Net Zero Agrivoltaic Arrays for Agrotunnel Vertical Growing Systems: Energy Analysis and System Sizing
Bibliographic record
Abstract
To control the volatility and reduce the electricity costs for indoor farming, the agrivoltaics agrotunnel introduced here uses: 1) high insulation for a building dedicated to vertical growing, 2) high-efficiency LED lighting, 3) heat pumps (HPs), and 4), solar photovoltaics (PV) provide known electric costs for 25 years. In order to size the PV array, this study develops a thermal model for agrotunnel load calculations and validates it using the Hourly Analysis Program and measured data so the effect of plants’ evapotranspiration can be included. HPs are sized, plug loads (i.e., water pump energy needed to provide for the hybrid aeroponics/hydroponics system, DC power running the LEDs hung on grow walls, and dehumidifier assisting in moisture condensation in summer) are measured/modeled. Ultimately, all models are combined to establish an annual load profile for an agrotunnel that is then used to model the necessary PV to power the system throughout the year. The results find that agrivoltaics to power an agrotunnel range from 40 to 50kW and make up an areas from 3.2 to 10.48 m²/m² of an agrotunnel footprint. Net zero agrotunnels are technically viable although future work is needed to deeply explore the economics of localized vertical food growing systems.
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 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
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".