sustainability

Article
Performance and Economic Evaluation of Solar
Rooftop Systems in Different Regions of Thailand
Suntiti Yoomak 1 , Theerasak Patcharoen 2 and Atthapol Ngaopitakkul 1, *
1 Faculty of Engineering, King Mongkut’s Institute of Technology Ladkrabang, Bangkok 10520, Thailand;
suntitiatim@hotmail.com
2 Faculty of Industrial Technology, Rajabhat Rajanagarindra University, Chachoengsao 24000, Thailand;
Theerasak_p@hotmail.com
* Correspondence: atthapol.ng@kmitl.ac.th




Received: 21 October 2019; Accepted: 18 November 2019; Published: 25 November 2019


Abstract: Solar rooftop systems in the residential sector have been rapidly increased in the term
of installed capacity. There are various factors, such as climate, temperature, and solar radiation,
that have effects on solar power generation efficiency. This paper presents a performance assessment
of a solar system installed on the rooftop of residence in different regions of Thailand by using PSIM
simulation. Solar rooftop installation comparison in different regions is carried out to evaluate the
suitable location. In addition, three types of solar panels are used in research: monocrystalline,
polycrystalline, and thin-film. The electrical parameters of real power and energy generated from
the systems are investigated and analyzed. Furthermore, the economic evaluation of different
solar rooftop system sizes using the monocrystalline module is investigated by using economic
indicators of discounted payback period (DPP), net present value (NPV), internal rate of return
(IRR), and profitability index (PI). Results show that the central region of Thailand is a suitable place
for installing solar rooftop in terms of solar radiation, and the temperature has more solar power
generation capacity than the other regions. The monocrystalline and polycrystalline solar panels can
generate maximum power close to each other. All solar rooftop sizes with the Feed-in Tariff (FiT)
scheme give the same DPP of 6.1 years, IRR of 15%, and PI of 2.57 which are better than the cases
without the FiT scheme. However, a large-scale installation of solar rooftop systems can receive more
electrical energy produced from the solar rooftop systems. As a result, the larger solar rooftop system
sizes can achieve better economic satisfaction.

Keywords: solar rooftop; solar energy; single-phase grid-connected solar system; economic evaluation

1. Introduction
Electrical energy consumption in Thailand has continuously increased with the economic growth,
industrial demand, air-conditioning consumption, increase in an electric vehicle as well as development
in the country. In 2017, Thailand’s energy demand reached 185,124 GWh, almost all of which was
produced from power plants using conventional fossil fuel, i.e., 60% from natural gas, 18% from coal,
and 0.2% from oil [1]. As an energy net-importer, Thailand has been aware of its need for energy
security and has developed policies designed to decrease its dependence on fossil fuel for electricity
production and increase its use of renewable energy sources. For this reason, renewable energy has
gained much attention in these last few years with the current electrical energy consumption rate that
has rapidly increased, and large-scale power plants cannot keep up with demand. Solar energy is one
of the renewable energy sources that has rapidly grown in terms of capacity as Thailand is located in
the tropical area and therefore contains an abundant solar power source, having great solar power
potential, which is solar irradiation of 17–20 MJ/m2 per day [2]. Furthermore, solar power production

Sustainability 2019, 11, 6647; doi:10.3390/su11236647 www.mdpi.com/journal/sustainability

Sustainability 2019, 11, 6647 2 of 20

is also supported by the government according to the Alternative Energy Development Plan (AEDP)
and the Power Development Plan (PDP), which are the national renewable energy master plan. In this
AEDP formulated in line with the PDP, the country is escalating the target of electricity capacity to
70,410 MW [3,4] with the installed capacity of renewable energy at 19,635 MW in 2036. Solar energy is
the largest expected renewable energy source for electricity generation in the plan, with a target for
an installed capacity of 6000 MW.
In the past, most solar systems invested in Thailand have come from utility-scale installations [5].
However, due to solar system prices having a trend to decrease, the number of prosumers in other
sectors, namely an industrial sector and a residential sector, has increased significantly. For this
reason, solar rooftop systems in all scales of the solar system i.e., home, building, and industry, play
a significant role in increasing the proportion of renewable energy production. Several research articles
and case studies about solar rooftop systems in Thailand are reviewed in [5–12].
Tongsopit A. [5] investigates the FiT scheme used in Thailand for the promotor of solar power
generation and gives a feasibility analysis of solar rooftop system investment in a residential sector
under three scenarios: NEPC assumptions, current market, and market stimulation. It is found that
the residential FiT launched in 2013 is not strong and continuous enough to allow a significant market
growth due to its short application period, lack of a widespread campaign, and complicated permitting
processes. Furthermore, the author suggests that investment in solar rooftop systems for the residential
scale can be motivated by a tax incentive given as discounts amounting to 20% of the investment cost.
The situation of solar rooftop implementation, expansion, and execution strategies in Thailand are
reviewed in Chaianong A. and Pharino C. [6]. The three main topics of solar rooftop advantages based
on successful international experiences and models, barriers of successful solar rooftop implementation,
and recommendations to address existing gaps for solar rooftop investment. The results claim that the
success of solar rooftop investment depends on collaborative works among the governmental, public,
and private sectors with a clear understanding of the energy security issue that the country is facing.
Moreover, the financial support policies of low-interest rate loans, production tax credits, schemes
to support battery implementation, and renewable portfolio standards (RPS) have a successfully
significant effect on solar rooftop promoting.
Business models and financing options for rooftop solar investment in Thailand are studied in
Tongsopit S. et al. [7]. Four kinds of solar rooftop business models: roof rental, solar power purchase
agreement, solar leasing, and community solar are reviewed, including one type of financing option
of solar loan is also identified. In addition, the drivers for solar rooftop emergence, barriers to solar
rooftop investment success, and the risks from the viewpoints of owner and consumer are analyzed.
Eskew J. et al. [8] investigates the environmental impacts of solar rooftop installation and models
the potential of solar rooftop systems to reach the country’s renewable energy goals. The results
show that electricity generated from solar rooftop systems causes lower environmental impacts than
fossil fuel-based electricity. However, the major contribution to impacts is in manufacturing by stage
and from solar modules by component. Additionally, the mounting structure and inverters are also
significant ones. However, domestic production of components and recycling of materials would
reduce impacts. In this case study, there is an energy payback time of 2.5 years and a payback period of
7.4 years. In Tantisattayakul T. and Kanchanapiya P. [9] paper, the economic evaluation of solar rooftop
systems for the residential sector under a feed-in tariff scheme in Thailand is presented. Furthermore,
additional appropriate encouragement measures, including an appropriate feed-in-tariff rate, personal
income tax exemptions, carbon trading, and low-interest-rate loans for household investment, are
proposed. It is found that the current scheme is not infeasible to promote solar rooftop investment in
the residential sector under the current market situation. Among the additional supportive measures,
the low-interest rate loan is the most outstanding measure for supporting and stimulating investment
in the solar rooftop residential sector.
The situation of solar energy information for electricity production i.e., the potential of solar energy,
solar energy status, and the barriers of solar-powered-system development in Thailand, including the
Sustainability 2019, 11, 6647 3 of 20

global potential and growth of electricity production with solar energy is reviewed in Wongwises S.
and Chimres N. [10]. The information provides the benefit of the industry, investors, and people who
intend to utilize solar energy to replace the fossil fuels in their businesses, encompassing the investment
in electricity generation projects from solar energy. Chaianong A. et al. [11] analyzes electricity bill
saving of solar rooftop systems with different support programs: net metering and net billing for
individual load profiles of four customer groups (residential scale, small general service, medium
general service, and large general service). It is found that the electricity bill saving of all customer
groups relies on electricity tariffs, solar system sizes, load characteristics, and details on the support
programs. However, load characteristics hardly have an effect on the electricity bill saving. In addition,
the use of the net metering program gives a smaller variation in the electricity bill saving compared
to the other, leading to more flexibility for customers to size their solar systems. However, the net
billing program cause encouraging customers to limit their solar system sizes, mitigating the concerns
of several consumers about the oversizing of solar rooftop installations and the limitations of the
utility grid. Furthermore, the same author also studies the economic feasibility of grid-connected solar
self-consumption for four customer groups among three potential support programs: no compensation
for excess electricity, net metering, and net billing [12]. The economic evaluation is implemented by
using the indicators of internal rate of return (IRR), net present value (NPV), and payback periods (PB).
The results claim that entire customer class profit can be increased by using the programs. However,
the net metering offers the most customer benefits. However, the authors recommend the net billing
program for policy adoption since it is not only enough level of economic viability but also flexibility
in dealing with broad stakeholders’ concerns.
These papers [6–12] provide evidence and report challenges about the solar rooftop adoption
model in Thailand in terms of economic feasibility, environmental impacts, FiT and execution strategies
incentive scheme, and situation of solar energy information. It can be implied that solar energy
can be a promising technology to help increase energy security and help transform Thailand into
a sustainable society.
Not only in Thailand, solar system is more widely used technology and becoming more and more
attractive especially with the solar rooftop systems in supply of the utility grid all around the world
i.e., India [13,14], Pakistan [15], United Arab Emirates [16], Oman [17], EU [18], Switzerland [19,20],
Uganda [21], and South Korea [22,23]. Rathore S. [13] studies various factors that have effects on
the growth and development of the solar rooftop systems in India. Moreover, solar power policies
supported the decentralized solar rooftop systems along with various business models and current
status in India. Solar rooftop government policies & initiatives, the current status of the solar rooftop
systems, key challenges, and various business models for the growth of the solar rooftop sector
are also discussed. Finally, the international status of the solar rooftop systems, followed by some
policy recommendations, is reviewed. Next, the feasibility of grid-connected solar rooftop systems
for a household to supply the electricity in India is presented in Dondariya C. et al. [14]. The various
simulation software of PV*SOL, PVGIS, SolarGIS, and SISIFO is carried out to analyze the performance
of the considered solar rooftop systems. In addition, the index of energy generation, performance
ratio, solar fraction, and energy yield for performance prediction of the systems is also evaluated. It is
found that the PV*SOL software is easy, fast, and reliable for the simulation of solar rooftop systems.
In Pakistan, Khan J. and Arsalan M. H. [15] present methods to combine geographic information
systems (GIS) and object-based image recognition approach to identify the available rooftop area for
solar installation. Six step techniques are used to estimate solar rooftop potential, which is a geographic
division of high-resolution satellite imagery, sampling rooftop feature extraction, analyzing different
rooftop factors, comparing the extracted rooftops to another rooftop, and conversion of energy into
power outputs.
Due to changing hydrocarbon markets in the Middle East and North Africa (MENA), the solar
system technology trends to rapidly falling prices, leading to solar power increasingly attractive.
Hence, their energy systems are away from dependence on hydrocarbon fuel sources. For this reason,
Sustainability 2019, 11, 6647 4 of 20

using solar energy, especially in solar rooftop systems, is being positioned to play an essential role in the
United Arab Emirates (UAE) [16]. Griffiths S. and Mills R. [16], the solar rooftop situations in UAE are
studied for the evolution of a MENA energy system. It is found that solar rooftop installation in UAE
can be an economically viable technology choice, and it will become part of regional energy strategies.
In Oman, Al-Saqlawi J. et al. [17] implements a new approach to evaluate the potential of using solar
rooftop with battery technologies that operate without recourse to the utility grid. The proposed
technique is a technical assessment of stand-alone systems which assesses the characteristics of the
solar panel and the battery facility required to provide stand-alone systems. After that, the considered
systems are compared to similar grid-connected systems and any techno-economic targets necessary
to enhance the feasibility of residential solar rooftop systems using a mathematical model. The
simulation is dealt with in the gPROMS program based on real hourly weather and climate conditions
matched with real demand data. The results show that stand-alone solar rooftop systems are infeasible.
However, supporting high electricity prices and reducing battery prices can be economically feasible.
Bódis K. et al. [18] uses earth-observation geospatial data from a geospatially explicit methodology
using up-to-date spatial information for calculating the rooftop areas and technical potential for solar
electricity production over the whole of the EU. Statistical data sources with machine learning are
combined with satellite-based to achieve a reliable evaluation of the technical potential for solar
rooftop power generation. The economic assessment in the term of levelized cost of electricity (LCOE)
based on country-specific parameters and the comparison of household electricity prices is dealt
with. Buffat R. et al. [19] presents the long-term potential of solar irradiation over solar rooftops in
Switzerland using a generic method to calculate solar irradiation potential on rooftops over large regions.
Moreover, corresponding unpredictability estimation when the long-term electricity generation of
solar systems is calculated is also investigated. Suitable surfaces on rooftops are identified using digital
surface models combined with building footprints in order to determine rooftop geometry, namely
slope, and orientation. Assouline D. et al. [20] employs a computational methodology combining
Geographic Information Systems (GIS) data processing and a machine learning method (Random
Forests) to estimate solar rooftop potential in Switzerland. The suitable installation of solar panels
on rooftops is estimated in each grid pixel of electricity production by following the constraints of
incoming solar radiation, the roof shapes, roof superstructures, tilt and direction of roofs, available
rooftop areas for solar installations, shading effects, and efficiency of solar panels. It is found that
Switzerland provides great potential for solar rooftop installation.
An alternative technique to determine rooftop areas suitable for solar deployment in Uganda
by using validated open-source tools i.e., namely, Google Earth and Pitch and Azimuth tools are
presented in Mukisa N. et al. [21]. Additionally, the economic feasibility of proposed grid-tied solar
rooftop systems in the industrial sector is evaluated. The study results show that the energy generation
potential of all solar roof orientations and tilt angles in the range 0◦ –45◦ is possible, which provides
annual energy yield in the range of 1046 kWh/kW–1344 kWh/kW. For economic aspect, the solar
rooftop systems, which are short loan period of 5 years being still feasible when the loan share of
investment cost reached up to 75%, cause an LCOE of 5.75 US cent/kWh, internal rate of return of 7%
and BCR of 1.27. Lee M. et al. [22] proposes a methodology for estimating the economic potential of
solar rooftop systems in South Korea based on a bottom-up approach. Solar rooftop profitability is
calculated using various technique i.e., life cycle cost analysis and Hillshade analysis, along with actual
building data. Furthermore, the market conditions of installation cost, policies and support program,
and electricity costs, which vary over time, are considered for the economic evaluation of solar rooftop
systems. Lee M. et al. [23] proposes a technique for developing solar rooftop systems in South Korea
using cluster analysis based on technical and economic suitability criteria. Additionally, two cluster
analysis of hierarchical cluster analysis (HCA) and k-means clustering is used to validate statistical
approaches for developing solar rooftop systems. This study provides significant contributions for
solar rooftop suitability information for intuitive decision-making based on scientific evidence and
reasonable criteria.
Sustainability 2019, 11, 6647 5 of 20

This paper presents the performance evaluation of solar rooftop systems in the residential sector
installed in different regions of Thailand using PSIM simulation. Solar rooftop installation comparison
in different regions is carried out to evaluate the suitable location. In addition, three different types
of solar panels are used in research. The electrical parameters of real power and energy generated
from the systems are investigated and analyzed. Furthermore, the economic evaluation of different
solar rooftop system sizes is investigated. The rest of this paper is arranged by Section 2 present solar
system situation in Thailand. The simulation is presented in Section 3. In Section 4, the simulation
results are shown and discussed. The economic evaluation is dealt with in Section 5. The discussion is
presented in Section 6. Finally, the conclusion is presented in Section 7.

2. Solar System Situation in Thailand

According to the long-term Energy Master Plan of Thailand (2015–2036), the Alternative Energy
Development Plan (AEDP) formulated in line with the Power Development Plan (PDP) is released by
the ministry of energy. These plans focus on raising the target of electricity capacity to 70,410 MW [3,4]
with the installed capacity of renewable energy at 19,635 MW in 2036. Solar energy is the largest
expected renewable energy source for electricity generation in the plan, with a target for an installed
capacity of 6000 MW.
The solar rooftop systems aim to produce and employ the electrical energy at the installation area
due to the loss of transmission and the fact that the installation areas are smaller than the solar power
plants. Many factors can affect power produced by solar rooftop systems, such as the direction of
sunlight, climate, temperature, solar radiation. The solar irradiation average in Thailand is presented in
Figure 1. It is found that 14.3% of the country gains average daily solar exposure at around 19–20 MJ/m2
per day, while the other 50% of the country demonstrates around 18–19 MJ/m2 per day. Moreover,
0.5% of the country has less than 16 MJ/m2 per day [2]. As a result, Thailand has the potential to produce
electrical power
Sustainability 2017, 9,from
x FORsolar
PEER energy
REVIEW throughout the country, suitable for investment in solar systems.
6 of 22

Figure 1.
Figure Thailand Potential
1. Thailand Potential Solar
Solar radiation
radiation Map.
Map.

• Solar off-grid program for rural non-electrified areas for village, school, health care
1993-present clinic, water pumping, the royal project and military, and police at the border area.
• 100% Government support with regular maintenance. 30 MWp in total.

• Introducing of “Adder (Feed-in Premium)” policy for the Very Small Power
Sustainability 2019, 11, 6647 6 of 20

Solar rooftop systems in Thailand have recently gained much attention from investors owing to
the recent policy from the Thai government, named “Feed-in Tariff (FiT).” This program supports
community and residents to install a solar system on their roof to further increase the solar rooftop
capacity of the country. As shown in Figure 2, the first FiT program was a premium FiT scheme called
Adder, which is a premium rate paid on top of the normal tariff of electricity, which varies over time.
However, the adder rate for solar schemes is equal to every solar system capacity. It cannot reflect on
the actual investment costs of the projects, which usually rely on the solar system size. For that reason,
the adder scheme is replaced with a fixed FiT. The first solar rooftop FiT policy for the country was
set up in 2013 with a target of 200 MW, dividing to commercial rooftops (10–1000 kW) and 100 MW
of residential (0–10 kW) rooftop systems [24]. The support duration is 25 years from a commercial
operation date. However, in 2015, regarding the AEDP, the new target of the solar system in Thailand
Figure 1. Thailand
was 6000 MW, but the new incentive Potential
for the solar Solarwas
rooftop radiation
holedMap.
at the FiT 2013 [9].

• Solar off-grid program for rural non-electrified areas for village, school, health care
1993-present clinic, water pumping, the royal project and military, and police at the border area.
• 100% Government support with regular maintenance. 30 MWp in total.

• Introducing of “Adder (Feed-in Premium)” policy for the Very Small Power
Producers (VSPP) and Small Power Producers (SPP) for all renewable energy
2007 Adder generation up to 90 MWp.
• Solar target: 500 MWp, Adder: 0.25 USD/kWh for 10 years.

• Since there were huge applications for Solar systems.

2010 Adder • Solar target: 2000 MWp, Adder: decreased to 0.20 USD/kWh for 10 years and
stop taking application since June 2010.

• Solar target: increased to 3000 MWp.

• Solar farm: 2000 MWp with Adder for 10 years.
2013 Adder
• Solar rooftop: 200 MWp with FiT 0.19-0.21 USD/kWh for 25 years.
• Solar for community 800 MWp with decreasing FiT for 25 years.

• Solar target: increased to 3800 MWp.

• Solar farm: 1800 MWp with Adder for 10 years.
• Solar farm: 1000 MWp applied before Lune 2010 changed from Adder for
Adder
2014 10 years to FiT 0.18 USD/kWh for 25 years.
- • Solar rooftop: 200 MWp with FiT 0.19-0.21 USD/kWh for 25 years.
2015
FiT • Solar for community 800 MWp changed to solar for govermental agency and
agricultural cooperative with FiT 0.18 USD/kWh for 35 years.
• Phase 1: Solar for governmental agency and agricultural cooperative.

2016 • Pilot project for solar rooftop (for self consumption) 100 MWp.
- FiT
2017 • Phase 2: Solar for govermental agency and agricultural cooperative.

Figure 2. Summary of solar policy in Thailand [9,24].

Figure 2. Summary of solar policy in Thailand [9,24].
It is found that there are three types of solar panels (monocrystalline, polycrystalline, and thin-film)
that are commonly used in the solar rooftop systems, which have different advantages and disadvantages
as shown in Table 1. However, the thin-film is not very popular nowadays due to its less efficient than
the other types. As a result, the former is not widespread in terms of commercials.
Sustainability 2019, 11, 6647 7 of 20

Table 1. Comparison of various types of solar panels [6].

Solar Panel Types Advantages Disadvantages Efficiency

• The efficiency is highest.

• The price is high.
• The least amount of space is required.
• There is a great number of origin
• Long lifetime.
Monocrystalline silicon ending up from the process. 12.5–15%
• There is a better performance at low
• Provide highly efficient at
solar irradiance conditions
a warmer temperature.
than others.

• Use a simple process.

• Low space-efficiency.
Polycrystalline • There is an adverse effect on heat 11–14%
• Low efficiency.
tolerance than the monocrystalline.

• Mass production is simple.

• The lowest space-efficiency.
• They can be made flexible.
• The lowest efficiency.
• There are positive effects on high
• There is not widespread use for the 10–13% for CIGS, 9–12%
Thin-film temperature and shading.
residential sector. for CdTe, 5–7% for a-Si
• Less expensive manufacturing cost
• Lower life cycle than crystalline
but higher equipment cost than the
solar panels.
crystalline solar panels.

Installation prices per watt of various solar system categories are shown in Table 2. The solar
system prices rely upon the system size and type of installation: the solar rooftop system and the solar
farm system. The solar rooftop price is in the range of 1.9–2.4 USD/W, depending on the product’s
guarantee and after-sale service contracts [25].

Table 2. Installation prices of general solar system applications in Thailand [25].

Categories and Sizes General Applications Prices (USD/W)
Stand-alone solar The stand-alone solar system installation with batteries for providing power to individual
systems up to 1 kW households, schools, health clinics, and royal projects in the remote non-electrified areas. The power 6.3–6.7
Stand-alone solar is used for lighting, telecommunication and water pumping, etc. These systems are fully supported
systems > 1 kW by Government in order to increase the opportunity and quality of rural communities.
Solar rooftop systems up
Solar system installation on the roof of households, dwelling places, and religious places. 1.9–2.4
to 10 kW
Solar rooftop systems up
Solar system installation with a range of 10–250 kW and > 250–1000 kW for businesses, industrials,
to 10 kW
government institutions, state enterprises, foreigner entities, international organizations, and hotels. 1.6–1.7
Solar rooftop systems
from 10 to 250 kW
Solar farm systems or
Solar system installed to supply electricity to the grid with generating capacity more than 1 MW but
grid-connected 1.3–1.7
not exceeding 90 MW.
ground-mounted > 1MW

3. Simulation
The simulation of this research is carried out by using PSIM software, the studied system
principally consists of a solar rooftop system, a grid-tied inverter, and utility. The power produced from
the solar rooftop system, controlled by using maximum power point tracking (MPPT) technique, is
directly fed into the grid utility, single-phase voltage of 220 volts and frequency of 50 Hz, vie a grid-tied
inverter. Measurement of current and voltage from the grid utility of each solar rooftop system is
implemented by using simulation to analyze and compare their efficiency. The simulated results issued
from three different types of solar panels, which are monocrystalline, polycrystalline, and thin-film,
are compared in terms of efficiency for power system generation. The simulation will be done for six
regions (the North, Central, East, Northeast, West, and South) in Thailand, where there are different
temperatures and radiation.
In the simulation, maximum power point tracking (MPPT) is utilized due to power generated
from solar rooftops having fluctuated behavior characteristics dependable on weather conditions.
The MPPT lets the solar rooftops to produce maximum power at their output and thus increases the
system efficiency. Figure 3 presents the MPPT control modeling. It sets a suitable duty cycle value at
the gate of an insulated-gate bipolar transistor (IGBT) switch employed in a DC-DC buck converter
so that maximum power can be extracted. MPPT tests for dV/dT to be zero. If the sum is not zero,
Sustainability 2019, 11, 6647 8 of 20

the Proportional Integral (PI) controller treats the sum as error and minimizes this error. The obtained
value at the output of the PI controller is the change in duty cycle value. The DC-DC buck converter is
utilized to decrease and regulate the output voltage of the solar rooftops and to implement maximum
Sustainability 2017, 9, x FOR PEER REVIEW 9 of 22
power point tracking as well.

Sustainability 2017, 9, x FOR PEER REVIEW 9 of 22

Figure 3. Maximum power point tracking modeling.

Figure 3. Maximum power point tracking modeling.
Single-phase grid-tied inverter is used to convert direct current power into alternating current
power. A model block used for this purpose is presented in Figure 4. A triangular waveform signal is
used to create the graded signal of the IGBT for switching on and off periods. The grid-tied inverter
generates single-phase sinusoidal voltage and current. However, the current generated from the
grid-tied inverter has encompassing harmonic distortion. Thus, the LC filter at the output of the
grid-tied inverter is implemented to decrease inverter current harmonic distortion. In this study case,
the frequency of 50 Hz is selected as a cut off frequency of the filter. The complete single-phase grid-tied
Figure
solar rooftop system is shown 3. Maximum
in Figure 5. power point tracking modeling.

Figure 4. Single-phase grid-tied inverter and LC Low pass filter modeling.

Figure 4. Single-phase grid-tied inverter and LC Low pass filter modeling.

Figure 4. Single-phase grid-tied inverter and LC Low pass filter modeling.
 Sustainability 2019, 11,Figure
6647 4. Single-phase grid-tied inverter and LC Low pass filter modeling. 9 of 20

Figure 5. Complete modeled single-phase grid-connected solar rooftop system.

Figure 5. Complete modeled single-phase grid-connected solar rooftop system.
Sustainability 2017, 9, x FOR PEER REVIEW 10 of 22
The installation and area of the solar rooftop is an important key to be considered because these
factors have a direct
The installation andinfluence on solar
area of the electrical power
rooftop is angenerated
importantfrom a solar
key to system. The
be considered area rooftop
because these
used have
factors in theastudy
directcase is shown
influence on in Figure 6.
electrical power generated from a solar system. The area rooftop
used inIn theFigure
study 6, a solar
case rooftop
is shown installation
in Figure 6. in the south is an area in the shade. From the data,
theIncalculated
Figure 6, aarea average
solar rooftop equal to 0.5in×the
is installation 10 × 6.714is=an33.57
south aream
2 The maximum area able to be
in .the shade. From the data, the
installed is 33.57 × 0.85 = 28.53 m 2
calculated area average is equal to 0.5 x 10 x 6.714 = 33.57 m . The maximum area ableofto1640
. 250-Wp solar panels, which
2 are the dimension mm × 992
be installed
mm × 40 mm, are employed. Therefore, the solar panels of 16 panels, which
is 33.57 * 0.85 = 28.53 m . 250-Wp solar panels, which are the dimension of 1640 mm x 992 mm
2 are connected inxseries
40
mm,andare
parallel in order
employed. to increase
Therefore, the voltage and power,
solar panels are installed
of 16 panels, on the
which are rooftop.inHence,
connected thereparallel
series and is a solar
in power
order to ofincrease
4000 Wp.voltage and power, are installed on the rooftop. Hence, there is a solar power of
4000 Wp.

Figure 6. Solar
Figure rooftop
6. Solar plan.
rooftop plan.

4. Simulation Result
Solar radiation and temperature data in Thailand obtained from the Department of Alternative
Energy Development and Efficiency (DEDE), as shown in Figure 7a,b, respectively, are used. The
average real power and energy generated from the three solar rooftop systems in different Thailand
regions are presented in Table 3. In addition, the real power and energy behavior of the various solar
rooftop types in different regions are shown in Figure 8 Real power and energy are measured for
solar modules of 3 types: a red graph for monocrystalline modules, a blue graph for polycrystalline
modules, and a green graph for thin-film modules. However, the simulation graph results show that
the energy output sent to the grid utility is low since this simulation is conducted by 3.6 seconds from
 Sustainability 2019, 11, 6647 10 of 20

4. Simulation Result
Solar radiation and temperature data in Thailand obtained from the Department of Alternative
Energy Development and Efficiency (DEDE), as shown in Figure 7a,b, respectively, are used. The average
real power and energy generated from the three solar rooftop systems in different Thailand regions are
presented in Table 3. In addition, the real power and energy behavior of the various solar rooftop types
in different regions are shown in Figure 8 Real power and energy are measured for solar modules of
3 types: a red graph for monocrystalline modules, a blue graph for polycrystalline modules, and a green
graph for thin-film modules. However, the simulation graph results show that the energy output sent
to the grid utility is low since this simulation is conducted by 3.6 seconds from the actual time ranges
of 12 hours. For this reason, the energy results are multiplied by 12,000.
Table 3 shows that in the central region of Thailand has a suitable condition for the solar rooftop
system to generate power when comparing to other parts of Thailand. There is an average power
of 3752 W and an energy of 16.84 kWh for monocrystalline modules, an average power of 3709 W,
and an energy of 16.52 kWh for polycrystalline modules, and average power of 2765 W and energy of
11.58 kWh
Sustainability 2017,for
9, xthin-film
FOR PEER modules.
REVIEW The northeast region provides slightly lower average power and 11 of 22
energy than the central region for the three types of solar modules. For the north region, the east
region, and the southern region, both average power and energy are somewhat similar for every solar
module. However, the west region has the lowest average power and energy.

(a) (b)
Figure
Figure 7. Solar
7. Solar radiation
radiation and
and temperature in
temperature in different
different regions
regionsofof
Thailand: (a) (a)
Thailand: Average solarsolar
Average radiation
radiation
(W/m 2 ), (b) Average Temperature (C◦ ).
(W/m2), (b) Average Temperature (C°).
Table 3. Average power and energy generating from solar rooftop systems in different regions
Table 3. Average power and energy generating from solar rooftop systems in different regions of
of Thailand.
Thailand. Solar Panel
Region Monocrystalline Polycrystalline Thin-Film
Average Power (W) Energy (kWh) Solar
Average Power (W) Panel
Energy (kWh) Average Power (W) Energy (kWh)
North 3530 15.62 3494 15.28 2603 10.69
Central 3752 Monocrystalline 16.84 3709 Polycrystalline
16.52 2765 Thin-Film
11.58
East 3560 16.32 3521 15.97 2627 11.22
Region
Northeast Average
3731 16.73 Average
3725 16.52 2715 Average 11.45
West 3476 Energy
15.96 3432 Energy
15.61 2521 10.85 Energy
South 3583 Power 16.41 3533Power 16.08 2613 Power 11.23
(kWh) (kWh) (kWh)
(W) (W) (W)
North 3530 15.62 3494 15.28 2603 10.69
Central 3752 16.84 3709 16.52 2765 11.58
East 3560 16.32 3521 15.97 2627 11.22
Northeast 3731 16.73 3725 16.52 2715 11.45
West 3476 15.96 3432 15.61 2521 10.85
South 3583 16.41 3533 16.08 2613 11.23
 Sustainability 2019, 11, 6647 11 of 20
Sustainability 2017, 9, x FOR PEER REVIEW 12 of 22

(a)

(b)

Figure 8. Cont.
 Sustainability 2019, 11, 6647 12 of 20
Sustainability 2017, 9, x FOR PEER REVIEW 13 of 22

(c)

(d)

Figure 8. Cont.
 Sustainability 2019, 11, 6647 13 of 20
Sustainability 2017, 9, x FOR PEER REVIEW 14 of 22

(e)

(f)

Figure 8. Relations between real power (W) and energy (kWh) to utility with time (s) for three types
Figure 8. Relations
of solar modules: between
(a) Thereal power region,
northern (W) and(b)energy (kWh) to
The central utility(c)
region, with time
The (s) forregion,
eastern three types
(d) The
of northeastern
solar modules: (a) The
region, northern
(e) The region,
western (b)(f)The
region, Thecentral region,
southern (c) The eastern region, (d) The
region.
northeastern region, (e) The western region, (f) The southern region
Sustainability 2019, 11, 6647 14 of 20

By observing Figure 8, it is found that the real power and energy behavior of each area tend to
be similar. Additionally, the real power supplied to the utility is consistent with the solar radiation
intensity used in the simulation. Using monocrystalline and polycrystalline modules can provide
similar real power, and their real power is more than using a thin-film module for every solar radiation
intensity range. The central and the northwest locations able to produce the highest real power,
resulting in the greatest energy. By contrast, the west region gives the lowest real power, leading to the
least energy. For this reason, the solar rooftop installation in Thailand should avoid the west location.

5. Economic Evaluation
From the simulation results, it is found that the use of monocrystalline and polycrystalline modules
can produce the most electrical energy, resulting in high energy efficiency. However, although the energy
produced from solar energy is clean and abundant energy, the system cost is high. Thus, the installation
cost of the solar rooftop system must also be taken into account. The solar rooftop system has
high energy efficiency but high installation cost, which is less attractive for consumers. Therefore,
the economic evaluation of the solar looptop installation is an important point of view. In this section,
the economic evaluation of different solar rooftop system sizes using the monocrystalline module is
investigated by using economic indicators of discounted payback period (DPP), net present value
(NPV), internal rate of return (IRR), and profitability index (PI).
The cost of solar rooftop systems, operation & maintenance cost, financial mechanism, FiT rates
of the solar rooftop systems based on Figure 2 is used to evaluate economic feasibility in the term
of solar rooftop system owner’s perspective. The economic evaluation is implemented based on the
assumption of Thailand’s geography, which is a tropical climate located near the equator. For this
reason, this location obtains a great number of solar irradiance as a result of high solar generation
performance, with an average 1000 W/m2 for roughly 4.8 hours per day. The used economic study is
dynamic methods to account for time values of money by discounting the cash inflows of the project,
which is discounted payback period (DPP), net present value (NPV), internal rate of return (IRR),
and profitability index (PI).

5.1. Discounted Payback Period (DPP)

The DPP is used to determine the profitability of a project, which gives the number of years that
takes to break even from undertaking the initial investment cost, by discounting future cash flows
and recognizing the time value of money. The acceptable DPP must be shorter than the service life of
a project.
DPP is the period for which annual total saving cost per year (A) is equal to initial investment cost
(I0 ). If all annual cash inflows are equal the DPP calculation is shown in Equation (1) [26].
X
A
= I0
(1+i)DPP
Or (1)
A[1−(1+i)−DPP ]
i = I0

This equation can be solved for DPP to give in Equation (2).

 
I ×i
−ln 1− 0A
DPP = ln(1+i)
Or  (2)
 
ln 1 
I ×i
1− 0

A
DPP = ln(1+i)

where:
Sustainability 2019, 11, 6647 15 of 20

I0 is the investment cost at the beginning.

A is Annual Total Saving cost per year.
i is the discount rate: 3% (average value in the inflation rate of Thailand).

5.2. Net Present Value (NPV)

The NPV of an investment project is the sum of the present values of all cash inflows and outflows
of the investment. A project is profitable when NPV > 0, and the higher the NPV, the more profitable.
By contrast, if the NPV is negative, a minimum interest rate will not be met. The NPV for the discount
rate of all cash flows can be calculated from Equation (5).

A1 A2 An
NPV = −I0 + + +···+ (3)
1 + i (1 + i)2 (1 + i)n

The Equation (3) can be rewritten as:

Xn At
NPV = −I0 + (4)
t=1 (1 + i)t

For constant annual total saving cost per year (A), the NPV is a finite geometric series and is
given by
  n + i 
 1 − 1 
1+i
NPV = −I0 + 
 
 (5)
 1− 1 
1+i

where:

n is the number of the lifetime of the project in years: 25 years (mostly considered number).

5.3. Internal Rate of Return (IRR)

The IRR of an investment project is utilized to estimate the profitability of potential investments,
which can calculate from a discount rate that makes the NPV of all cash flows from a particular project
equal to zero. Thus, the IRR calculations depend on the same formula as the NPV does. The higher
percent of the IRR, the more achievable interest tied-up in the investment.
Xn At
NPV = −I0 + =0 (6)
t=1 (1 + IRR)t

However, Equation (6) illustrates a manifestation of the complex problem of finding the IRR due
to the roots. According case studies, the IRR is considered based on 25 years. Thus, it cannot solve the
equation with hand calculations. For this reason, calculating the IRR can be done in Excel software for
all case studies.

5.4. Profitability Index (PI)

The PI is the measurement of the ratio between the present value of future cash flows and the
initial investment. If the PI is greater than 1, the project is satisfied for investigation. By contrast,
the project is not an economic benefit when the PI is less than 1. Hence, the greater the PI value,
the more attractive the investment. The equation for PI is as follows [27]:

NPV
PI = +1 (7)
I0

The economic parameters of solar rooftop systems used in case studies are presented in Table 4.
Solar rooftop systems are installed in Thailand which has an average 1000 W/m2 for roughly 4.8 hours
Sustainability 2019, 11, 6647 16 of 20

per day. In case studies, the solar rooftop system sizes are varied from 2.4 to 9 kW. The project periods
and discount rates used for economic evaluation are 25 years and 3% respectively. Solar rooftop system
costs comprising the costs of solar panels, inverters, etc. are calculated from average installation prices
of general solar system applications in Thailand for solar rooftop systems up to 10 kW as mentioned in
Table 2 [25]. For that reason, the costs of solar rooftop system used in case studies are 2.1 USD/W.

Table 4. Economic parameters of solar rooftop systems used in case studies.

Solar rooftop system information

Location Thailand
Installed capacity (kW) 2.4, 3, 3.6, 4.8, 6, 7.2, 9
Project periods (year) 25
Discount rate (%) 3
Solar rooftop system cost assumption
Solar panel (USD per W) [25] 0.87
Inverter (USD per W) [25] 0.38
Other (installation, contracting, equipment, etc.) (USD per W) [25] 0.89
Operation and maintenance (% of initial investment cost) [5] 0.68
Solar rooftop system revenue assumption
Feed-in tariff rate (USD per kWh) [9,24] 0.21
Electricity rate (USD per kWh) [11] 0.125
Solar panel degradation (% per year) [5] 1

The annual cost of operation and maintaining (O&M) of a solar rooftop system is normally
minimum and set at 0.68% of the initial investment cost [5]. In order to evaluate economic feasibility,
the annual revenue is calculated from using the FiT scheme for solar rooftop systems of 0.21 USD/kWh
as shown Figure 2 [9,24]. However, solar rooftop systems that are installed without FiT scheme have
the main function to reduce energy consumption from the utility grid, in which the electricity cost in
Thailand is 0.125 USD/kWh. The degradation rate of 1% per year was used as assumption.
Tables 5 and 6 present installation costs and economic evaluation results of different solar rooftop
installation sizes using monocrystalline modules for using FiT scheme and without FiT scheme
respectively. Initial installation costs are calculated from the costs of solar panels, inverters, and others.
The costs of solar rooftop systems depend on the sizes of the systems. O&M costs are considered
from the initial installation costs, which is used to estimate expense for system maintenance each year.
Additionally, O&M costs are not expensive for the solar rooftop systems, since the systems have small
capacity as well as the equipment is durable and has a long lifetime. Energy production per year is the
electrical energy produced from the solar rooftop systems in the periods of 365 days based on average
solar irradiance of 1000 W/m2 for roughly 4.8 hours per day. Annual revenue is calculated from the
costs of energy production per year based on FiT or without Fit rates subtracted with the O&M costs
per year. In economic evaluation, the degradation rate of 1% per year is implemented, caused by the
degradation rate of solar panels, the amount of dust, and inverter efficiency reduction.

Table 5. Solar system using monocrystalline type solar panel installed on different sizes of rooftops.

Energy
Size of Solar Area Initial O&M Cost ($) Annual DPP NPV IRR
Production per PI
Rooftops (kW) (m2 ) Installation Cost ($) per Year Revenue ($) (Year) ($) (%)
Year (kWh)
2.4 16 5040 34 4380 849 6.1 7929 15% 2.57
3 20 6300 43 5475 1061 6.1 9907 15% 2.57
3.6 24 7560 51 6570 1273 6.1 11,886 15% 2.57
4.8 32 10,080 69 8760 1697 6.1 15,843 15% 2.57
6 40 12,600 86 10,950 2122 6.1 19,815 15% 2.57
7.2 48 15,120 103 13,140 2546 6.1 23,771 15% 2.57
9 60 18,900 129 16,425 3183 6.1 29,722 15% 2.57
Sustainability 2019, 11, 6647 17 of 20

Table 6. Solar system using monocrystalline type solar panel installed on different sizes of rooftop
without a FiT scheme.

Energy
Size of Solar Area Initial O&M Cost ($) Annual DPP NPV IRR
Production per PI
Rooftops (kW) (m2 ) Installation Cost ($) per Year Revenue ($) (Year) ($) (%)
Year (kWh)
2.4 16 5040 34 4380 491 12.4 2522 7% 1.50
3 20 6300 43 5475 614 12.4 3156 7% 1.50
3.6 24 7560 51 6570 737 12.4 3791 7% 1.50
4.8 32 10,080 69 8760 983 12.4 5059 7% 1.50
6 40 12,600 86 10,950 1228 12.4 6313 7% 1.50
7.2 48 15,120 103 13,140 1474 12.4 7581 7% 1.50
9 60 18,900 129 16,425 1842 12.4 9469 7% 1.50
Sustainability 2017, 9, x FOR PEER REVIEW 19 of 22

Economic
7.2
results
48
show that the103
15,120
sizes of solar
13,140
rooftop1474
systems12.4have an effect 7%
7581
on high1.50installation
costs. The greater the solar rooftop system installation sizes, the higher the installation costs. However,
9 60 18,900 129 16,425 1842 12.4 9469 7% 1.50
the more the higher installation costs, the more the greater the average produced power per day, hence
a great numberEconomic resultsrevenues.
of annual show that the sizesall
Thus, of solar rooftop
the solar systemsinstallation
rooftop have an effect on high
sizes installation
provide similar DPP,
costs. The greater the solar rooftop system installation sizes, the higher the installation costs.
IRR, and PI values. The increase in installation costs of solar rooftop systems is consistent with the
However, the more the higher installation costs, the more the greater the average produced power
increaseper
in day,
energy produced
hence from them,
a great number leading
of annual to the
revenues. proportion
Thus, of installation
all the solar costs sizes
rooftop installation and annual
revenueprovide
being similar
equal to each year. By comparing the solar rooftop systems between
DPP, IRR, and PI values. The increase in installation costs of solar rooftop systems with FiTisscheme
and without the FiT
consistent withscheme, it isinfound
the increase energythat the former
produced givesleading
from them, better to
economic results
the proportion of which are shorter
installation
costs and
DPP, higher NPV, annual
morerevenue
IRR, and being equalPI.
better to each year. By
However, a comparing
large-scalethe solar rooftop
installation ofsystems betweensystems
solar rooftop
gives a with
higherFiT scheme and without the FiT scheme, it is found that the former gives better economic results
NPV since all solar rooftop system sizes have the same DPP of 6.1 years, meaning
which are shorter DPP, higher NPV, more IRR, and better PI. However, a large-scale installation of
that thesolar
solar rooftop systems having a profit for solar rooftop own’s in 6.2 years. For this reason,
rooftop systems gives a higher NPV since all solar rooftop system sizes have the same DPP of
large-scale solar rooftop
6.1 years, meaning that systems arerooftop
the solar more profitable afteratheir
systems having profitpayback by comparing
for solar rooftop theyears.
own's in 6.2 NPV values
of 9 kWFor
solar rooftop
this reason,sizes and 2.4solar
large-scale kW solar
rooftoprooftop
systemssizes.
are Although the solar
more profitable afterroof
theirsystems
paybackhaveby a high
comparing
installation the installation
cost, the NPV values ofof9 solarkW solar rooftop
rooftop sizes and
systems 2.4economic
has kW solar rooftop sizes.for
feasibility Although thelifetime
a project
solardue
of 25 years roofto
systems
supporthavefrom
a hightheinstallation cost, the installation of solar rooftop systems has economic
FiT scheme.
feasibility for a project lifetime of 25 years due to support from the FiT scheme.
6. Discussion
6. Discussion
This study focuses
This study on the
focuses comparison
on the comparisonof ofelectrical energy
electrical energy production
production fromfrom
solar solar
rooftoprooftop
systemssystems
using 3 using
different typestypes
3 different of solar panel
of solar technologies
panel technologies i.e., polycrystalline,
i.e. polycrystalline, monocrystalline,
monocrystalline, and thin-film.
and thin-film.
In fact, In
thefact,
technology of the
the technology solar
of the panels
solar panelswill
will have
have aamajor
major effect
effect on on
the the produced
produced electrical
electrical power. power.
Recently,Recently, solar panel
solar panel technologies
technologies areare continuously explored
continuously explored andanddeveloped
developed as shown in the timeline
as shown in the timeline
of technologies in Figure 9.
of technologies in Figure 9.

Figure
Figure 9. Solar
9. Solar module
module efficiency plotted
efficiency plotted from
from1988 to the
1988 present
to the [28]. [28].
present

Most solar modules are currently produced from crystalline silicon

(polycrystalline and monocrystalline silicon.) due to high efficiency and their prices tend to decrease.
In addition, Rühle S. article claims that crystalline silicon devices of single p–n junction based on
Shockley–Queisser limit are now approaching the theoretical limiting power efficiency of 33.16% [29].
The rest of the overall market is made up of thin-film technologies using cadmium telluride, copper
indium gallium selenide (CIGS) and amorphous silicon. The thin-film and amorphous silicon
Sustainability 2019, 11, 6647 18 of 20

Most solar modules are currently produced from crystalline silicon (polycrystalline and
monocrystalline silicon.) due to high efficiency and their prices tend to decrease. In addition,
Rühle S. article claims that crystalline silicon devices of single p–n junction based on Shockley–Queisser
limit are now approaching the theoretical limiting power efficiency of 33.16% [29]. The rest of the
overall market is made up of thin-film technologies using cadmium telluride, copper indium gallium
selenide (CIGS) and amorphous silicon. The thin-film and amorphous silicon technologies still give
lower efficiency than the silicon. However, they provide outstanding benefits for higher efficiency in
different climatic conditions and lower production costs [30].
Emerging photovoltaic is third generation solar technologies that use advanced thin-film cells i.e.,
organic photovoltaic [31] and perovskite [32,33]. Ana M. et al. work [31] presents that the performance
of organic photovoltaic in a term of module performance ratio is similar to some of the most
common technologies. Different compositional perovskite materials for solar cells are reviewed in
L. Yan et al. [32] and Parida B. et al [33]. It is found that organic photovoltaic technology may be
a good alternative candidate for solar deployment due to their relatively high-efficiency conversion
and the low cost compared to other new solar technologies. However, they are still less efficient than
crystalline silicon.
Gallium arsenide (GaAs) solar cell technologies provide the highest efficiency as well as their
highest costs [34,35]. GAGS Multi-junction cells which are compound semiconductors and made of
GaAs and other semiconductor materials are preferably used in solar panels on spacecraft since they
give the greatest ratio of generated power per kilogram lifted into space.
However, the use of high-efficiency solar panels may not be appropriate for solar rooftop systems
since they are expensive, resulting in not being economically worthwhile. In addition, some of the
solar panel technologies are in the research and development stages. Thus, there is not widespread in
the term of the commercial market. From another perspective, the shape of the roof does not have any
significant impact on the production of electrical power in the solar rooftop system due to the electrical
power produced depending on the solar irradiance, temperature, tilt angle and direction of the solar
panel installation.

7. Conclusions
Results from the study reveal that the central region of Thailand has more solar power generation
capacity than the other regions. The central region has the highest average solar radiation, while its
temperate is similar to other regions. For this reason, the central part of Thailand is a suitable place for
installing solar rooftop in terms of solar radiation and temperature. In the case of using different solar
panels, the thin-film type solar panel is not suitable for solar rooftop systems as its generation capacity
is less than the other types of solar panels. The monocrystalline and polycrystalline solar panels can
generate maximum power close to each other.
For the economic evaluation, the solar rooftop sizes of less than 10 kW are implemented. The study
cases are based on the installation of monocrystalline solar panels and using the FiT scheme supported
for solar rooftop in Thailand. The sizes of solar rooftops are varied to compare and analyze economic
feasibility in terms of DPP, NPV, IRR, and PI. Every solar rooftop size with FiT scheme provides the same
DPP, IRR, and PI of 6.1 years, 15%, and 2.57 respectively, while the DPP of 12.4 years, IRR of 7%, and PI
of 1.50 provide for every solar rooftop size without the FiT scheme. For that reason, the installation of
solar rooftop systems, which are different sizes, has the same payback period. However, a large-scale
installation of solar rooftop systems can receive more electrical energy produced from the solar rooftop
systems, as a result of the larger solar rooftop system sizes being more economic satisfaction.

Author Contributions: A.N. and T.P. conceived and designed the experiments; S.Y. performed the experiments;
S.Y. and T.P. analyzed the data; A.N. contributed reagents/materials/analysis tools; S.Y. wrote the paper.
Funding: This research received no external funding.
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest.
Sustainability 2019, 11, 6647 19 of 20

References
1. Energy Statistics of Thailand 2018; The Energy Policy and Planning Office (EPPO): Bangkok, Thailand, 2018.
2. Department of Alternative Energy Development and Efficiency, Ministry of Energy. The Solar Map; Department
of Alternative Energy Development and Efficiency, Ministry of Energy: Bangkok, Thailand, 2017.
3. Ministry of Energy. Thailand Power Development Plan 2015–2036 (PDP 2015); Ministry of Energy: Bangkok,
Thailand, 2019. Available online: www.egat.co.th/en/images/about-egat/PDP2015_Eng.pdf (accessed on
11 April 2019).
4. Ministry of Energy. Alternative Energy Development Plan 2015–2036 (AEDP 2015); Ministry of Energy: Bangkok,
Thailand, 2019. Available online: www.eppo.go.th/images/POLICY/ENG/AEDP2015ENG.pdf (accessed on
11 April 2019).
5. Tongsopit, S. Thailand’s feed-in tariff for residential rooftop solar PV systems: Progress so far. Energy Sustain.
Dev. 2015, 29, 127–134. [CrossRef]
6. Chaianong, A.; Pharino, C. Outlook and challenges for promoting solar photovoltaic rooftops in Thailand.
Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2015, 48, 356–372. [CrossRef]
7. Tongsopit, S.; Moungchareon, S.; Aksornkij, A.; Potisat, T. Business models and financing options for a rapid
scale-up of rooftop solar power systems in Thailand. Energy Policy 2016, 95, 447–457. [CrossRef]
8. Eskew, J.; Ratledge, M.; Wallace, M.; Gheewala, S.H.; Rakkwamsuk, P. An environmental Life Cycle
Assessment of rooftop solar in Bangkok, Thailand. Renew. Energy 2018, 123, 781–792. [CrossRef]
9. Tantisattayakul, T.; Kanchanapiya, P. Financial measures for promoting residential rooftop photovoltaics
under a feed-in tariff framework in Thailand. Energy Policy 2017, 109, 260–269. [CrossRef]
10. Chimres, N.; Wongwises, S. Critical review of the current status of solar energy in Thailand. Renew. Sustain.
Energy Rev. 2016, 58, 198–207. [CrossRef]
11. Chaianong, A.; Tongsopit, S.; Bangviwat, A.; Menke, C. Bill saving analysis of rooftop PV customers and
policy implications for Thailand. Renew. Energy 2019, 131, 422–434. [CrossRef]
12. Tongsopit, S.; Junlakarn, S.; Wibulpolprasert, W.; Chaianong, A.; Kokchang, P.; Hoang, N.V. The economics
of solar PV self-consumption in Thailand. Renew. Energy 2019, 138, 395–408. [CrossRef]
13. Rathore, P.K.S.; Chauhan, D.S.; Singh, R.P. Decentralized solar rooftop photovoltaic in India: On the path of
sustainable energy security. Renew. Energy 2019, 131, 297–307. [CrossRef]
14. Dondariya, C.; Porwal, D.; Awasthi, A.; Shukla, A.K.; Sudhakar, K.; Manohar, S.R.M.; Bhimte, A. Performance
simulation of grid-connected rooftop solar PV system for small households: A case study of Ujjain, India.
Energy Rep. 2018, 4, 546–553. [CrossRef]
15. Khan, J.; Arsalan, M.H. Estimation of rooftop solar photovoltaic potential using geo-spatial techniques:
A perspective from planned neighborhood of Karachi—Pakistan. Renew. Energy 2016, 90, 188–203. [CrossRef]
16. Griffiths, S.; Mills, R. Potential of rooftop solar photovoltaics in the energy system evolution of the United
Arab Emirates. Energy Strategy Rev. 2016, 9, 1–7. [CrossRef]
17. Saqlawi, J.A.; Madani, K.; Dowell, N.M. Techno-economic feasibility of grid-independent residential roof-top
solar PV systems in Muscat, Oman. Energy Convers. Manag. 2018, 178, 322–334. [CrossRef]
18. Bódis, K.; Kougias, I.; Waldau, A.J.; Taylor, N.; Szabó, S. A high-resolution geospatial assessment of the
rooftop solar photovoltaic potential in the European Union. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2019, 114, 109309.
[CrossRef]
19. Buffat, R.; Grassi, S.; Raubal, M. A scalable method for estimating rooftop solar irradiation potential over
large regions. Appl. Energy 2018, 216, 389–401. [CrossRef]
20. Assouline, D.; Mohajeri, N.; Scartezzini, J.L. Large-scale rooftop solar photovoltaic technical potential
estimation using Random Forests. Appl. Energy 2018, 217, 189–211. [CrossRef]
21. Mukisa, N.; Zamora, R.; Lie, T.T. Feasibility assessment of grid-tied rooftop solar photovoltaic systems for
industrial sector application in Uganda. Sustain. Energy Technol. Assess. 2019, 32, 83–91. [CrossRef]
22. Lee, M.; Hong, T.; Jeong, K.; Kim, J. A bottom-up approach for estimating the economic potential of the
rooftop solar photovoltaic system considering the spatial and temporal diversity. Appl. Energy 2018, 232,
640–656. [CrossRef]
23. Lee, M.; Hong, T.; Jeong, J.; Jeong, K. Development of a rooftop solar photovoltaic rating system considering
the technical and economic suitability criteria at the building level. Energy 2018, 160, 213–224. [CrossRef]
Sustainability 2019, 11, 6647 20 of 20

24. Energy Regulatory Commission (ERC). Regulation of the Energy Regulatory Commission on Power Purchasa
from Solar Rooftop. 2019. Available online: www.erc.or.th/ERCWeb2/Front/StaticPage/StaticPage.aspx?p=
200&Tag=SolarRooftop (accessed on 18 September 2019).
25. National Survey Report of PV Power Application in Thailand 2015; Department of Alternative Energy Development
and Efficiency, Ministry of Energy: Bangkok, Thailand, 2015.
26. Lee, J.; Chang, B.; Aktas, C.; Gorthala, R. Economic feasibility of campus-wide photovoltaic systems in New
England. Renew. Energy 2016, 99, 452–464. [CrossRef]
27. Bhandari, S.B. Discounted Payback Period-Some Extensions. Journal of Business and Behavioral Sciences 1989,
21, 28–38.
28. Kopidakis, N. Champion Photovoltaic Module Efficiency Chart; National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL):
Golden, CO, USA, 2019.
29. Rühle, S. Tabulated values of the Shockley—Queisser limit for single junction solar cells. Sol. Energy 2016,
130, 139–147. [CrossRef]
30. Brun, N.R.; Wehrli, B.; Fent, K. Ecotoxicological assessment of solar cell leachates: Copper indium gallium
selenide (CIGS) cells show higher activity than organic photovoltaic (OPV) cells. Sci. Total Environ. 2016, 543
Pt A, 703–714. [CrossRef]
31. Amillo, A.M.G.; Bardizza, G.; Salis, E.; Huld, T.; Dunlop, E.D. Energy-based metric for analysis of organic PV
devices in comparison with conventional industrial technologies. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2018, 93, 76–89.
[CrossRef]
32. Yan, L.L.; Han, C.; Shi, B.; Zhao, Y.; Zhang, X.D. A review on the crystalline silicon bottom cell for monolithic
perovskite/silicon tandem solar cells. Mater. Today Nano 2019, 7, 100045. [CrossRef]
33. Parida, B.; Yoon, S.; Jeong, S.M.; Cho, J.S.; Kim, J.K.; Kang, D.W. Recent progress on cesium lead/tin
halide-based inorganic perovskites for stable and efficient solar cells: A review. Sol. Energy Mater. Sol. Cells
2020, 204, 110212. [CrossRef]
34. Dimroth, F.; Tibbits, T.N.D.; Niemeyer, M.; Predan, F.; Beutel, P.; Karcher, C.; Oliva, E.; Siefer, G.; Lackner, D.;
Fuß-Kailuweit, P.; et al. Four-Junction Wafer-Bonded Concentrator Solar Cells. IEEE J. Photovolt. 2016, 6,
343–349. [CrossRef]
35. Essig, S.; Allebé, C.; Remo, T.; Geisz, J.F.; Steiner, M.A.; Horowitz, K.; Barraud, L.; Ward, J.S.; Schnabel, M.;
Descoeudres, A.; et al. Raising the one-sun conversion efficiency of III–V/Si solar cells to 32.8% for two
junctions and 35.9% for three junctions. Nat. Energy 2017, 6, 17144. [CrossRef]

© 2019 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access
article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution
(CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).