Techno-economic analysis of photovoltaic systems in Western Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Solar energy has become a pivotal component of the energy landscape in recent years, demonstrating the highest growth rate of all renewable energy sources over the past decade. This thesis provides an overview of the current techno-economic status of photovoltaic (PV) energy in Interior British Columbia (B.C.), Canada, and in remote, off-grid communities in the Northwest Territories (N.W.T.). Two case studies are presented here for the implementation of a PV system in two contrasting environments in Western Canada. The first case study examines the implementation of a 152 kWp PV system on top of student residences in Kelowna, B.C. The second case study examines the feasibility of installing a PV system in the northern, remote, and First Nation’s community in what we now know as Fort McPherson, N.W.T. First, the energy consumption for the respective case studies is examined, providing insight into monthly and hourly consumption trends. The consumption trends show that as temperature extremes are accentuated due to climate change, electricity demand for cooling and heating will increase. Next, the PV systems are modelled and optimized in PVsyst, followed by a financial analysis examining the balance of system, the levelized cost of electricity (LCOE), and the impact of key variables on the payback period of the PV systems. In Kelowna, the results indicate that PV systems have a payback period under the lifetime of the PV system, and LCOE below ¢11 per kWh. A 5 kWp PV system in the Okanagan averages $3.24 per watt, while a larger PV system around 300 kWp averages $1.24 per watt. Contrastingly, the PV system size and cost of electricity in Fort McPherson plays a critical role in determining its financial viability. A 74 kWp PV system is financially viable for governmental customers and entities that pay non-subsidized electricity rates, or if 20% of the capital cost of the PV system is subsidized. This work is intended to serve as a blueprint for the feasibility of PV in Interior B.C. and in remote communities in Northern Canada, to lead to further uptake of solar energy in the province of B.C. and the N.W.T.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".