As others have stated, the basic goal of solar project development in utility and industrial applications is always to maximize economic factors such as levelized cost of energy (LCOE) or return on investment (ROI). Every project is subject to financial and engineering review. While this is a conservative exercise by nature, there is nothing "stupid" about it or the stakeholders involved in the process.
In terms of optimizing for LCOE, revenues associated with solar plant energy production are one input to the equation only; the other inputs include up-front capital expenditures (CapEx) and long-term operation expenditures (OpEx). All else being equal, developers are clearly incentivized to generate more energy. But not at any cost. Dual-axis tracking, for example, can increase energy harvest (kWh) and yield (kWh/kW). But it also increases CapEx and OpEx beyond what is beneficial for LCOE.
In utility-scale applications,
bifacial modules mounted on single-axis trackers are currently the most favorable plant design, on average, based on LCOE. This is in part due to the fact that single-axis tracking is considerably more efficient in terms of land usage as compared to dual-axis trackers. If land cost were zero, then dual-axis trackers might be leading the market. Since land isn't free, developers need to co-optimize for revenue, yield and ground coverage. As a result, tightly packed single-axis trackers almost always win the day based on LCOE.
In commercial and industrial applications, plant optimization is further complicated by utility rate structures. If a utility is charging a premium rate for energy during the 4pm to 6pm window in summer, for example, then a west-facing solar array may generate considerably more revenue over the course of the year than a south-facing array-even though the south-facing array will generate more energy.
In the future, energy storage costs may factor more directly into project development considerations. Today, most solar farms do not include storage. However, more storage will be required to accommodate high levels of solar penetration. Also, co-located storage can turn a "variable" solar power plant into a "dispatchable" solar power plant, which is beneficial for power system balancing. In practice, those higher-level considerations are not part of solar project development or utility planning today, outside of very few niche markets.
While utilities are often offtakers of solar power plants, they are rarely the project developers or operators. So, there are a lot of competing interests at play. Also, utility regulation lags behind the market and technology. It's complex. But it is all highly studied and scrutinized and driven by dollars and cents.
------------------------------
David Brearley
Board of Directors
David Brearley
david.charles.brearley@gmail.com------------------------------
Original Message:
Sent: 03-16-2022 08:58 AM
From: Ernie Rogers
Subject: What's wrong with tracking on large solar arrays?
I am no expert, just trying to understand. When I see pictures of large solar arrays, the panels are stacked together in a way that would make efficient solar tracking impossible. Tracking should allow efficient collection over a wider period of the day, thereby reducing the need for expensive storage. Are power companies stupid? What am I missing?
------------------------------
Ernie Rogers
Partner
ernie.e.rogers@gmail.com
------------------------------