Development and assessment of a floating photovoltaic-based hydrogen production system integrated with storage options
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The integrated system approach utilized in the current study represents an innovative approach to harnessing solar energy through a floating photovoltaic-based integrated plant featuring a diverse array of energy storage options. As part of this research, a solar energy system integrating both floating and concentrating solar technologies was designed at the specified site. Despite the constraints presented by the cold temperature at the chosen location, particularly during the winter months when solar irradiation is restricted, strategies are employed, such as exploiting the high albedo effect caused by the freezing of the water body, optimizing the application of solar radiation, and assuring the system's resilience and energy efficiency. Floating photovoltaic and concentrated solar panels are integral components of this advanced system, which is supplemented by underground hot and cold storage units, underground hydro-pumped storage, a multi-effect desalination system with freshwater storage, a lithium bromide absorption cooling system, and an alkaline electrolysis system for hydrogen and oxygen storage. This comprehensive energy strategy includes diverse storage and production technologies. The thermodynamic analyses and assessments employing the Engineering Equation Solver and the System Advisor Model provide some quantitative performance evaluations. The study considers time-dependent operational characteristics, illustrates the water withdrawal rates, energy and exergy efficiencies of the heating space temperature, inverter efficiency, GHI irradiance, mass, and volume values of the heat transfer fluid in both hot and cold tanks within thermal energy storage, annual cooling generation over a year, power production, hydropower storage, and hydrogen storage over a year. The system's concentrated solar panels are projected to generate an annual AC output of 180.79 GWh, with a yearly water usage of 14,055 m3, while floating panels are predicted to provide 7000 kWh with a 0.85 performance ratio. The overall energy efficiency of the current system is determined to be 51.76 %, and the exergy efficiency is found to be 55.41 %, respectively. Optimizing energy efficiency, utilizing diverse storage solutions, and utilizing aquatic environments minimizes environmental impact, and time-dependent analysis enhances perceptions of performance throughout different times and circumstances.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".