Harnessing Solar energy, Options for India
A study on harnessing solar energy options for India was conducted recently by Shakti Sustainable Energy Foundation, Climate works Foundation and SSN foundation. Supporting this study it has been concluded that solar energy can play a big role in providing electricity to rural areas and thus has been included in India’s rural electrification policy. See more at: http://shaktifoundation.in/report/harnessing-solar-energy-options-for-india/ A study on harnessing solar energy options for India was conducted recently by Shakti Sustainable Energy Foundation, Climate works Foundation and SSN foundation. Supporting this study it has been concluded that solar energy can play a big role in providing electricity to rural areas and thus has been included in India’s rural electrification policy. See more at: http://shaktifoundation.in/report/harnessing-solar-energy-options-for-india/
Table 34: Economics of a Biomass and Solar (50:50) Hybridised Microgrid Per unit capital costs Village installation Capital costs Solar PV ( `/W p ) Low voltage (LT) line (million `/km) Household connection (l `/node) Biomass gasifier (million `/kW) 180 Demand (kW) 35 0.12 LT length (km) 3 1800 0.078 No. of households Inverter efficiency Battery efficiency Solar PV size (kW p ) Biomass gasifier size (kW) 150 0.95 0.8 17.5 17.5 Solar PV cost (million `) Battery (million `) LT line (million `) Household connection (million `) Decentralised distributed generation ( million `) 3.15 0.49 0.36 0.27 5.64 Table 35: Assumptions in Computing LCOE of Grid Extension High voltage (HT) line (million `/km) Transformer 66 kVA (million `) LT line (million `/km) Household connection cost (million `/home) 0.16 Tariff for households (`/kWh) 2.50 0.2 Inflation (%) 5 0.12 Number of households 150 1800 Distribution losses (%) 10 Total capital cost for 15 km extension (million `) 3.23 Appendix 1 CSTEP | Page 106
Appendix - 2 Grid Integration in Urban India: Establishment of Standards and Technical Challenges Insufficient generation of power in India has led to widespread load shedding. Consequently, establishments turn to economically and environmentally expensive diesel generators to meet their needs. Distributed generation provides a very attractive solution. This could also save millions of kilowatts of power lost in transmission in the Indian grid system. However, there is insufficient clarity on the technical standards for proposed projects of grid-connected systems rated for less than 100 kW at low voltage/tension (LT) level (400 V for three phases and 230 V for single phase). Some major issues to be considered are: 1. Power quality issues: The quality of power provided by a photovoltaic (PV) system for onsite alternating current (AC) loads and for delivery to the utility distribution grid should be within a certain range with regards to voltage, flicker, frequency and distortion. a. Voltage: The voltage operating window should be selected in a manner that minimises nuisance tripping. Based on International Electro technical Commission (IEC) Standard 61727:2004, the operating range can be 85 to 110% of the nominal voltage. Thus, for India, the operating range based on a voltage of 230 V would be 195.5 to 253 V. b. Flicker: As per IEC 61727, operation of the PV system should not cause voltage flicker in excess of the limits stated in the relevant sections of IEC 61000-3-3 for systems less than 16 A or IEC 61000-3-5 for systems with current of 16 A and above. c. Frequency: When the utility grid frequency deviates outside specified conditions, the PV system should cease to energise the utility line. IEC 61727 specifies the frequency limits to be ±1 Hz, which is when the system should stop energising the utility line within 0.2 s. d. Distortion: 1 The current experience of several European utility-scale producers shows that harmonics are not currently a concern at the LT distribution level, and that penetration from 33 to 50% of distribution transformer/line capacity is considered safe. 2 European distribution grids are much more robust than their Indian counterparts; hence, studies will be required to establish standard practices in the Indian case. e. Direct current (DC) injection: According to IEC 61727, the PV system should not inject DC power greater than 1% of the rated inverter output current into the utility distribution grid under any operating condition. f. Power factor: The PV system should operate at a lagging power factor greater than 0.9 when output is greater than 50% of rated inverter output power. 2. Safety and protection issues: The following protection issues need to be kept in mind while designing PV systems: a. Islanding protection: In the event of loss of grid supply, utilities require that the PV system should stop feeding power to the grid. This can be achieved either by an in-built protection in the inverter/Power Control Unit (PCU), or, if this is not supplied or is insufficient to satisfy the utility, it can be provided by external relays. b. Grounding. c. Lightning surge protection. d. Ground earth/fault detection: When the size of the PV array becomes large enough to cause Appendix 2 CSTEP | Page 107
- Page 55: consumed by the customers will grad
- Page 60 and 61: In the case of smaller PV plants, p
- Page 62 and 63: decentralised in that banks and oth
- Page 64 and 65: 1.2.1.Solar Lanterns 1.2.1.1. Overv
- Page 66 and 67: Table 11: Models of Dissemination D
- Page 68 and 69: 1.2.3. Solar PV Microgrid 1.2.3.1.
- Page 70 and 71: NPV of Govt. Subsidies (` in Lakhs)
- Page 72 and 73: Table 12: Capital Cost of Solar-bas
- Page 74 and 75: electrification, assuming a solar s
- Page 76 and 77: electrical energy output of the arr
- Page 78 and 79: Table 18: Estimation of Potential f
- Page 80 and 81: The benchmark cost and subsidy for
- Page 82 and 83: 14 12 2.47 0.74 10 0.91 0.47 LCOE (
- Page 84 and 85: 3.2.1.1. Conclusions Although econo
- Page 86 and 87: IRR 3.3. Policy Debate From an inve
- Page 88: Table 22: Estimation of Potential f
- Page 92 and 93: Solar thermal technologies have a n
- Page 94 and 95: Figure 19: Solar Dryer Installation
- Page 96 and 97: Figure 20: The Box Cooker (Source:
- Page 98 and 99: Table 26: Cost Calculation for a 60
- Page 100 and 101: for the residential and commercial
- Page 102 and 103: It is difficult to estimate the pot
- Page 105: Appendix - 1 Assumptions in the Sec
- Page 109 and 110: Appendix - 3 Estimation of Commerci
- Page 111 and 112: Annexure 2 - List of Figures Introd
- Page 113 and 114: Annexure 4 - List of Acronyms AC AC
- Page 115 and 116: Annexure 5 - About the Authors Shub
- Page 117 and 118: 21 RPS System in Japan, http://www.
- Page 119 and 120: 35 Purohit, Pallav, ‘Financial Ev
Table 34: Economics of a Biomass and <strong>Solar</strong> (50:50) Hybridised Microgrid<br />
Per unit capital costs Village installation Capital costs<br />
<strong>Solar</strong> PV<br />
( `/W p )<br />
Low voltage (LT)<br />
line<br />
(million `/km)<br />
Household<br />
connection<br />
(l `/node)<br />
Biomass gasifier<br />
(million `/kW)<br />
180 Demand (kW) 35<br />
0.12 LT length (km) 3<br />
1800<br />
0.078<br />
No. of<br />
households<br />
Inverter<br />
efficiency<br />
Battery<br />
efficiency<br />
<strong>Solar</strong> PV size<br />
(kW p )<br />
Biomass<br />
gasifier size<br />
(kW)<br />
150<br />
0.95<br />
0.8<br />
17.5<br />
17.5<br />
<strong>Solar</strong> PV cost<br />
(million `)<br />
Battery<br />
(million `)<br />
LT line<br />
(million `)<br />
Household<br />
connection<br />
(million `)<br />
Decentralised<br />
distributed<br />
generation<br />
( million `)<br />
3.15<br />
0.49<br />
0.36<br />
0.27<br />
5.64<br />
Table 35: Assumptions in Computing LCOE of Grid Extension<br />
High voltage (HT) line<br />
(million `/km)<br />
Trans<strong>for</strong>mer 66 kVA<br />
(million `)<br />
LT line<br />
(million `/km)<br />
Household connection cost<br />
(million `/home)<br />
0.16<br />
Tariff <strong>for</strong> households<br />
(`/kWh)<br />
2.50<br />
0.2 Inflation (%) 5<br />
0.12 Number of households 150<br />
1800<br />
Distribution losses (%) 10<br />
Total capital cost <strong>for</strong> 15 km<br />
extension (million `)<br />
3.23<br />
Appendix 1 CSTEP | Page 106
Change language