Economic Analysis and Potential Feed‐in Tariff of Grid‐Connected PV Systems in Nigeria
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study presents a feasibility study of grid‐tied PV system in selected locations across the country with focus on cost of energy produced and incentives such as feed‐in tariff and investment support. Based on the study locations and assumptions used in this study, it was estimated that the annual energy generated by the PV system varies between 2885 kWh in Port‐Harcourt in southern region and 4391 kWh in Isa in northern region. The optimal simulation results reveal that the levelized cost of energy varies from one location to another: highest in very low‐energy site (Port‐Harcourt) and lowest in the very high‐energy (Isa). In addition, it is estimated that the feed‐in tariff varies between N76.54/kWh (or US$0.4556/kWh) in Port‐Harcourt and N50.25/kWh (or US$0.2991/kWh) in Isa. It was further observed that the ratio of levelized cost of energy to current electricity tariff is least at Bauchi with a value of 1.22 and highest in Ikeja with a value of 2.95. Consequently, it would easier to sell solar PV idea to individual in Bauchi than those in Ikeja to invest in solar PV. Some of the benefits and potential challenges of implementing feed‐in tariff in Nigeria were also presented. © 2016 American Institute of Chemical Engineers Environ Prog, 36: 305–314, 2017
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".