Large-scale Solar PV Investment Models, Tools and Analysis: The Ontario Case
Wajid Muneer, Student Member, IEEE, Kankar Bhattacharya, Senior Member, IEEE, and Claudio Cañizares, Fellow, IEEE
Abstract – In this paper, an optimization model and techniques to facilitate a prospective investor to arrive at an optimal plan for investment in large-scale solar photovoltaic (PV) generation projects are proposed and discussed. The optimal set of decisions includes the location, sizing and time of investment that yields the highest profit. The mathematical model considers various relevant issues associated with PV projects such as locationspecific solar radiation levels, detailed investment costs representation, and an approximate representation of the transmission system. A detailed case study considering the investment in PV projects in Ontario, Canada, is presented and discussed, demonstrating the practical application and usefulness of the proposed methodology and tools. Index Terms – Power system planning, renewable energy generation, solar photovoltaic, investment tools. 𝐷𝐵

𝑁 𝐿 𝐴 𝐼𝑖 𝑇𝑖 𝜂𝑖 𝜂𝑜 𝜂𝑖𝑛𝑣 𝑛𝑑,𝑚 𝑛𝑚

I. NOMENCLATURE A. Indices Zone 𝑖, 𝑗 Year 𝑘

This work is supported by the Ontario Centers of Excellence project “Large-scale Photovoltaic Solar Power Integration in Transmission and Distribution Networks” (PV-SOPITAD), in collaboration with Hydro One Networks, London Hydro, Blue Water Power Generation, OptiSolar, First Solar and the University of Western Ontario. The authors are with the Department of Electrical & Computer Engineering, University of Waterloo, Waterloo, Ontario, N2L 3G1, Canada. (e-mail:,,

B. Parameters Discount rate [%] 𝑎 𝐸𝐶𝑘,𝑖 Equipment cost [$/kW] 𝐿𝐶𝑘,𝑖 Land cost [$/kW] 𝑇𝐶𝑘,𝑖 Transport cost [$/kW] 𝐿𝑏𝐶𝑘,𝑖 Labor cost [$/kW] 𝑂𝑀𝑘,𝑖 Operation and maintenance cost [$/kWh] 𝐶𝐹𝑖𝑃𝑉 Solar PV capacity factor [%] 𝐶𝐹𝑖𝑐𝑜𝑛𝑣 Conventional generation capacity factor [%] 𝑐𝑜𝑛𝑣 𝐶𝑎𝑝𝑘,𝑖 Conventional generation capacity available [MW] 𝑒𝑓𝑓 𝑃𝐷𝑘,𝑖 Effective zonal peak demand [MW] 𝑀𝐴𝑋 𝑃𝑘,𝑖𝑗 Transmission line capacity [MW] 𝐵𝑘,𝑖𝑗 Element of B-matrix [p.u.] Price of energy sold to grid/utility [$/kWh] 𝜌 𝐴𝐵𝑢𝑑𝑘 Annual budget [$] 𝑇𝐵𝑢𝑑 Total budget [$] 𝑃𝑉 𝑃𝑜𝑖,𝑚 Monthly average power from solar PV module [kW] Rated power of a typical solar PV module [kW] 𝑃𝑟𝑃𝑉

C. Variables Net present value of investor profit [$] 𝛺 𝑃𝑉 𝑁𝐶𝑘,𝑖 New solar PV capacity [MW] 𝑃𝑉 𝐶𝑎𝑝𝑘,𝑖 Total solar PV capacity [MW] 𝑃𝑘,𝑖𝑗 Transmission line power flow [MW] 𝛿𝑘,𝑖 Zone power angle [rad] 𝑐𝑜𝑛𝑣 𝑃𝑘,𝑖 Power dispatched from conventional generation [MW] 𝑃𝑉 𝑃𝑘,𝑖 Power dispatched from solar PV generation [MW] 𝑐𝑜𝑛𝑣 𝐸𝑘,𝑖 Energy available from conventional generation [MWh] 𝑃𝑉 𝐸𝑘,𝑖 Energy available from solar PV generation [MWh] II. INTRODUCTION HE depleting oil reserves, uncertainty and political issues concerning nuclear generation, combined with the environmental concerns associated with coal and natural gasfired generation, is encouraging researchers, practitioners and policy makers to look for alternative and sustainable sources of energy. Among them, wind and solar generation have become preeminent in recent years. In this context, the ease of installation, declining cost of technology and supportive government policies have been the catalysts for the fast growth of solar photo-voltaic (PV) generation in the world. Thus, in just a short duration of 6 years, from 2004 to 2009, the total global grid-connected solar PV capacity has increased at an average rate of 60%, annually, to a total of about 21 GW [1]. As of 2009, in the province of Ontario, Canada, out of a total renewable energy generation capacity of 1,422 MW, solar PV generation capacity accounts for 525 MW [2]. The current world’s largest solar PV power plant with an installed capacity of 80 MW was completed in Sarnia, Ontario, Canada, in October 2010 [3]. Grid-connected solar PV systems provide a quiet, low maintenance, pollution-free, safe, reliable and independent alternative to conventional generation sources. Major

Dead-band imposed on initial investment [years] Investment period [years] Plant useful life [years] Solar PV module area [m2] Zonal solar radiation in zone [kWh/m2-day] Zonal ambient temperature [°C] Solar PV system conversion efficiency [%] Solar PV module efficiency [%] Inverter efficiency [%] Number of daylight hours available per month [hrs] Number of hours per month [hrs]


However. the focus of this work is restricted to large-scale solar PV systems (5 MW and above).ACCEPTED TO IEEE TRANS. transmission parameters. which includes development of cost components. as it incorporates the entire life-cycle of the projects and the time value of money. hydro power and solar PV. Finally. It also stimulates the development of new tools and techniques to determine optimal paths of integration of renewable energy resources into the existing power system. The FIT offers lucrative prices under long-term contracts for energy generated from biomass. Therefore. demand. carefully evaluated with adequate accuracy for a planning problem of this nature. This is in line with the current investment trends in power systems with the influx of private investments. but it is only useful when solar energy is the only available resource. landfill gas. The FIT price schedule for larger projects. BACKGROUND Solar PV systems are generally characterized by high fixed costs and low operation costs [11]. it can be observed that the most appropriate economic criteria for solar PV investment analysis is the NPV analysis [9]. the main conclusions and contributions of the paper are highlighted in Section VII. However.[10]. power angle constraints and power flow equations in the planning framework. including a probabilistic study to consider relevant parameter uncertainties. NPV is the discounted sum of the revenue from selling the gross generated energy net of all costs associated with the energy delivery system. According to the European PV Technology Platform Group. allows the highest rates to investments in solar PV systems up to 10 MW [6]. an LCC analysis using a cost annuity method is applied. POWER SYSTEMS. It is important to highlight the fact that the primary purpose of this paper is to present an investor-oriented solar PV planning model. solar PV is expected to reach grid parity in most of Europe by 2019 [4]. annualized life-cycle cost (ALCC) or cost annuity. In [10]. development of decision making tools for a solar PV investor. therefore. the analysis and mitigation of the adverse effects of solar PV sources on the utility grid is discussed in [7] and [8]. the actual flow varies with year. In an attempt to attract investments in renewable energy and help phase-out coal generation in Ontario by 2014 to meet emission reduction targets. as discussed in [9]. APRIL 2011. Hence. Ontario’s Feed-in Tariff (FIT) was established as North America’s first comprehensive guaranteed pricing structure for renewable energy production. planning and operational effects of distributed generation (DG) on power systems. the Green Energy and Green Economy Act of Ontario was passed in May 2009 [5]. There has been some reported works in the literature on system-wide analysis. ALCC is the average yearly flow of money. Section IV presents the proposed investor-centric generation planning model to determine the optimal investment decisions in solar PV. Thus. ROI is the market discount rate that results in zero NPV. not concerned with system-wide operation or planning are not generally available in the current technical literature. the transmission system model. this paper focuses on developing optimal plan decision tools for solar PV investments from the perspective of investors. which cannot be ignored in their investment planning programs. and evaluation of solar PV capacity factors. the viability of solar PV systems is examined and a sensitivity analysis is carried out to estimate their comparative viability with conventional diesel-powered units based on region specific parameters. private investors do not own or operate the transmission network and are hence not solely responsible for its performance. solar PV and conventional generation capacity factors. in the prevalent decentralized power systems. This program opens up opportunities for new investments in the renewable energy sector in Ontario. net present value (NPV) or life-cycle cost (LCC). The proposed and general mathematical model considers the future generation. The following economic criteria have been proposed in the literature for the evaluation of solar PV investments [12]: least cost energy. From a literature review. It also concludes that the break-even point occurs at high . solar PV investment planning models are not significantly affected by their operating costs. this model can be considered as the first stage of a two stage planning framework for a decentralized power system. Least cost energy is a reasonable criterion. making the results viable from a systems’ point of view. Section V discusses the Ontario case study. Unlike certain conventional generation sources that have substantial operational costs such as thermal units. NPVs are calculated for all the proposed projects. The structure of the rest of this paper is as follows: Section III provides a brief background review of the relevant economic criteria and technical literature. and return on investment (ROI). the model presented here does incorporate transmission constraints. The model is demonstrated in the case of a prospective investor in Ontario’s booming green energy sector. payback period (PBP). thus representing somewhat system security issues. the traditional centralized planning aspects such as minimization of overall system losses and overall system security are not considered here. 2 breakthroughs in solar cell manufacturing technologies have enabled it to compete with conventional generation technologies in the large-scale as well. It was concluded in [10] that solar PV systems become much more economically competitive with conventional generation sources when they are installed on a large-scale. security or reliability. biogas. In Section VI the results obtained from the Ontario case model are presented and analyzed. III. on-shore and off-shore wind. driven by various incentives and support policy mechanisms offered by governments. Generally. and the project with the highest NPV is selected.[13]-[15]. but the sum over the period can be converted to a series of equal payments. For example. Therefore. Cost comparisons reveal that PV systems have the lowest cost when the daily energy demand is low. PBP is a nonlife cycle criteria and simply calculates the time needed to recover the investment made. with the results meant to aid private investors in their decision making.

Based on the annual cash flow over the useful life of the new investments. land cost 𝐿𝐶𝑘.𝑖 + 𝐿𝐶𝑘. This transfer must not exceed the maximum power transfer limit of each of the transmission lines. Thus.𝑖 − 𝐶𝑜𝑠𝑡𝑘.𝑖𝑗 = −𝐵𝑘. Objective Function The objective is to maximize the NPV of the investor’s profit (𝛺).𝑖 is constrained as follows: 𝑃𝑉 𝑃𝑉 𝐸𝑘.𝑖 − 𝑃𝐷𝑘. thus: (5) 𝑃𝑘. 6) Dynamic Constraint on Solar PV Capacity Addition: This constraint ensures that the solar PV capacity for the next year is the cumulative sum of the new capacity installed and the capacity of the previous year. APRIL 2011.𝑖 ≤ 8760 𝐶𝑎𝑝𝑘. POWER SYSTEMS.𝑖 �𝑁𝐶𝑘. transportation/freight cost 𝑇𝐶𝑘. Based on these capacity factors the annual energy available from the solar PV 𝑃𝑉 generation sources 𝐸𝑘.𝑖 ≤ 𝛿𝑚𝑎𝑥 (7) 2) Line Flow Limits: The power transferred between the zones depends on the impedance of the transmission lines. and that either a carbon tax or cap-and-trade mechanism to the FIT would result in reduction of both emissions and energy cost. All variables and parameters throughout this section are properly defined in Section I. while the investment selection variables are binary. A.𝑖 . are presented and discussed in detail. 3 energy demand.𝑖 + 𝑁𝐶𝑘.𝑖 (2) 𝑃𝑉 + 𝑂𝑀𝑘.𝑖 is discrete with 5 MW steps.𝑖 = �𝐸𝐶𝑘. It also includes operation and maintenance cost 𝑂𝑀𝑘. siting and production schedule).𝑖 ≤ 8760 𝐶𝑎𝑝𝑘. Thus: 𝑃𝑉 𝐶𝑜𝑠𝑡𝑘.𝑖𝑗 = 0 𝑒𝑓𝑓 𝑗 (4) 3) Power Angle Limits: The power angles are constrained to be within a range to ensure system stability (±30° limits were used here): 𝛿𝑚𝑖𝑛 ≤ 𝛿𝑘. as follows: ∑𝑖�𝑅𝑒𝑣𝑒𝑛𝑢𝑒𝑘. This scheme relies on an iterative process satisfying both the objective of the LDC (maximizing DG participation and penetration) and the SPP (maximizing profit based on sizing.𝑖 .𝑖𝑗 (6) where.𝑖 = 𝜌𝐸𝑘. (𝑁 − 1) 5) Energy Generation From Solar PV Sources: Zonal capacity factors of solar PV generation 𝐶𝐹𝑖𝑃𝑉 can be determined from solar energy data.𝑖 and 𝑃𝑉 labor cost 𝐿𝑏𝐶𝑘.𝑖 = 8760 𝑃𝑘.𝑖 associated with inverter replacements and periodic maintenance checks.𝑖 associated with new investments 𝑁𝐶𝑘. policy changes and other similar temporary effects (𝐷𝐵 was assumed here to be 2 years): 𝑃𝑉 𝐶𝑎𝑝𝑘. in [9]. 2. as the cost of solar PV systems decrease and diesel cost increases. given the cost parameters. thereby implying that there are no new investments beyond year 𝑁. … . Finally. Constraints 1) Demand-supply Balance: The effective power demand of each zone is met by existing conventional generation and new solar PV generation while considering the transmission network representation through the following dc power flow model: 𝑐𝑜𝑛𝑣 𝑃𝑉 𝑃𝑘. 𝛺 is calculated for a discount rate 𝑎. carbon taxes and cap-and-trade on renewable energy investments by small power producers (SPPs) and/or local distribution company (LDC) are presented in [15].𝑖 + 𝑇𝐶𝑘.𝑖 + � 𝑃𝑘. 2.𝑖𝑗 �𝛿𝑘.𝑖 = 0 ∀ 𝑘 = 1. A simple PBP and LCC analysis of NPV is carried out.𝑖 + 𝑃𝑘. thus: 7) Constraint on Initial Year Investment: This constraint ensures that there are no investments made during the first few years. IV.𝑖 𝐶𝐹𝑖𝑐𝑜𝑛𝑣 (8) 𝑐𝑜𝑛𝑣 𝑐𝑜𝑛𝑣 𝐸𝑘. It is concluded that government incentives such as FIT are necessary to attract investments in solar PV. the following constraint is included to account for budgeting delays. a coordination scheme for approval of DG investment proposals is presented.𝑖𝑗 ≤ 𝑃𝑘. … .𝑖 = 𝐶𝑎𝑝𝑘. In (1).𝑖 𝐶𝐹𝑖𝑃𝑉 (10) 𝑃𝑉 𝑃𝑉 𝐸𝑘. the annual energy available from conventional 𝑐𝑜𝑛𝑣 generation sources 𝐸𝑘.𝑖 (3) The aforementioned cost components and revenue stream are annualized considering the total plant life 𝐿.𝑗 � 𝑀𝐴𝑋 𝑃𝑘. A technical and economic assessment of utility interactive solar PV systems for South East Queensland is reported in [14].𝑖 𝐸𝑘. which includes annualized values of equipment cost 𝐸𝐶𝑘. Based on these capacity factors. This cumulative sum is taken only for the investment period as follows: 𝑃𝑉 𝑃𝑉 𝑃𝑉 𝐶𝑎𝑝𝑘+1. tariff structure and grid interconnection policy of the region.𝑖 injected into the grid and the negotiated contract price 𝜌: 𝑃𝑉 𝑅𝑒𝑣𝑒𝑛𝑢𝑒𝑘.𝑖 is constrained as follows: 𝑐𝑜𝑛𝑣 𝑐𝑜𝑛𝑣 𝐸𝑘. Long-term effects of FIT. 𝐷𝐵 (13) .𝑖 � 𝑀𝑎𝑥𝑖𝑚𝑖𝑧𝑒 𝛺 = � (1) (1 + 𝑎)𝑘 𝑘 B.𝑖 (12) ∀ 𝑘 = 1. including the objective function and constraints.𝑖 𝑃𝑉 Note that the variable 𝑁𝐶𝑘. The proposed optimization model is linear and most of the decision variables are continuous.ACCEPTED TO IEEE TRANS. the annual revenue generated by new investments is 𝑃𝑉 calculated based on the amount of energy 𝐸𝑘.𝑖 . MATHEMATICAL MODEL In this section the proposed optimization model.𝑖 + 𝐿𝑏𝐶𝑘. 𝐶𝑜𝑠𝑡𝑘.𝑖 denotes the total annualized project cost in year 𝑘 and zone 𝑖. as discussed in the next section for the case of Ontario [12].𝑖 − 𝛿𝑘. This results in a Mixed Integer Linear Programming (MILP) model that was solved in GAMS using the CPLEX solver [16].𝑖 (9) 8) Constraint on Terminal Year Investment: The solar PV capacity remains unchanged beyond the plan period.𝑖 = 8760 𝑃𝑘.𝑖 (11) 4) Energy Generation From Conventional Sources: Zonal capacity factors of conventional generation 𝐶𝐹𝑖𝑐𝑜𝑛𝑣 can be evaluated using the system’s historical data of generator outputs and available capacity.

the power output from the solar PV module is given as: 𝑃𝑉 𝑃𝑜𝑖.24 3. hence: 𝑃𝑉 𝑃𝑉 � ��𝐶𝐶𝑘. each solar PV installation is considered to be phased out of operation (𝐿 is assumed here to be 25 years).𝑖 4 TABLE II ANNUAL GROWTH RATES FOR COST COMPONENTS Module Cost Annual Growth Rate [%] -1 Inverter Cost -0. Also.67 2.𝑖 reflects the cost of .000 2010 – 2018 (14) Net Inflation Rate [%] Annual Budget.𝑖 � ≤ 𝑇𝐵𝑢𝑑 Land Cost Labor Cost Transport Cost (17) Fig. These costs are dependent on a variety of parameters.𝑖 (15) ∀ 𝑘 = 1.73 3.000 500. land cost. the increase in land prices observed from 2005-2009 was extrapolated to obtain the land cost trends in the future [22].𝑚 = 𝐴 𝐼𝑖 𝜂𝑖 (19) Equations (18) and (19) can be used to evaluate the energy available per unit area per month for a particular type of solar module [17]. … .𝑖 ≤ 𝐴𝐵𝑢𝑑𝑘 𝑖 ≤ 0. 1. 𝑇𝐵𝑢𝑑 [$] Energy Price. 𝑂𝑀𝑘.𝑖 𝑘 𝑖 Zonal solar PV capacity factors 𝐶𝐹𝑖𝑃𝑉 can be evaluated based on zonal solar radiation and zonal ambient temperature data as discussed in the next section.𝑖 − 𝑁𝐶𝑘. 𝑎 [%] $/kW 10) Annual Budget Limit: This constraint ensures that the annual cost of new solar PV installations is constrained by an annual budget limit (a limit of $100 M was assumed here). The effect of technology change and the consequent expected reduction in module and inverter costs over the next 30 years [20]. thus: (16) 600 400 200 0 Bruce SW Ottawa Essa Niagara Toronto West East NW NE 11) Total Budget Limit: This constraint ensures that the total cost of new solar PV installations over the entire plan period is constrained by a total budget limit (a limit of $500 M was assumed here).01 8 4 25 0. 𝐴𝐵𝑢𝑑 [$/year] Investment Period. The monthly solar radiation 𝐼𝑖 and ambient temperature 𝑇𝑖 can thus be obtained and used to find the system conversion efficiency 𝜂𝑖 . ONTARIO CASE STUDY PARAMETERS A.27 9) Decommissioning of Solar PV Units: After a useful life of 𝐿 years. 1) Equipment Cost: This cost reflects the cost of modules. the capacity factors are evaluated using the rating of the solar PV module as follows: 𝑃𝑉 ∑𝑚�𝑃𝑜𝑖. 2) Land Cost: This cost reflects the cost of land required for the installation. given by [8]: 𝐼𝑖 (18) 𝜂𝑖 = �1 − 0.𝑖 𝑁𝐶𝑘. Therefore. TABLE I PERCENTAGE ANNUAL GROWTH RATES FOR ZONAL LABOR COSTS IN ONTARIO FROM 2010 ONWARDS Annual Annual Zone Growth Rate Zone Growth Rate [%] [%] Bruce West SW Niagara Toronto 𝑃𝑉 𝐶𝑎𝑝𝑘+1.𝑖 is determined based on the number of modules and inverters required per unit of power produced. The per unit equipment cost 𝐸𝐶𝑘.0042 � + 𝑇𝑖 − 20�� 𝜂𝑜 𝜂𝑖𝑛𝑣 18 Consequently. The energy produced is determined based on the number of daylight hours available [18].44 5.𝑚 𝑛𝑑.8 Land Cost 2. Solar PV Power Model + 𝑃𝑉 𝑂𝑀𝑘. (𝑁 − 1) 𝑃𝑉 𝑃𝑉 � 𝐶𝐶𝑘.37 2. hence: 𝑃𝑉 𝑃𝑉 𝑃𝑉 𝐶𝑎𝑝𝑘+𝐿+1. based on the trend over the last 10 years.8 3. 𝐿 [years] Discount Rate. and labor cost [19].49 1. which are associated with the “dominant” type of land in each zone.31 East Ottawa Essa NE 4.𝑖 [$/kWh] Item TABLE III REMAINING INPUT PARAMETERS Value 0.𝑖 𝑁𝐶𝑘.000.42 100. Capital cost components for the year 2010.𝑖 ∀ 𝑘 = 𝑁 NW Annual Maintenance Cost.90 𝑃𝑉 𝐶𝑎𝑝𝑘. 𝑁 [years] Total Budget.𝑚 � (20) 𝐶𝐹𝑖𝑃𝑉 = 𝑃𝑟𝑃𝑉 ∑𝑚 𝑛𝑚 C.𝑖 𝐸𝑘. transportation cost. The per unit land cost 𝐿𝐶𝑘.𝑖 = 𝐶𝑎𝑝𝑘+𝐿.ACCEPTED TO IEEE TRANS. as discussed next. V.56 Transportation Cost 2.95 2. and is independent of the zone in which the plant is installed. 2.𝑖 was determined using proportional land market prices [21]. 3) Transportation Cost: This cost 𝑇𝐶𝑘. Cost Model Parameters The cost of installing a solar PV power plant can be split into four main components: the equipment cost. inverters and balance of system. 𝐹𝐼𝑇 [$/kWh] Useful Life. POWER SYSTEMS. APRIL 2011.000. was also taken into consideration here.

17 NE 1162. which is independent of location. In this work. The increase in the median income was forecasted based on the census data of Ontario for the period from 2000 to 2005 [26]. In addition to the distances from the supply centers to the zones.91 0. Because of lack of sufficient data from 2025 onwards. The model developed Fig.42 Essa 906. after calculating the number of labor required per unit capacity of solar PV plant [27]. 3. Zonal generation plan in Ontario. and are presented in Table II. APRIL 2011.7 1.77 East 935. 4. a ten zone equivalent model for Ontario’s transmission network has been used.41 Toronto 5473. Generation Capacity [MW] Fig. the mode of transportation is considered to be trucking. The actual cost components obtained for 2010 are shown in Fig. transporting the equipment from the supply center (assumed to be Toronto here) to the construction site. According to the Integrated Power System Plan (IPSP) of Ontario [32]. and the weight of the equipment [17]. represents the system in a detail that is adequate for planning studies.29% SW 2853. 1) Generation Capability: The proposed planning model requires inputs on zonal generation availability for the future.14 3. 1. The IESO also considers this model to forecast and assess the reliability of existing and committed resources and transmission facilities in the Ontario electricity market [29]. TABLE IV DEMAND FORECAST BASIS [30] Bruce Effective Peak Demand in 2009 [MW] Demand Growth Rate [%] 57. the model is estimated from information available from various resources [29]-[32].12 1. is the most significant.51 0. Observe that the equipment cost component.44 -0. and is shown in Table I. as shown in Fig. 2. Bruce has the highest growth rate of 3%. The generation forecast in this figure was obtained by combining the information presented in [30] and [31] to give the generation capability contributing to the peak load rather than just the base load. Thus. Percentage distribution of solar PV capital cost in Bruce in 2010. as shown in Table III. 12000 10000 8000 6000 4000 2000 0 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 4) Labor Cost: This cost reflects the cost of labor at each zone and is determined using the median income of the zone [26]. In this work.98% 0. approximate zonal generation growth rates were assumed based on historical data.71 Ottawa 1219.ACCEPTED TO IEEE TRANS.49 0.65% 8. a generation forecast of each zone was obtained for the period 2008-2025. followed by Niagara and Toronto with 2% each.08% Equipment Cost Land Cost Labor Cost Transport Cost Fig.1 5 87. 5) Total Capital Cost: The solar PV cost model developed realistically reflects the trends in these components in different zones in Ontario.64 0.33 NW 478. and information provided by the OPA and IESO. 4. B.43 0. 3.28 Niagara 513. Future cost components were also forecasted using a variety of reliable resources [20]-[27].8 1. transportation costs are only a fraction of the total capital cost. the transportation cost also depends on the unit cost of freight [23]. POWER SYSTEMS. Ontario 10-zone power system model. along with other parameters considered in this work. Figure 2 shows the respective percentage distribution for Zone 1 (Bruce). The annual maintenance cost associated with periodic check-up and repair of modules and inverter replacements were also considered [28].78 West 1656.44 1. The generation growth Ottawa Essa NW Niagara NE SW East Bruce West Toronto . [24]. as depicted in Fig. The increase in trucking costs in Ontario [25] since 2003 was considered and used to determine future transportation costs. Ontario Power System Model In this work. followed by the cost of land and labor.

6. rate for Essa and Northeast was considered to be 1%. with lower voltage lines being neglected.0% 24. Energy from solar PV and conventional sources. whereas the rest of the zones are not expected to show considerable growth. POWER SYSTEMS. The approximate distances between zones. [17]. 5.ACCEPTED TO IEEE TRANS. 8. Using the zonal demand forecast from 2007-2015 provided by the IESO. 9. Annualized Capacity Factors 28. line parameters are evaluated from 2008 to 2038 based on the typical values of transmission lines at these voltage levels [34]. Zonal solar PV capacity factors. Solar PV monthly energy yield. 2) Effective Peak Demand: The proposed model also requires information on zonal peak demand forecasts. Fig. zonal demand growth rates are obtained (see Table IV). generation and demand changes 2010-2018. the energy produced per month per solar PV module per zone was computed as discussed in Section IV-C. comprising 500 kV and 230 kV lines.5% SW Ottawa Essa Niagara Toronto Bruce West East NW NE Annual Energy from Conventional Sources [GWh] 135000 134500 134000 133500 133000 132500 132000 131500 Fig.0% 25.5% 27. C. APRIL 2011. New capacity investments in Ontario. Conventional Energy Fig.0% 27. transmission line capacities and line loading limits are also considered. 7. Zonal capacity factors for conventional generation 𝐶𝐹𝑖𝑐𝑜𝑛𝑣 were evaluated based on two months worth of data from the IESO [33]. 25 Energy (kWh) 20 15 10 5 0 March May February September October April January June July November August December Bruce West SW Niagara Toronto East Ottawa Essa NE NW Bruce West SW Niagara Toronto East Ottawa Essa NE NW Fig. The transmission NW .5% 25. as well as the transmission capacity enhancements planned by the OPA (see Table V). based on solar radiation and ambient temperature data provided in NASA’s 3) Transmission Lines: The simplified transmission system model considered in this work represents Ontario’s transmission network. Transmission line flows.0% 26. The transmission line capacities so evaluated define the line flow limits. TABLE V PLANNED TRANSMISSION SYSTEM ENHANCEMENTS [30] Current Planned Year Corridor MW MW 2012 Bruce – Southwest 2560 4560 2012 2013 2015 2017 2017 Southwest – Toronto Northeast – Northwest Bruce – West Toronto – Essa Essa – Northeast 3212 350 1940 2000 1900 5212 550 2440 2500 2400 6 New Capacity Investments [MW] 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 300 250 200 150 100 50 0 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 Solar PV Energy Annual Energy from Solar PV sources [GWh] 350 Bruce West SW Niagara Toronto East Ottawa Essa NE Fig. Zonal Solar PV Capacity Factors In Ontario For a typical 140 W solar module of 15% efficiency and dc to ac conversion efficiency of 85% [8]. the conservation and demand management plans presented in Ontario’s IPSP are also considered and the corresponding reduced peak demand is estimated.5% 26. In this work.

conventional generation capacity. and the negotiated contract price can be assumed to remain constant over the entire useful life of the project. Note that the tie-line linking Zone 1 to Zone 3 is the most affected transmission corridor. Probabilistic Case Study In order to account for the uncertainty in various model parameters. The Monte Carlo simulation approach is based on the assumption that the uncertain parameters have an associated probability distribution function. Both the results of deterministic and probabilistic (to consider parameter uncertainties) analyses are shown and discussed next. The NPV of all projects selected for investment is $725 million.00% 0. which can be attributed to the 135 MW of new solar PV capacity being commissioned in Zone 1. Cumulative average of NPV in $bn from 2000 iterations. Histogram and probability distribution function of NPV. which represents an annual ROI on investments of 37% (note that the current best average annual rate of return in emerging markets is about 10%). negotiated contract price and solar PV investment costs. besides the increase of over 800 MW conventional generation and a slight decrease in demand. APRIL 2011.9 1 85 169 253 337 421 505 589 673 757 841 925 1009 1093 1177 1261 1345 1429 1513 1597 1681 1765 1849 1933 134000 133500 133000 132500 132000 131500 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 400 300 200 100 0 Number of iterations Conventional Energy Solar PV Energy Fig. demand and generation capacity along with future expansions plans were carefully accounted for and hence are not expected to differ NE Expected annual energy from solar PV sources [GWh] 134500 500 . 12. Of the parameters directly influencing the NPV. and is shown in Fig. 7 which indicates that Zone 1 “Bruce” is the ideal zone to invest in solar PV to yield the maximum returns. The energy injected into the system annually during the plan period from new solar PV units is compared with that from conventional sources in Fig. Energy from solar PV and conventional sources. On the other hand.00% 3. Surface meteorology and Solar Energy (SSE) database [35].05 1 0. VI. The main parameters that may most directly influence the NPV and the associated investment decisions. effective demand and the transmission system have an indirect effect.00% 1.2 1. 7 Average Cumulative NPV [$bn] 1. 10. Figure 8 shows the changes in transmission line flows. the contribution of solar energy increases during the investment period and attains a steady-state share after 2013. 13. this analysis yielded the results depicted in Fig.ACCEPTED TO IEEE TRANS.95 0.1 1.1% optimality gap tolerance. as per Ontario’s FIT program. generation and demand over the investment period 2010-2018.25 Expected annual energy from conventional sources [GWh] 1. Observe that although the Fig. the solar PV investment costs were evaluated based on historical data and are hence expected to steadily maintain their trends in the future. budget limits. POWER SYSTEMS. arising from solar PV investments. New Capacity Selection Frequency [%] 4.00% 2. discount rate.00% Bruce West SW Niagara Toronto East Ottawa Essa NW 2017 2016 2015 2014 2013 2012 2011 2010 Fig. a Monte Carlo simulation approach can be used to determine the expected investment plans and associated decisions. 5. conventional energy sources continue to serve the largest share of the demand. 9. which is an MILP model. B. Fig. the budget limits are considered to be at the discretion of the investor. are. 11. 6. was solved using the CPLEX solver in GAMS with a 0. A. Deterministic Case Study The deterministic optimal investment plan for solar PV projects in Ontario is shown in Fig. New capacity decision frequency.15 1. solar PV capacity factors. RESULTS AND ANALYSIS The proposed solar PV investment model. Four investment projects of sizes 3 x 35 MW + 30 MW respectively. are selected for the Bruce region (Zone 1) over the first four years of the plan period. The zonal solar PV capacity factors are obtained considering the total energy produced and the number of daylight hours as per (20). The existing transmission system.

Available: http://www. The test results show the usefulness and practicality of the model for determining optimal investment plans on solar PV and validate the related investment decisions currently being made in Ontario. S. “Coordination of Investor-Owned DG Capacity Growth in Distribution Systems. shown in Fig. D. V. and revenues for a 30 year investment plan.pdf “A Progress Report on Electricity Supply Third Quarter 2009. Beckman. “Photovoltaic Systems: A Buyer’s Guide. µ=20.” GAMS Development “Technologies for the new millennium: Photovoltaics as a distributed resource. resulting in a lognormal distribution (σ=0. [Online]. POWER SYSTEMS. K. Aug.” Farm Credit Canada. April 2008.” PVresources.gc. June 2010. Available: http://www. the new solar PV investment decisions are shown in terms of their likelihood of being selected.” International Energy Agency. “Solar Module Retail Price Environment. “Effects of large-scale photovoltaic power integration on electricity distribution networks. no.ontla.centennialsolar. for example.3. 2009. an optimal planning model for investment in large-scale solar PV generation from the perspective of an individual investor has been presented. 2010. CONCLUSIONS In this 0(draft1. “An Act to enact the Green Energy “Solar Energy Technologies Plan: Multiyear technology plan 20082012. Available: http://www. 2000 IEEE Power and Engineering Society Summer Meeting. 24. and W.808). [Online]. DeBlasio.” T. 155–65. 1991. 2nd ed. Khouzam. Lund. S.fccfac. K. Gwartney.” Natural Resources Canada (NRCAN). Sinke. Bill 150. no. discount rate can be considered as an uncertain parameter. “Methodology for the design optimisation and the economic analysis of grid-connected photovoltaic systems. 2.ACCEPTED TO IEEE TRANS. It should be highlighted that the estimated NPV converges in about 500 Monte Carlo simulations.asp#on “Estimates of the Full Cost of Transportation in Canada. [Online]. Available: http://www. pp. VIII. [Online]. Therefore.pdf “Feed-in Tariff Program. “World's largest photovoltaic power plants.” Statistics Canada. Available: http://canmetenergycanmetenergie.pdf with a standard deviation of 10% to account for their's%20Guide.C. no.on.” Transport Canada. Chapter 12 Statutes of Ontario.powerauthority.25. 10. 4. “Long-Term Effects of Feed-in Tariffs and Carbon Taxes on Distribution Systems. [Online]. R. taking into account a very detailed and realistic representation of solar PV unit costs. Available: http://www.3. Fuller.htm “Fall 2010 Farmland Values Report. Observe in Fig.25.” Energy Economics. Available: http://www.1375-1383. USA. “National Survey Report of PV Power Applications in Canada 2009. 1. “Economic viability of stand-alone solar photovoltaic system in comparison with diesel-powered system for India.” IEEE Transactions on Energy Conversion.1_final_for_posting-oct_27.gc. pp. Aug 2010. Wong. 12 is somewhat higher than that obtained for the deterministic case. Available: http://www. Solar Engineering of Thermal Processes.gc.1798-1801. M.gc. pp. vol.php [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] [18] [19] [20] [21] [22] [23] [24] [25] [26] [27] [2] [3] .1241-1253. December 1999. However. the Bruce region (Zone 1) has the comparatively highest likelihood of investment. A. vol. Based on the aforementioned arguments.” IEEE Transactions on Power Systems. no. 2009.” Solarbuzz.html J. and P.” US Department of Energy. 8 [4] [5] W. 2009 and to build a green economy.” International Sustainable Energy Review. pp. demand growth. Bhattacharya and J. and J. 2009. Furthermore. 2.” Ontario Power Authority (OPA). K. VII. 1544-1550. “Standard Polycrystalline Module Product Sheet. [Online]. L.” Ontario Power Authority (OPA) vol. Y. March 2002. “Technical and economic assessment of utility interactive PV systems for domestic applications in South East Queensland.0). no. Available: http://www. [Online].13 that the new investments are still concentrated in the first four years of the plan period.” Renewable Energy Policy Network for the 21st Century. pp. 216-234. “Grid parity: holy grail or hype?.C. Jul 2000. pp.pdf J. and a standard deviation of 2% representing a variability of 25% around the mean to account for investment risks. 2010. Available: http://www. Aug 2010. [Online].htm “Estimating Land Market Values.” IET Renewable Power Generation. to represent the risks associated with the investments and related profits over a period of time. M. Available: http://www. [Online]. resulting in an expected NPV of $1. conventional generation and transmission capacities. 476-492. 6. Washington. 2009.A.” Time and Date AS.3. Kornelakis. vol.timeanddate.” IEEE Transactions on Power Systems. M. 2002. Available: http://www. the discount rate and zonal solar PV capacity factors were considered to be the two most uncertain parameters in the proposed investment model. 2008. February 2009. The zonal solar PV capacity factors are assumed to be normally distributed around their base values. ver. 23.” in Proc.” Transport Canada. Photovoltaic Systems Program.” Renewable Energy.nrcanrncan. [Online]. 1. [Online]. no. Wong. Available: http://www. and E. D. The average cumulative NPV of the investment plan is plotted over 2000 iterations of Monte Carlo simulations in which is significantly higher than the values obtained from the deterministic analysis.htm “Census data 2001 and 2006 Community Profiles. [Online]. and Y. [Online]. vol. “GAMS Users Manual. Sept. The expected energy injected from new solar PV capacity addition depicted in Fig.pdf greatly from their assumed values over the investment horizon considered here. Kroposki. the discount rate is assumed here to be normally distributed with a mean of 8% in line with the current financial situation.pdf “Sunrise and Sunset hours.pdf “PowerGate Plus 500 kW PV Inverter Data Sheet. Figure 11 shows the resulting histogram of the NPV of the probabilistic investment plan. Paatero. vol.3.pdf “Operating Cost of Trucks in Canada their future values may also be considered uncertain due to their inherent variability. ew_August_new_price_version_1. APRIL 2011.” Satcon Solar PV Inverters.30657. Joshi. J.henrygeorge. Bhattacharya and J. [Online].142 million. 14. 2005. to repeal the Energy Conservation Leadership Act. REFERENCES [1] “Renewables 2010: Global Status Report. February 2007.3. 2010. Available: http://www.A. Dignard-Bailey. Duffie. 3. New York: Wiley. 2006 and the Energy Efficiency Act and to amend other statutes”. Available: Iss. The model was tested using the Ontario case.pvresources. vol.ren21. even though zonal solar PV capacity factors were evaluated based on 22 years of historical data.statcan. Kolhe.” Centennial Solar.satcon. based on realistic estimates for solar radiation patterns. S. Kolhe. 4. 32. August 2008. Koutroulis.

He has been with the E&CE Department. in 1984 where he held different teaching and administrative positions from 1983 to 1993. distributed generation economics and planning.ACCEPTED TO IEEE TRANS. and is currently a full Professor. University of Waterloo. he is pursuing M. and holds and has held several leadership appointments in IEEE-PES technical committees and subcommittees. modeling. in electrical engineering from the University of Waterloo. mathematical [Online]. University of Waterloo since 1993. smart grids and hybrid vehicles. in 2007. scenario analysis. August 2009.pdf [30] A.” Sygration.repartners. . sustainable energy systems. Waterloo.” NASA Earth Science Enterprise Program in collaboration with CANMET Technology Centre. Available: http://www.” Public Renewables Partnership. Sweden (1998– 2002).ieso.Sc. [Online]. electricity markets. BIOGRAPHIES Wajid Muneer (S’10) received the B. August 2008. [Online]. Power System Stability and Control. ver. economics and planning. His research interests are in power systems. Karachi-Pakistan. deregulation and retail competition issues. Kankar Bhattacharya (M’95–SM’01) received Ph.larc.html [32] “Ontario’s Integrated Power System Plan. where he has held various academic and administrative positions and is currently a full Professor and the Associate Director of the Waterloo Institute for Sustainable Energy (WISE). McGraw Hill. Currently.on.pdf [33] “Monthly Generator Disclosure Report. Claudio A. Göteborg.nasa. APRIL 2011. Waterloo. optimization. [Online]. and Comp. 080904. Available: http://www. [35] “Surface meteorology and Solar Energy (SSE) .0. He was awarded Hydro One research chair in [29] “Ontario Transmission System. demand-side management.D. simulation. His research activities concentrate in the study of stability.ieso. Canada. Quito-Ecuador.powerauthority. Univ. Elec. 2010. He has been the recipient of various IEEEPES Working Group awards. [Online]. [28] “PV cost factors.” Ontario Power Authority (OPA). control and computational issues in power systems within the context of competitive electricity markets and smart grids. degree in electrical engineering from N. global energy models. long-term planning and energy-environment linkages and sustainable development. degree in electrical engineering from the Indian Institute of Technology. University of Engineering and Technology. Cañizares (S’86-M’91-SM’00-F’07) received the Electrical Engineer degree from Escuela Politecnica Nacional (EPN).A. He was on the faculty of Indira Gandhi Institute of Development Research.sygration. since 2003. Dept. in 1993. Available: http://www. Bombay. [Online].com/gendispsample. POWER SYSTEMS.” Independent Electricity System Operator (IESO). Kundur. Available: http://www..asp [34] P. “Sustainable Convergence of Electricity and Transport Sectors in the Context of Integrated Energy Systems. Eng. simulation. and Chalmers University of Technology. His MSc (1988) and PhD (1991) degrees in Electrical Engineering are from University of Wisconsin-Madison. Waterloo. New Delhi.” PhD thesis. March 9 IX. release Hajimiragha. operation. [31] “Ontario Generation Report. 1994. Available: http://www. Available: http://eosweb. His research interests are in power system operations and economics.E.” Independent Electricity System Operator (IESO). India (1993–1998). He has been with the Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering. ON.