This document summarizes a life cycle assessment of a 21 MW solar photovoltaic farm in Suphanburi, Thailand. It finds that producing the solar panels in Thailand results in significantly lower environmental impacts than producing them in Australia due to differences in the countries' electricity grid mixes. Specifically, the study shows that greenhouse gas emissions are 18 times lower when produced in Thailand. It also determines that the manufacturing/production phase contributes most emissions over the solar farm's lifetime and that the system will offset 498,000 tons of carbon dioxide emissions over 30 years of operation.

1. LCA: Utility-Scale PV
By:
Chris Graham
Connor Jarvis
Raymond Stanton

2. Background
• Thailand leads ASEAN
region in Installed
Solar Capacity (IEA
2013)
• Thailand’s Alternative
Energy Development
Plan mandates that
20% of the nation’s
energy will from
renewables by 2022
(DEDE 2013)
• Poly-Silicon, Utility
Scale

3. Why Solar investment?

4. A Case Study: Suphanburi
• Thailand Solar Energy (TSE) funded Conergy to build a 21
MWp solar field in Suphanburi/ Kanchanaburi. The solar
park covers about 370,000m2 and reportedly produces
30MWh/year
• 15,700 tons of carbon dioxide emissions are saved
yearly from this renewable energy source
• But, from cradle-to-grid, how long will it take to
account for the emissions from production?

5. LOCATION:
-Suphanburi, Thailand
-(14.149921, 99.905755)

6. Phase I: Goal & Scope
• The purpose of this LCA is to assess the environmental
impacts from the production and operation of a large scale
solar farm, comparing two manufacturing and production
scenarios from both Australian and Thai energy mixtures.
Impact Categories:
Global Warming Potential GWP
Photochemical Oxidant Formation
Acidification
Ozone Depletion
Energy Production:
21 MWp farm
~30,000 MWh/year
Energy Payback Time

7. Goal Definition cont.
• Audience
•Policy makers and public utility commissioners
⇊Improve environmental performance in manufacturing
of solar panels
•Limitations
•Does not account for long term advancements in solar
⇊Temporal limit of 10 years
•Not a evaluation of system but to show
how grid mix impacts environmental
sustainability

8. Functional Unit
Comparative LCA of a solar farm under two grid mix
productions
• Australia
• Thailand
Quantity Duration Qualities
Yearly electricity
production of a 21
MWp poly-silicon
solar photovoltaic
farm.
- 30,000 MWh
30 years Efficiency
Energy Consumption
Lifetime

9. Processing
of ores to
useable
materials
System Boundaries
Mineral Ore Extraction
Fuel, Electricity,
Ores, chemicals
Solar Panel, Mount &
Inverter Manufacturing Transport and Installation Disposal & Recycling
Emissions, Particulates Emissions, Water
discharge
metals,
chemicals, oils,
elements,
plasticsFuel, Electricity Fuels
EmissionsEmissions, oils,
cleaning solutions, etc

10. •LCA includes material extraction, manufacturing/production,
assembly/construction, operation, and transportation.
•Cradle to Grid
System Boundaries

11. General Assumptions:
Functional Unit/System
Assumptions
Value Reference
Specific heats to create
industrial chemicals and
needed materials
Silicon Carbide, KOH,
KNO3, POCl3, SiH4
Engineering Toolbox online
database
Poly-Si Panel Duration 30 years Vthenakis 2011
Poly-Si Panel Rated
Efficiency
15.2 (years 0-10) 13.7 (years
10-25) 12.6 (years 25-30) or
14.2 average
Conergy PH250
Inverters & Transformers
Efficiency
98.30% Conergy
Inverters & Transformers
Duration
10-15 years, parts must be
replaced 2-3 times during the
system's lifetime
Vthenakis 2011
Mounting System Duration 30 years Vthenakis 2011
Geographical Location Suphanburi, Thailand (14.149921, 99.905755)
Solar Irradiation (annual
average)
4.88 kWh/m2/day NASA 2015
LCA methods Stoppato 2006, Kittner 2012, Vthenakis 2011
LCA tools NREL
vv

12. Allocation Procedures
• In LCA, a multifunctional process is one that produces
multiple products using the same process.
• The solar farm in this study has one sole product:
electricity.
• Since our process is not multifunctional, allocation is
unnecessary and is avoided altogether.

13. Phase II: Life Cycle Inventory

14. Wafer production
Our plant:
● 84,050 panels
● 5,040,000 cells (wafers)

15. Wafer production: Unit processes

16. Unit processes cont...

17. - Array mount
manufacturing
- Fence &
cement
included
Mount Production
Our plant:
● 7004 mounts
● 138,017.496 m2
IEA, 2011
2547.84 kg
cement

18. Inverter Production
- Balance of
system
- Copper wires
and grid
connection
Our plant:
● 20 inverters
● 21 MW
IEA, 2011

19. Transport Calculations
NREL database,
(2015)
Ship
Short-Haul
Truck Long-Haul
Truck

20. Phase III: Life cycle impact
Assessment
Solar power plants emit virtually nothing during their
operation phases, as they utilize combustion-free,
photovoltaic electricity production; therefore, the bulk of
emissions associated with the life cycle of a solar farm can be
attributed to manufacturing and production phases (Kittner
2012). Impact categories were chosen based on their
relevance to both solar power plant pollutants and
conventional sources.
Impact Categories:
Global Warming Potential GWP
Acidification
Photochemical Oxidant Formation
Ozone Depletion

21. Australian Electricity Mix
World Nuclear
Association 2013

22. Thailand Electricity Mix
Source:
EPPO
2015

23. Life cycle impact
comparison
● Thailand Grid mix for production
● Australian Grid mix for production

24. Life cycle impact
comparison
● Thailand Grid mix for production
● Australian Grid mix for production

25. Phase IV: Interpretation
• Comparing the Thai and Australian grid mixes for the location
of our system’s manufacturing phase, producing the panels
in Thailand poses significantly fewer environmental loads.
GWP, for example, is a factor of 18 less when produced in
Thailand.
• Energy Payback Time = Total Energy Usage/Yearly Production
~408E6MJ/~108E6MJ/year = ~3.77 years
• Contribution Analysis / Normalized Results
• Carbon Offsets

26. Contribution Analysis

27. Data Normalization
● Data was Internally Normalized by setting
Thailand’s impact values as 1
● Australia is shown in red for comparison

28. Carbon offset
62,000
tons CO2
Emissions produced in
production
Emissions avoided during
plant operation (30 years)
560,000
tons CO2
498,000
tons
CO2
Emissions offset via our plant

29. Carbon offset
6.20 E+7
kg CO2
Emissions produced in
production
Emissions avoided during
plant operation (30 years)
5.6 E+8
kg CO2
4.98
E+8 kg
CO2
Emissions offset via our plant

30. Carbon offset
6.20 E+7
kg CO2
Emissions produced in
production
Emissions avoided during
plant operation (30 years)
5.6 E+8
kg CO2
4.98
E+8 kg
CO2
Emissions offset via our plant
That’s equivalent to
removing 104,842
passenger vehicles
for a year!

31. Phase V: Conclusions
• Utility-scale solar applications are a sustainable alternative to
conventional power generation.
• The manufacturing/production phase of the panels
represents the greatest contribution to emissions during the
life cycle of a solar farm, specifically the mounting structures.
• Relocating manufacturing and production operations
domestically, or to other less carbon-intensive grid mixtures,
would greatly reduce the overall emissions of a solar farm.
• Recycling of panels is under significant research and
development, and disposal of panels to landfills will no
longer be as realistic at the end of our system’s life. More
recycling LCA’s would support solar LCA’s
Phase
V

32. References:Albers, Kyle. Analyzing the Environmental Impacts of Simple Shoes: A Life Cycle Assessment of the Supply Chain and Evaluation of End-of-Life Management Options. Donald Bren School of Environmental
Science and Management. 2008
Birol F., Bromhead A., Ikeyama S., Blasi A., and Frank M. (2013) Southeast Asia Energy Outlook, World Energy Outlook Special Report. International Energy Agency (IEA).
https://www.iea.org/publications/freepublications/publication/world-energy-outlook-special-report-2013-southeast-asia-energy-outlook.html
Brouwer, K. A. (2011). Methods and Concerns for Disposal of Photovoltaic Solar Panels (Doctoral dissertation, San Jose State University). url:
http://generalengineering.sjsu.edu/docs/pdf/mse_prj_rpts/fall2011/METHODS%20AND%20CONCERNS%20FOR%20DISPOSAL%20OF%20PHOTOVOLTAICS.pdf
Conergy. (2015). Australia Conergy. General reference. url. http://www.conergy.com.au/about-conergy
Conergy. (2014). Conergy PH 225-250P. Technical Data. Photo Modules. Url: http://www.solarwyse.ca/ConergyPH_225P-250P_3-busbar_TD_ENG_0512_v1.pdf
Conergy. (2014). Reference Project | On-Grid, Free-Field | 21 MW: Suphanburi/Kanchanaburi, Thailand. Conergy Asia. Url: http://asia.conergy.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/10/SSE3_Reference-Project-
Sheets_LR.pdf
Department of Alternative Energy Development and Efficiency (DEDE). (2014). Annual Report 2013. Ministry of Energy. Url: http://www4.dede.go.th/dede/images/stories/file/ann2013eng.pdf
Department of Alternative Energy Development and Efficiency (DEDE). (2014). Table of Thailand Energy Balance 2014. Ministry of Energy. Url:
http://www4.dede.go.th/dede/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=1841%3A2010-09-22-07-02-07&catid=128&lang=th
Energy Policy and Planning Office (EPPO). (2015). Electricity Energy Statistics | 2015 Capacity. URl: http://www.eppo.go.th/info/5electricity_stat.htm
Froehlich, Peter. A Sustainable Approach to the Supply of Nitrogen. Parker Hannifin Corporation. 2013.
Fthenakis V., Kim H. C., Frischknecht R., Raugei M., Sinha P., Stucki M. (2011) Life
Cycle Inventories and Life Cycle Assessment of Photovoltaic Systems, International Energy
Agency(IEA) PVPS Task 12, Report T12-02:2011.
International Index of Energy Security Risk: Assessing Risk in a Global Energy Market. U.S. Chamber of Commerce Institute for 21st Century Energy. 2013
Kirtikara K.,Kitichantaropas P., Chenvidhya D. (2013). Thailand PV status report 2012-2013. Department of Alternative Energy Development and Efficiency (DEDE), Ministry of Energy. Url:
http://www4.dede.go.th/dede/images/stories/jum_circular_55/PV_Status_Report_eng_final.pdf
Kittner N., Gheewala S., Kamens R.(2012) Life Cycle Considerations for Monocrystalline Photovoltaics in Thailand. J Sustainable Energy & Environment 3 143-146
Life Cycle assessment of Aluminum: Inventory Data For the primary Aluminum Industry. International Aluminum Institute. 2007.
Margolis, R. (2006). A Review of PV Inverter Technology Cost and Performance Projections. U.S. Department of Energy’s (U.S. DOE) Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE) under National
Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) Contract No. KACX-4-44451-04. url: http://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy06osti/38771.pdf
National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL). (accessed 2015). LCA database. Url: http://www.nrel.gov/analysis/sustain_lca_pv.html
Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy. (2013). Photovoltaic Electrical Contact and Cell Coating Basics. US Department of Energy. Energy.gov. Url:
http://energy.gov/eere/energybasics/articles/photovoltaic-electrical-contact-and-cell-coating-basics
Phumpradab K., Gheewala K., and M Sagisaka (2009). Life cycle assessment of natural gas power plants in Thailand. International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment 14(4): pp. 354-363. June 2009.
P. Lavery, et. al. Life cycle assessment of a sponge nickel produced by gas atomization for use of in industrial hydrogenation catalysis applications. The Inernational Journal of Life Cycle Assessment.
Spring 2012
Stoppato A. (2008) Life cycle assessment of photovoltaic electricity generation. J Energy 33:224-232
Thailand Board of Investors. (2014). Thailand Alternative Energy Industry.The Board Investment of Thailand. Url: http://www.boi.go.th/index.php?page=brochure
Thai Solar Energy Company. (2015). Url. http://www.thaisolarenergy.com/index.php
Zipp, K. (2011). Solar Inverter step-up transformers need a new design approach. Solar Power World. Url: www.solarpowerworldonline.com/2011/07/solar-inverter-step-up-transformers-need-a-new-design-
approach/