Search

• Various solar energy systems for combined heat and power provision are compared. • PVT CHP system has the highest total energy output and emission reduction potential. • PV system has the shortest payback time and the lowest levelised cost of energy. • ETC solar-thermal system is economically inviable for the sport centre application. • PVT CHP system attains the highest total cost saving if a carbon price is imposed. This paper presents a comprehensive analysis of the energetic, economic and environmental potentials of hybrid photovoltaic-thermal (PVT) and conventional solar energy systems for combined heat and power provision. A solar combined heat and power (S-CHP) system based on PVT collectors, a solar-power system based on PV panels, a solar-thermal system based on evacuated tube collectors (ETCs), and a S-CHP system based on a combination of side-by-side PV panels and ETCs (PV-ETC) are assessed and compared. A conventional CHP system based on a natural-gas-fired internal combustion engine (ICE) prime mover is also analysed as a competing fossil-fuel based solution. Annual simulations are conducted for the provision of electricity, along with space heating, swimming pool heating and hot water to the University Sports Centre of Bari, Italy. The results show that, based on a total installation area of 4000 m2 in all cases, the PVT S-CHP system outperforms the other systems in terms of total energy output, with annual electrical and thermal energy yields reaching 82.3% and 51.3% of the centre's demands, respectively. The PV system is the most profitable solar solution, with the shortest payback time (9.4 years) and lowest levelised cost of energy (0.089 €/kWh). Conversely, the ETC solar-thermal system is not economically viable for the sports centre application, and increasing the ETC area share in the combined PV-ETC S-CHP system is unfavourable due to the low natural gas price. Although the PVT S-CHP system has the highest investment cost, the high annual revenue from the avoided energy bills elevates its economic performance to a level between those of the conventional PV and ETC-based S-CHP systems, with a payback time of 13.7 years and a levelised cost of energy of 0.109 €/kWh. However, at 445 tCO 2 /year, the CO 2 emission reduction potential of the PVT S-CHP system is considerably higher (by 40–75%) than those of the all other solar systems (254–317 tCO 2 /year). Compared to the solar energy systems, the ICE-CHP system has the shortest payback time (6.2 years), but its CO 2 emission reduction (25 tCO 2 /year) is significantly lower. A high carbon price is beneficial for improving the cost-competitiveness of the solar energy systems, boosting its market penetration and helping to meet any carbon emission targets. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]