in the proposals for the S_BIPV scenario; this approach leaves the possibility to use larger panels reflecting the manufacturing flexibility that is emerging.

Accepted Answer

For archetype 2, this sizing value is of 233 kWh/day (oil-boiler) and 313 kWh/day (heat-pump) leading to a total battery capacity of 485 and 653 kWh respectively.

Accepted Answer

Two indicators that take into account the load profile of the building are the selfconsumption (SC) and self-sufficiency (SS) ratios [44].

Accepted Answer

The application of the proposed methodology can directly be adapted to other types of buildings and contexts, mainly by adjusting the settings in the simulation models (e.g. neighbour context in the 3D model, weather file corresponding to the geographic location).

Accepted Answer

In the no battery case, for archetype 1, the level from which the incomes compensate the cost – the breakeven point – is found at 800 kWh/m2·year (oil-boiler) and 700 kWh/m2·year (heat-pump).

Active surfaces selection method for building-integrated photovoltaics (BIPV) in renovation projects based on self-consumption and self-sufficiency

Chat with Paper

AI Agents for this Paper

Most frequently asked questions

1. What have the authors contributed in "Active surfaces selection method for building-integrated photovoltaics (bipv) in renovation projects based on self-consumption and self-sufficiency" ?

2. How many kWh/day are needed for the archetype 1?

3. Where can The authorget a PVAC CEPT EDM ANUS CRIP T-?

4. What is the recommended irradiation threshold for archetype 2?

5. What is the main reason why the use of BAPV in renovation projects remains undervalued?

6. What is the way to use a coloured panel?

7. What is the importance of taking into account a larger range of irradiation levels?

8. What is the irradiation threshold for archetype 1?

9. What is the purpose of this paper?

10. What are the main reasons for the sizing of PV panels?

11. What is the main motivation for this paper?

12. What is the design concept used in the proposals for the S_BIPV scenario?

13. How many kWh/day is the sizing value for archetype 2?

14. What are the two indicators that take into account the load profile of the building?

15. How can the methodology be adapted to other types of buildings?

16. What is the breakeven point for the no battery case?

Citations

Methodological-Technological Framework for Construction 4.0

Modeling and assessing BIPV envelopes using parametric Rhinoceros plugins Grasshopper and Ladybug

An optimization approach to photovoltaic building integration towards low energy buildings in different climate zones

Storage systems for building-integrated photovoltaic (BIPV) and building-integrated photovoltaic/thermal (BIPVT) installations: Environmental profile and other aspects

Building PV integration according to regional climate conditions: BIPV regional adaptability extending Köppen-Geiger climate classification against urban and climate-related temperature increases

References

Photovoltaic self-consumption in buildings : A review

Solar and daylight availability in the urban fabric

Building-integrated photovoltaics (BIPV) in architectural design in China

Building simulations supporting decision making in early design – A review

"architect friendly": a comparison of ten different building performance simulation tools

Related Papers (5)

A key review of building integrated photovoltaic (BIPV) systems

BIPV: building envelope solutions in a multi-criteria approach. A method for assessing life-cycle costs in the early design phase

State-of-the-Art Technologies for Building-Integrated Photovoltaic Systems

A critical review on building integrated photovoltaic products and their applications

Active BIPV glass facades: current trends of innovation