EPG Economics

8/3/2019 EPG Economics

1/16

Envelope Power Greenhouse(EPG)

A combined Solar Power Station and Greenhouse

to produce Energy and Crop

Technology and Economics

Jrgen Kleinwchter

Sunvention GmbH

April 2005

SUNVENTION

SOLAR

POWER

VILLAGE


2/16

SUNVENTION

SOLAR

POWER

VILLAGE

Envelope Power Greenhouse

Situation

The exponentially growing world population needs more Energy, more arable land and acleaner environment (Fig.1, Fig.2).

Fig.1: Energy Reserves, world population,food production Fig.2: Growing population and decreasing arable land space

Since most of the arable land worldwide is already used, new arable land out of arid andsemi-arid zones must be crated to cover the need of food. Due to a harsh environment in thisregions the greenhouses must be climatized which in turn requires massive amounts of

energy. Furthermore, Water one of the most important prerequisites for agriculture is a veryscarce resource. People working in the greenhouses farms and living in villages around themneed additionally energy. But we are speaking about new land to be developed in zones wherebeside huge land space, a little bit of groundwater and a sky with an inexorably burning sunnothing exists no power grid, no infrastructure and therefore no hope.

If for the reasons described in Fig.1 and Fig.2 mankind is nevertheless urged to make use ofthis land, the economical conditions to do this seems prohibitive and therefore an unrealisticscenario for just that part of humanity needing it at utmost the majority of mankind living in thesunny, mostly semi-arid zones of our globe.

Therefore, a technical solution combining in a synergetic way Greenhouse, Agriculture and

Energy production, turning the destructive force of the Sun into a benign one by making use ofthe 200-400 l/m/year (!) of oil equivalent of its radiation, is a logical consequence to face thishistorical challenge.

The Envelope Power Greenhouse (EPG) represents such a technical solution. It opens newways to combine the technical and biological world and represents in so far the tendencytoward a new Industrial Paradigma of the 21st Century a shift of Technology toward theNature.

- 2 -

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

1900 1920 1940 1960 1980 2000 2020 2040 2060 2080

Year

[Billion]

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

900

1000

1100

1200

1300

CO2

intheAtmosphere[ppm]

Coal

Oil

Uran

GasCO2-Emission

World Population

Food Production

?

?

Reserves

30

0

1

2

3

4

5

1650 1700 1750 1800 1850 1900 1950 2000 2050 2100

[year]

land

area

[109

hectares]

a

c

b

1

2

1. Usable worldwide agriculture land2. World population x 0,4 haa. Culmination point if 0,4 ha is needed to feed one personb. Culmination point if 0,2 ha is needed to feed one personc. Culmination point if 0,1 ha is needed to feed one person


3/16

SUNVENTION

SOLAR

POWER

VILLAGE


Technology

The EPG combines two systems: a Solar Power Station (SPS) under the protective, highlytransparent, endurant and self cleaning cover (Envelope) of an advanced Greenhouse (Fig.3).

Fig.3: Schema

The SPS consists of Sun Tracking Concentrator Lens Systems (SunFlower and SunRay)combined either with actively cooled Photovoltaic Cells (CoolPhoton - Solar PhotovoltaicPower Station (SPS-PV)) (Fig.4) or with thermal Absorbers providing the Heat Energy to run aThermodynamic Generator (Power Fluid Engine Solar Thermal Power Station SPS-TH)(Fig.5). To extend the operation over the sunshine hours parts of the daily produced heat canbe stored with a compact Thermo Chemical Storage System (TCS) (Fig.6). This can lead toautonomous, 24 hr operating, decentralized base load power stations.

Fig.4: EPG with SPS-PV

- 3 -

SunFlower

SunRay


4/16

SUNVENTION

SOLAR

POWER

VILLAGE


Fig.5: EPG with SPS-TH

Fig.6: TCS-System

- 4 -

Mg + H2 = Mg H2 + E

Mg H2 + E = Mg + H2

E = 1 kWh/kg Mg + 70 g H2

System 3

total = 0,16

Mg H2

1

= 0,8

2 = 0,2

H2

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500 550

Temperatur [C]

Druck

[bar]

- 37 kJ/mol H2+ 37 kJ/mol H2- 75 kJ/mol H2 + 75 kJ/mol H2

MgH2 Mg H2+

NaAlH4

Ka.

Na3AlH63

1 Al+H2

3

2+

Pressure

[bar]

Temperature [C]


5/16

SUNVENTION

SOLAR

POWER

VILLAGE


The Greenhouse part of the EPG is situated under the Shelter of the outer Envelope and theinterior optical lens system.

The Photosynthesis requires depending from the growth stage, season and the type ofcultivation only between 5 and 30% of the Energy content of the incoming global SolarSpectrum (Fig.7) within a well defined Spectral Region (PAR).

Fig.7: Absorption spectrum of chlorophyll

Curve 1 = Solar spectrum, terrestrialCurve 2 = Absorption spectrum of chlorophyll (PAR) A = UV-A radiation.

Doesn't effect plant growing, but produces brighter colours, strongeraromas and causes natural disinfection.

B + D = Most productive spectral regions.C + E = Only small contribution to photosynthesis.

This lucky coincidence makes it possible, to extract the none photosynthetically (70-95%) usedEnergy within the SPS-TH or SPS-PV Lens System and to turn them to usable Energy(Electricity, Process Heat, Mechanical Power).

Since only one small part of this Energy is used for the EPG-Greenhouse itself, following mainsynergetic benefits result out of the combination of the Envelope, the Lens SystemSunFlower, SunRay) and the enclosed Agricultural Greenhouse:

Production of Energy: used in a small fraction for the greenhouse itself, in the remaining

part to supply the surrounding infrastructures (farms, villages, regions; Cluster of EPG'scombined with mini and medium distribution grids; in bigger clusters to export the electricityvia large grids).

Controlling the temperature within the greenhouse: Since only a smaller part of theglobal radiation (in the ideal case, only the PAR spectrum, Fig.7) penetrates the interior ofthe greenhouse, it stays at moderate temperatures even on hot days. If the ambienttemperature falls under a critical limit (typically: night time in arid zones), parts of the dailyextracted heat can be easily stored (Hot-Water, Hot-Rock, Hot-Sand etc. -Storages) andgiven back to the greenhouse. That means, that instead of installing an expensive,energy consuming greenhouse air conditioning system, the EPG's selective use of thesolar spectrum conditions the greenhouse temperature all by creating energy.

- 5 -


6/16

SUNVENTION

SOLAR

POWER

VILLAGE


Minimizing the water requirement: the closed EPG greenhouse is equipped with a Water-Regeneration-System minimizing dramatically the amount of required water (Fig.8).

Fig.8: Water Regeneration System (according to Prof. Pokorny and Sunvention)

Better Crop Quality, higher yields: the EPG systems use UV-A transparent materials. TheUV-A portion of the solar spectrum disinfects the interior of the greenhouse in a natural way(therefore making at least to a large extend obsolete fungicides and pesticides) andenhances the crop quality (taste, colour, odour). By giving the plants only the PAR spectrumin combination with temperature, humidity, CO2 control its yield can be more than doubledcompared to conventional high-tech greenhouses.

To get more detailed Information about the methods and concepts to create PAR spectras tominimize heat and water losses and to create other synergetic aspects of the EPG Technology,see: EPG, Energy and Crop, Principles, Development Status, Future Aspects,Sunvention, Feb.2005.

Economics

1.) Solar Power Station Part (SPS-PV and SPS-TH)

The fact, that the highly precise optical system with its accurate sun tracking, is sheltered fromwind, weather ans dust by its Envelope allows to build it about one order of magnitude morelight-weight than competing products without shelter.

Since weight is cost, this allows for strongly reduced costs (weight of the SunFlowerand SunRay optical system: 10kg/m compared to 100 kg/m for solar opticswithout Envelope).

The highly transparent Fluoropolymer Envelope (T=94%) absorbs a tiny portion of the incidentradiation. This is overcompensated by the self cleaning of the cover avoiding expensive andcomplicate cleaning methods for the optics and the light weight of the structure, including tiny

motors and gears for the tracking system which don't have to compensate heavy wind loads.

- 6 -

1

1a

7

3

4

2

6

5

5a

5b

8


7/16

SUNVENTION

SOLAR

POWER

VILLAGE


The Fig.9 gives the expected economics of large scale solar power plants of the parabolictrough type (Fig.9a) as installed with a capacity of 340 MWel in the Californian Mohave desert(SEGS=Solar Electric Generating System).

Fig.9: Cost reduction potential Fig.9a: SEGS in the Mohave desert of parabolic through solar power

Over 20 years data concerning investment cost, performance and operating/maintenance costhave been collected to allow a firm assessment of today's solar power plants economics and anextrapolation of future solar power plants performance. Most importantly, these plants generateelectricity at about $0.12/kWhel thus being already competitive with conventional power plantsfor peak-power demand.

Compared to the SPS-TH Technology, the SEGS Technology has four week points:

1. Economic size is 30 MWel since smaller steam turbines are not efficient. The Powerfluidengine of the SPS-TH is efficient already for smaller sizes 100kWel. Therefore alsodecentral applications are possible.

2. Night time storage for SEGS systems has been projected with huge sensible heat systems(oil, rocks, iron). They are expensive and not very effective, since working with fallingtemperature level during extraction of heat. The TCS System of the SPS-TH builds muchsmaller in volume (about a factor of 35). Since the chemical, reversible heat reactionis isothermal, the Powerfluid engine is operated at constant high temperature (andunchanging efficiency).

3. To reduce the costs considerably under 10 Uscents/kWh as required for market positioning,

a completely new technology of Solar Trough Optics has to be developed, since the existingGlass-Steel Technology has came to its limits. Since Wind-loads determine the requiredmaterial amount, a solution is hardly to see. The SPS-TH Technology with its inbuiltlight weight structure and using advanced composite technologies can be broughtwithin overseable, rational and relatively short time steps to 150$/m of system costs(Envelope + interior Lens system) and in a further step to 100$/m. This results inthe case of Solar Alone Operation (without TCS or Biogas Storage) to kWhel costs of6.2UScent/kWhel respectively 4.9UScent/kWhel. With biomass backup and Day andNight Operation this can be brought to approx. 9UScent/kWhel respectively8.6UScent/kWhel. By developing the TCS Storage to a serial product (40$/kWh storagesystem), Day and Night Operation in the range of 6.5UScent/kWhel respectively6.2UScent/kWhel for a stand alone, purely solar 24h system.

- 7 -


8/16

SUNVENTION

SOLAR

POWER

VILLAGE


4. The SEGS system uses land. The EPG systems convert additionally to their EnergyProduction arid land into arable land and therefore create double benefit(Energy+Crop).

See Exhibit I+II.

2.) SPS-PV (Solar Photovoltaic Power Station)

The photovoltaic technology is fast developing into a Multibillion-Dollars worldwide industry.Namely German and Japan are the drivers of the development. In Germany, producers of PVelectricity are paid approx. 50 cents for every kWhel injected to the grid for a period of 20years. Japan peak-power for air conditioning is so expensive, that even the still high productioncosts of PV electricity (approx. 40 cents/ kWhel) starts to be competitive.

However if PV electricity should become competitive with conventional energy sources. Itscosts must be dramatically decreased. The Times Magazine (Nov.04) stated, that aSupernova Market development of PV Technologies would start if kWhel costs would geunder 10 US cents/ kWhel.

Combining PV Cells with solar concentrators (reducing by this way the required PV cell surface)and cooling them actively (enhancing therefore its efficiency and producing usable lowtemperature heat) is therefore an interesting way to achieve the desired cost reduction.

Therefore the combination with the light weight optics (SunRay and SunFlower) and theCoolPhoton active cooling system is a promising technology for small, medium and large gridconnected Photovoltaic Power Plants. This SPS-PV, again in combination with the Envelope

Greenhouse has good economics.

See Exhibit III.

3.) The Agricultural-Greenhouse part

This part is the most complex since dealing with much more complicate interactions of thebiological system with radiation, spectrum, humidity, CO2, nutrients, temperatures, etc.

Therefore, in the frame of this short evaluation only some main factors and proven facts areconsidered. However the resulting net incomes /m PEG system can be for sure very stronglyenhanced for example by cultivating medical plants within the Envelope. This represents an

interesting challenge toward parallel developments. The EPG Greenhouse offers a wide varietyof flexible adaptations (light spectrum, temperature, CO2, moisture, etc.) to plant needs as theycould not been realized up so far in real size greenhouses.

Following are proven facts:

Filter Greenhouses produce more than twice the crop valve of classical high-techgreenhouses (pages 14-16, EPG paper, Feb.05)

They do this with much less external energy and water requirements (same sources).

Since the EPG Greenhouse is by far more advanced than classical filter greenhouses, its

additional energy requirements (fans, pumps, cooling, heating) are all taken out of the energyloops created by the EPG itself no auxiliary energy required.

- 8 -


9/16

SUNVENTION

SOLAR

POWER

VILLAGE


Table 1 shows the productivity of some greenhouse crops in Mediterranean countriescompared to Holland.

Table 1: Productivity of a few greenhouse crops in some Mediterranean countries and in the Netherlands.Data were provided by different institutions in the selected countries.

[Source: Chronica Horticulturae Vol.44/2, 2004]

Table 2 gives yields, cross income and net income for sweet pepper in Almeria / Spain andagain Holland.

Variable Soil culture Soilless culture Soilless culture

Almeria Almeria Holland

Yield kg/m 10.5 16 26

Market price /kg 0.53 0.66 1.62

Gross income /m 5.6 10.6 42.1

Variable costs /m 3.1 3.8 26.5

Fixed costs /m 1.3 2.7 5.5

Capital costs /m 0.4 0.8 6

Net income /m 0.8 3.3 4.1

Table 2: yields, cross income and net income for sweet pepper [same source]

At the first glance it seems paradoxical, that the poor solar country Holland produces so muchmore crops than the sun rich Mediterranean countries. As Southern Spain has about double ofsolar input one should think, that the crop yield also doubles. And if bringing it into a filtergreenhouse this crop yield should double again, so that in this case the Almeria yield would befour time the yield of Holland.

The reason why the opposite takes place, is simply to explain: as the Southern greenhousesdon't posses air conditioning systems (for energy cost reasons !) they simply can produce cropsin short time windows (winter and autumn). This lack of air conditioning is reflected in thecolumn variable costs in the Table 2. The heating costs in Holland (mainly variable costs) areeating up most of the cross income, whereas the lacking air conditioning for Spain results in low

variable costs so that the cross income of both is not so far away.

- 9 -


10/16

SUNVENTION

SOLAR

POWER

VILLAGE


Therefore to stay in a conservative picture we state that it should be feasible for an EPGgreenhouse situated in Southern latitudes like Spain to have at least double of the yield (inthis example 52 kg/m.year) therefore a double cross income of 84 /m.year and for thereasons mentioned (no auxiliary energy needed) about 70 /m.year net income (109$/m.yearincome).

It is clear that this part of the EPG production chain must still be proven under real conditions.But as the Envelope Greenhouse already is commercially viable without any crop productionwhatever the net incomes from the biological production will be they will add positively to theReturn of Investment.

And as mentioned under Situation- the biggest challenge for EPG systems are autonomic,decentral installations in remote, arid zones without other choice of electricity and food as thislocally produced.

4.) EPG for Salt Water Desalination

Water scarcity in arid zones is a problem. If salt water is available (salty ground water, saltlakes or ocean coasts), it must be desalinated. Modern multiflash Desalination systems, andespecially the Auto Regulating Autoflash Desalination unit from the Atlantis Company needonly 0.08 kWh of thermal energy around 100C to produce 1 litre of fresh water.

1m of EPG Greenhouse generates per year approx. 1000KWh of 100C thermal energy,which in turns produce 12 500 l of fresh water. For a 650m EPG greenhouse this results in8125 tons/year or an average of 22 000 l of fresh water per day. This is orders of magnitude

more than the greenhouse itself needs so that this type of EPG becomes a first classWater+Crop producer.

Fig.10: EPG with Autoflash desalination system

- 10 -


11/16

SUNVENTION

SOLAR

POWER

VILLAGE


Exhibit I-1: Thermal Solar Power Station (8 hrs day-16 hrs night operation)

- 11 -

SPS-TH Analysis: Assumptions, Output

Day and Day and

Daytime Night Night

Operation Operation Operation

Only Biogas TC Storage

I. Assumptions

Effective annual direct irradiation (kWh/sqm 2.000 2.000 2.000

Daytime solar operation (hrs/d) 8,0 8,0 8,0

Nighttime operation (hrs/d) 16,0 16,0

Floor size/Fresnel lenses aperture (sqm) 650 650 1.950Performance of Powerfluid engine (kWe) 100 100 100

Transmission through greenhouse cover 94% 94% 94%

Transmission through Fresnel lens 90% 90% 90%

Efficiency of thermal receiver/piping 90% 90% 90%

Efficiency of Powerfluid engin e 30% 30% 30%

Efficiency-solar to electricity 22,8% 22,8% 22,8%

Biogas burner efficiency 80%

II. Output

Thermal energy generated (kWh/year)o solar 989.820 989.820 2.969.460o biogas 0 1.946.667 0

989.820 2.936.487 2.969.460

Electrical energy output (kWh/year) 296.946 880.946 890.838

Yearly thermal energy needed (kWhth) 973.333 2.920.000 2.920.000

SPS-TH Analysis: InvestmentCost for Mass Product

AssumptionsCost of EPG ($/sqm) 150 100 150 100 150 100Cost of TC storage ($/kWh) 40 40

Nightly storage capacity needed (kWh) 5.424 5.424

Cost

EPG ($) 97.500 65.000 97.500 65.000 292.500 195.000100 kWe Powerfluid engine 60.000 60.000 60.000 60.000 60.000 60.000

TC storage 216.947 216.947Total investment cost 157.500 125.000 157.500 125.000 569.447 471.947

Day and Night

Operation with

TC Storage

Daytime

Operation only

Day and Night

Operation with

Biogas


12/16

SUNVENTION

SOLAR

POWER

VILLAGE


- 12 -

SPS-TH Analysis: Assessment of Economics

Day/Night Operation (hrs) 8 and 0 8 and 0 8 and 16 8 and 16 8 and 16 8 and 16

Cost of EPG ($/sqm) 150 100 150 100 150 100

Yearly energy output-electric (kWhel) 296.946 296.946 880.946 880.946 890.838 890.838

Investment cost ($) 157.500 125.000 157.500 125.000 569.447 471.947Investment cost ($/sqm) 242 192 242 192 292 242

Proceeds from electricity ($) (1) 44.542 44.542 132.142 132.142 133.626 133.626Proceeds from leasing greenhouse (3) 32.500 32.500 32.500 32.500 97.500 97.500

77.042 77.042 164.642 164.642 231.126 231.126

Yearly amortisation cost ($) (4) 13.732 10.898 13.732 10.898 49.647 41.146Maintenance (5) 4.725 3.750 4.725 3.750 17.083 14.158Biogas (6) 60.833 60.833

18.457 14.648 79.290 75.481 66.730 55.305

Pretax income ($) 58.585 62.394 85.352 89.160 164.395 175.821Pretax cashflow ($) 67.592 69.542 94.359 96.309 196.959 202.809

Cost of electricity ($/kWhe) (8) 0,062 0,049 0,090 0,086 0,075 0,062

Net present value ($) (7) 87.800 119.968 172.466 204.634 167.444 263.949Internal rate of return (IRR) 42,9% 55,6% 59,9% 77,0% 34,5% 42,9%(1) Price of kWhe sold ( /kWhe) 0,150

(2) Price of thermal energy sold ($/kWhth) 0,020

(3) Price for leasing greenhouse ($/sqm+year) 50,0

(4) Amortization (Years) 20Financing cost (%) 6,00%

(5) Maintenance/year (as % of investment) 3,00%

(6) Biogas cost ($/kWh) 0,025

(7) Calculated at required return 25%

(8) Cost of electricity for case of $ 80/kWh investment cost of TC-storage ($/kWhe) 0,103 0,091


Daytime Operation onlyDay and Night

Operation with Biogas

Day and Night

Operation with TCStorage


13/16

SUNVENTION

SOLAR

POWER

VILLAGE


Exhibit II: Thermal Solar Power Station (8 hrs day - 4 hrs night operation)

- 13 -

SPS-TH Analysis: Assumptions, Output

(4 hr night operation)

Day and Day and

Daytime Night Night

Operation Operation Operation

Only Biogas TC Storage

I. Assumptions

Effective annual direct irradiation (kWh/sqm 2.000 2.000 2.000

Daytime solar operation (hrs/d) 8,0 8,0 8,0

Nighttime operation (hrs/d) 4,0 4,0

Floor size/Fresnel lenses aperture (sqm) 650 650 970Performance of Powerfluid engine (kWe) 100 100 100

Transmission through greenhouse cover 94% 94% 94%

Transmission through Fresnel lens 90% 90% 90%

Efficiency of thermal receiver/piping 90% 90% 90%

Efficiency of Powerfluid engine 30% 30% 30%

Efficiency-solar to electricity 22,8% 22,8% 22,8%

Biogas burner efficiency 80%

II. Output

Thermal energy generated (kWh/year)

o solar 989.820 989.820 1.477.116o biogas 0 486.667 0

989.820 1.476.487 1.477.116

Electrical energy output (kWh/year) 296.946 442.946 443.135

Yearly thermal energy needed (kWh) 973.333 1.460.000 1.460.000

SPS-TH Analysis: Investment Cost for Mass Product


Assumptions

Cost of EPG ($/sqm) 150 100 150 100 150 100Cost of TC storage ($/kWh) 40 40Nightly storage capacity needed (kWh) 1.349 1.349

Cost

EPG ($) 97.500 65.000 97.500 65.000 145.500 97.000100 kWe Powerfluid engine 60.000 60.000 60.000 60.000 60.000 60.000TC storage 53.959 53.959Total investment cost 157.500 125.000 157.500 125.000 259.459 210.959

Daytime

Operation only

Day and Night

Operation with

Biogas

Day and Night

Operation with

TC Storage


14/16

SUNVENTION

SOLAR

POWER

VILLAGE


- 14 -

SPS-TH Analysis: Assessment of Economics


Day/Night Operation (hrs) 8 and 0 8 and 0 8 and 4 8 and 4 8 and 4 8 and 4

Cost of EPG ($/sqm) 150 100 150 100 150 100

Yearly energy output-electric (kWhel) 296.946 296.946 442.946 442.946 443.135 443.135

Investment cost ($) 157.500 125.000 157.500 125.000 259.459 210.959Investment cost ($/sqm) 242 192 242 192 267 217

Proceeds from electricity ($) (1) 44.542 44.542 66.442 66.442 66.470 66.470

Proceeds from leasing greenhouse (3) 32.500 32.500 32.500 32.500 48.500 48.50077.042 77.042 98.942 98.942 114.970 114.970

Yearly amortisation cost ($) (4) 13.732 10.898 13.732 10.898 22.621 18.392Maintenance ($) (5) 4.725 3.750 4.725 3.750 7.784 6.329Biogas (6) 15.208 15.208

18.457 14.648 33.665 29.856 30.405 24.721

Pretax income ($) 58.585 62.394 65.277 69.085 84.566 90.249Pretax cashflow ($) 67.592 69.542 74.284 76.234 99.403 102.313

Cost of electricity ($/kWhe) (8) 0,062 0,049 0,076 0,067 0,069 0,056

Net present value ($) (7) 87.800 119.968 108.967 141.135 106.854 154.859

Internal rate of return (IRR) 42,9% 55,6% 47,1% 61,0% 38,3% 48,5%(1) Price of kWhe sold ( /kWhe) 0,150

(2) Price of thermal energy sold ($/kWhth) 0,020


(4) Amortization (Years) 20

Financing cost (%) 6,00%


(6) Biogas cost ($/kWh) 0,025




Daytime Operation only

Day and Night

Operation with Biogas

Day and Night

Operation with TC

Storage


15/16

SUNVENTION

SOLAR

POWER

VILLAGE


Exhibit III: Photovoltaic Solar Power Station

- 15 -

SPS-PV Analysis: Assumptions, Output

PV-Cells PV-Cells

Solartec Boeing

Assumptions

Effective annual direct irradiation (kWh/sqm) 2.000 2.000

Floor size/Fresnel lenses aperture (sqm) 1.000 1.000

Transmission through greenhouse cover 94,0% 94,0%

Transmission through Fresnel lens 90,0% 90,0%PV-cells efficiency 15,0% 40,0%

Efficiency-solar to electricity 12,7% 33,8%

Output

Electricity output (kWh/year) 253.800 676.800

SPS-PV Analysis: InvestmentCost for Mass Product

AssumptionsCost of EPG ($/sqm) 150 100 150 100Cost of Solartec PV-cells ($/sqm aperture) 21 21Cost of Boeing PV-cells ($/Wp) 0,30 0,30

Cost

EPG ($) 150.000 100.000 150.000 100.000PV modules 21.000 21.000 102.000 102.000Total investment cost 171.000 121.000 252.000 202.000

PV-Cells Solartec PV-Cells Boeing


16/16

SUNVENTION

SOLAR

POWER

VILLAGE


- 16 -

SPS-PV Analysis: Assessment of Economics

Cost of EPG ($/sqm) 150 100 150 100

Yearly energy output-electric (kWhel) 253.800 253.800 676.800 676.800

Investment cost ($) 171.000 121.000 252.000 202.000Investment cost ($/sqm) 171 121 252 202

Proceeds from electricity ($) (1) 38.070 38.070 101.520 101.520

Proceeds from leasing greenhouse (2) 50.000 50.000 50.000 50.00088.070 88.070 151.520 151.520

Yearly amortisation cost ($) (3) 14.909 10.549 21.971 17.611Maintenance ($) (4) 5.130 3.630 7.560 6.060

20.039 14.179 29.531 23.671

Pretax income ($) 68.031 73.891 121.989 127.849Pretax cashflow ($) 77.810 80.810 136.400 139.400

Cost of electricity ($/kWhe) 0,079 0,056 0,044 0,035

Net present value ($) (5) 109.321 158.811 229.848 279.337

Internal rate of return (IRR) 45,5% 66,8% 54,1% 69,0%

(1) Price of kWhe sold ($/kWhe) 0,150


(3) Amortization (Years) 20

Financing cost (%) 6,00%



PV-Cells Solartec PV-Cells Boeing

EPG Economics

Documents

Transcript of EPG Economics