Technical and Economical Feasibility Analysis on Household-Scale Rooftop Solar Power Plant Design with On-Grid System in Semarang City
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Utilizing rooftops as a solar power plant system on the grid can be an effective and efficient solution to reduce electricity bills. This research aims to design and analyze the potential of 1215 Wp solar power plant rooftop with on grid system household scale in terms of techno economy. Using each of the two alternatives to the main components of solar panels and inverters, there were 4 variations of the component configuration design in this study. Variation 1 uses Canadian solar panels with solax inverters. Variation 2 uses Canadian solar panels with so far inverters. Variation 3 uses risen solar panels with solax inverters. Variation 4 uses risen solar panels with sofar inverter. Through PVSyst 6.43 software, with an average radiation average of 5.48 kWh/m2/day, the potential energy production of each variation of 1215 Wp rooftop solar power plant household scale are 1873 kWh, 1893 kWh, 1865 kWh and 1885 kWh. The investment cost of 1215 Wp rooftop solar power plant ranges from IDR25,220,000-IDR27,020,000 with Net Present Value ranges from IDR15,309,805- IDR17,421,839, Benefit Cost Ratio ranges from 1,489-1,588, Payback period ranges from 10.38 – 11.02 years and Internal Rate of Return value ranges from 8.8-9.56%.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".