2007
DOI: 10.1016/j.renene.2006.11.002
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Effect of different load profiles on the loss-of-load probability of stand-alone photovoltaic systems

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

0
22
0

Year Published

2007
2007
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
6
3
1

Relationship

0
10

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 67 publications
(22 citation statements)
references
References 24 publications
0
22
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The LCC of an item consists of the total costs of owning and operating an item over its lifetime, expressed in today's money [16][17][18][19]. The costs of an off-grid PV system include acquisition costs, operating costs, maintenance costs, and replacement costs.…”
Section: Analysis the Life Cycle Costmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The LCC of an item consists of the total costs of owning and operating an item over its lifetime, expressed in today's money [16][17][18][19]. The costs of an off-grid PV system include acquisition costs, operating costs, maintenance costs, and replacement costs.…”
Section: Analysis the Life Cycle Costmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Finally, the EPBP of the stand-alone system in Zakithnos is approximately equal to 23.5 years, a numerical value that exceeds the minimum service period of the installation, being however quite lower than the 30 years maximum, which is the sustainability criterion of the proposed PV-Bat systems. Besides, it is evident that by abandoning the zero-load rejection condition and allowing more realistic loss of load constraints [38,39], the size of the proposed stand-alone installations is significantly reduced, thus improving the energy sustainability of the proposed configuration.…”
Section: Application Results Of Epbpmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In the attempt to simulate an energetic equilibrium profile of a remote consumer, a condensed effort is done to define electricity demand of a typical remote consumer [4,11,24,25]. Energy needs were evaluated through a questionnaire (see Table II).…”
Section: E Consumption Profilmentioning
confidence: 99%