Severity: Warning
Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests
Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line Number: 176
Backtrace:
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 1034
Function: getPubMedXML
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3152
Function: GetPubMedArticleOutput_2016
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword
File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once
Many new photovoltaic (PV) applications, such as the concentrating PV (CPV) systems, are appearing on the market. The main characteristic of CPV systems is to concentrate sunlight on a receiver by means of optical devices and to decrease the solar cells area required. A low CPV (LCPV) system allows optimizing the PV effect with high increase of generated electric power as well as decrease of active surface area. In this paper, an economic analysis and a life cycle assessment (LCA) study of a particular LCPV scheme is presented and its environmental impacts are compared with those of a PV traditional system. The LCA study was performed with the software tool SimaPro 8.0.2, using the Econinvent 3.1 database. A functional unit of 1 kWh of electricity produced was chosen. Carbon Footprint, Ecological Footprint and ReCiPe 2008 were the methods used to assess the environmental impacts of the LCPV plant compared with a corresponding traditional system. All the methods demonstrated the environmental convenience of the LCPV system. The innovative system allowed saving 16.9% of CO2 equivalent in comparison with the traditional PV plant. The environmental impacts saving was 17% in terms of Ecological Footprint, and, finally, 15.8% with the ReCiPe method.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09593330.2016.1152308 | DOI Listing |
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!