Energy, environmental and economic analysis of the influence of the range of movement limit on horizontal single-axis trackers at photovoltaic power plants

This paper presents a$3E$(energy, environmental and economic) analysis of the impact of the movement limit on a horizontal single-axis tracker in Spain. Four scenarios have been analysed: (i) Scenario 1 (most favourable scenario), characterised by low wind and snow loads (Miraflores $PV$plant and Sueca location); (ii) Scenario 2, characterised by low wind and medium snow loads (Canredondo$PV$plant); (iii) Scenario 3, characterised by high wind and low snow loads (Basir$PV$plant); and (iv) Scenario 4 (less favourable scenario), characterised by high wind and snow loads (Rubió location). Four evaluation indicators (annual incident energy ratio,$C{O}_2$emissions ratio,$PV$mounting system cost ratio,$LCOE$efficiency) and ten movement limits (${\beta }_{max}$), ranging from$\pm 50$ (${}^o$) to$\pm 60$ (${}^o$), were analysed. Scenario 1 was used for comparison with the other scenarios. According to this study, the following conclusions can be drawn: (i) From an energetic point of view, the optimal maximum movement limit depends on each location; (ii) There is a relationship between$C{O}_2$ emissions and the presence of wind and snow loads. The higher the impact of wind and snow loads, the higher the$C{O}_2$emissions. For example, in Scenario 4, the configurations${\beta }_{max}=\pm 50$ (${}^o$),${\beta }_{max}=\pm 55$ (${}^o$) and${\beta }_{max}=\pm 60$ (${}^o$) generate1.94($t/tracker$),2.07 ($t/tracker$) and2.11($t/tracker$) more$C{O}_2$ emissions compared to Scenario 1; (iii)$C{O}_2$emissions decrease with decreasing${\beta }_{max}$. For example, in Scenario 4, the ${\beta }_{max}=\pm 60$ (${}^o$) configuration generates11.42%and4.23%more $C{O}_2$emissions compared to the${\beta }_{max}=\pm 50$ (${}^o$) and${\beta }_{max}=\pm 55$ (${}^o$) configuration, respectively; (iv) There is a relationship between the cost of the$PV$module mounting system and the presence of wind and snow loads. The higher the impact of wind and snow loads, the higher the cost of the$PV$module mounting system. For example, in Scenario 4, the configurations${\beta }_{max}=\pm 50$ (${}^o$),${\beta }_{max}=\pm 55$ (${}^o$) and${\beta }_{max}=\pm 60$ (${}^o$) the cost is higher by approximately 958 (€), 1034 (€) and 1045 (€) compared to Scenario 1; (v) The cost of the $PV$module mounting system decreases with decreasing ${\beta }_{max}$. For example, in Scenario 4, the${\beta }_{max}=\pm 60$ (${}^o$) configuration has a higher cost of8.44%and 3.05%compared to the${\beta }_{max}=\pm 50$ (${}^o$) and${\beta }_{max}=\pm 55$ (${}^o$) configuration, respectively; and (vi) In all scenarios analysed, the $LCOE$efficiency was always lower for movement limits below ${\beta }_{max}=\pm 55$ (${}^o$).