Renewable Energy 37 (2012) 355e363

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Renewable Energy
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/renene

Design and simulation of a PV and a PVeWind standalone energy system

to power a household application
Gregoris Panayiotou a, b, Soteris Kalogirou a, *, Savvas Tassou b
a
b

Department of Mechanical Engineering and Materials Science and Engineering, Cyprus University of Technology, P.O. Box 50329, 3603 Limassol, Cyprus
School of Engineering and Design, Brunel University, Uxbridge, Middlesex UB8 3PH, United Kingdom

a r t i c l e i n f o

a b s t r a c t

Article history:
Received 11 January 2011
Accepted 26 June 2011
Available online 23 July 2011

In this paper the design and simulation of two renewable-based standalone energy systems for application in two different locations are carried out. More specically, the systems examined are a standalone
PV system and a standalone hybrid PVeWind system. The locations considered are those of Nicosia,
Cyprus and Nice, France. These two locations have similar Mediterranean climates with different wind
potential and slightly different solar irradiation levels which lead to interesting conclusions concerning
the application of such systems. Since both systems are standalone, the energy produced is stored in
a battery bank. The software used for the modeling and simulation processes is TRNSYS. The results of
this paper dene the optimal type and size of the renewable-based system to be applied in each of the
locations examined at the minimum system cost. Additionally, a comparison of the two systems for both
locations in terms of technical and economic aspects is presented where it is concluded that the type of
the system to be used in each case is directly depended on the climatic characteristics of the specic
location. More specically, for Nicosia the solely PV system provides a better option than the PVeWind
hybrid system while in Nice the opposite is the case.
2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Keywords:
Standalone
Baseline scenario
Load prole
Hybrid
Wind potential
Solar potential

1. Introduction
Energy has always been the dominant driving force for the
socio-economic development of mankind. Nowadays, the global
energy system is mainly depended on fossil fuels resulting in
a series of negative effects with the consequent environmental
pollution having detrimental effects on the environment and
eventually life on the planet. Many studies are conrming that
fossil fuel reserves and especially oil reserves are depleting rapidly
and the immediate exploitation of renewable energy sources (RES)
such as solar and wind energy is imperative.
A possible eld of application of renewable-based systems is
that of standalone systems for powering grid-isolated applications.
Of course, this kind of applications will become more economically
viable as the prices of fuels currently used increase and the costs of
equipment to harvest renewable energy decrease. The most
commonly used types of renewable-based systems at present are
PV systems and hybrid PVeWind systems with energy storage
using a battery bank.
Dalton et al. [1] carried out a feasibility analysis of a renewablebased system for a standalone application for a large hotel unit in
* Corresponding author. Tel.: 357 25 002621; fax: 357 25 002637.
E-mail address: soteris.kalogirou@cut.ac.cy (S. Kalogirou).
0960-1481/$ e see front matter 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.renene.2011.06.038

Queensland, Australia. For this analysis two software tools were

used namely HOMER and HYBRIDS. The results showed that
renewable-based systems and specically hybrid systems have
signicant potential for use in large scale tourist units requiring
standalone power supplies.
On a similar approach Bekele and Palm [2] carried out a feasibility analysis to investigate the possibility of supplying power to
a remote community in Ethiopia from a PVeWind system. The
software used for this analysis was also HOMER and the results
indicated that the application of such technologies on large
standalone applications is not yet economically viable when
compared to the current cost of conventional fuels.
Shen [3] investigated the size optimization of a standalone PV
system in Malaysia. More specically, the optimal sizing concerned
the size of the solar array as well as batteries used in the system and
it was based on the loss of power supply probability (LPSP) for the
Malaysian weather data and for a given load demand. The results
showed that the location and the type of the system inuence the
optimization results.
A different approach was used from Ekren et al. [4] where they
presented an optimum sizing procedure of a standalone PVeWind
hybrid system with battery storage. The optimization of the system
was made using the response surface methodology (RSM) which is
a collection of statistical and mathematical methods relying on

356

G. Panayiotou et al. / Renewable Energy 37 (2012) 355e363

7000
6000

Energy [Wh]

5000
4000
3000
2000
1000
0
0

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

Time [hour]

Fig. 1. Load prole for a typical spring/autumn weekday.

optimization of response surface with design parameters. The

location examined was that of Izmir, Turkey and the results of the
optimization indicated that the optimum PV area, wind turbine
rotor swept area, and battery capacity are 3.95 m2, 29.4 m2,
31.92 kWh, respectively.
In this work the design and simulation of a PV and a PVeWind
standalone system for application in Nicosia, Cyprus and Nice,
France are presented. In order to properly design renewablebased standalone energy systems it is essential to initially
dene the baseline scenario characteristics and the typical annual
load prole. Consequently, the models of the systems are developed and the simulations are carried out. The analysis is done for
a household located in Nicosia, Cyprus, presented as Case 1 while
the same household is investigated in Nice, France, presented as
Case 2, which has a different weather than Nicosia, Cyprus, so as
to investigate the application of such systems in both environments. It should be noted that in order to have a common base for
comparison the simulation parameters (type of PVs, wind
turbines and typical load prole) are kept common for both
locations.

concerned the characteristics and the energy behavior of the residential building stock of Cyprus in view of Directive 2002/91/EC.
For the design of these systems a typical house is considered.
The house examined in the baseline scenario is a single story house
with an area of 160 m2 which was built in year 2000. The house has
3 bedrooms and it does not have pilotis, sotta or a basement while
it has a at concrete roof with 140 m2 of free space for any systems
such as solar thermal or PVs to be installed. The house has a 5 cm
polyurethane wall insulation and double glazing. The heating and
cooling requirements are satised by split type air conditioning
units. The number of units installed are two 9000 Btu (2.6 kW) in
two of three bedrooms and one 12,000 Btu (3.5 kW) unit in the
living room. For the production of domestic hot water (DHW)
a solar water heating system is used while an immersed electric
element is installed in the solar heater storage tank for backup.
3. Typical annual load prole denition
The typical annual load prole denition was also based on the
statistical analysis conducted by Panayiotou et al. [5]. In this
statistical analysis a sample of 500 houses along with analytical
data given by the Electricity Authority of Cyprus were used and it
was concluded that there are two peaks observed on the
consumption of electricity in the domestic sector annually; one in
summer, which is the highest, and one in winter. On the other hand,
autumn and spring periods have more or less the same consumption of electricity which is lower compared to that of summer and
winter. Also, another very important thing to notice is that the daily
average electricity consumption of the house is around 24 kWh
during summer, 21 kWh during winter and 15 kWh during autumn
and spring.

2. Baseline scenario characteristics

The baseline scenario is dened according to several parameters
of the house examined and it is very important to note that it
concerns a future situation where all energy for the household is
supplied by an RES system which is isolated from the grid and thus
is standalone. The characteristics of the baseline scenario concern
the structure, location, occupancy and energy systems installed in
the house. The data used to dene these characteristics were based
on the statistical analysis conducted by Panayiotou et al. [5] which
7000
6000

Energy [Wh]

5000
4000
3000
2000
1000
0
0

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

Time [hour]

Fig. 2. Load prole for a typical winter weekday.

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

G. Panayiotou et al. / Renewable Energy 37 (2012) 355e363

357

7000
6000

Energy [Wh]

5000
4000
3000
2000
1000
0
0

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

Time [hour]

Fig. 3. Load prole for a typical summer weekday.

To be more precise on the denition of the typical annual load

prole this was split into weekdays and weekends for each of the
four seasons. The months contained in each season are as follows;
Winter: December, January and February; Spring: March, April
and May; Summer: June, July and August; and Autumn:
September, October and November. Additionally, it should be
noted that holiday periods are not considered in the examined
typical annual load prole. The typical load proles for weekdays
of spring, autumn, summer and winter are shown in Figs. 1e3
respectively.
4. Model design for standalone PV system
The model design process was carried out in the TRNSYS environment [6], which is considered to be a complete and extensible
simulation environment for the transient simulation of solar and
other energy systems.
The model of the standalone PV system includes the following
components:
 Weather data processor model (Type 109)
 PV model (Type 180e)

 Inverter/Regulator model (Type 48b)

 Battery model (Type 47a)
 Load prole model (Type 9a)
A very important parameter to consider when designing
a standalone PV system is the nominal voltage of the battery bank
which can be 12, 24 or 48 V DC. The parameters affecting the
determination of the suitable nominal voltage for a system are the
nominal voltage of the PVs, the size of the system and the input
requirements of the inverter. For example, inverters which have
a power of 6e12 kW require nominal voltage to be 48 V while
inverters with a power of 2e5 kW require the nominal voltage to be
24 V. Since the system examined is neither a large system nor
a small one, it was decided that the nominal system voltage is
considered initially to be 24 V, in order to use a number of inverters
to cover the load. This decision was also based on the requirement
of securing basic load coverage, in case of failure of one of the
inverters.
It is essential to note that the characteristics and cost of the
components used in the modeling procedure (i.e., PVs, batteries,
inverters and electrical equipment) are those given by their
manufacturers. Special attention should be given to the batteries

3
1.5 kW
2.4 kW
2,5

Power [kW]

1,5

0,5

0
0

10

12

14

Wind velocity [m/s]

Fig. 4. Power vs wind velocity curves for both wind turbines considered.

16

18

20

358

G. Panayiotou et al. / Renewable Energy 37 (2012) 355e363

Fig. 5. Yearly sum of global irradiation (kWh/m2) for Cyprus [3].

used which are of the gel technology and thus, according to their
manufacturer, have a service life of 18 years. Additionally the
maximum depth of discharge used in the model is 20%. This is the
value usually used to prolong the life of batteries.

5. Model design for hybrid standalone PVeWind system

The model for the hybrid standalone PVeWind is based on the
model for the standalone PV system. The difference between the
two models relies on the addition of a small domestic wind turbine
(Type 90). In this system, as in all hybrid energy systems, more than
one source of energy is used in order to diversify the sources and

6. Case 1: household application in Nicosia, Cyprus

Nicosia is located in the center of the island of Cyprus at a latitude 35100 N and a longitude of 33 250 E. The climate of Nicosia is
characterized as a standard Mediterranean climate and it is mainly
affected by the fact that Cyprus it is surrounded by the Mediterranean Sea. The main characteristics of this kind of climate are that
it has hot and dry summers from the mid-May to mid-September,
while winter is mild and lasts from the mid-November to mid-

25

20

Frequ en cy [ %]

achieve load coverage under various climatic conditions during the

entire 24 h period. Furthermore, it is very important to note that
the operation of this system differs from that of the PV system due
to the fact that the energy produced by the wind turbine is directly
supplied to the load through a power conditioner and the rest of the
load is covered by the PV subsystem. For the design of this model
two wind turbines were chosen a 1.5 kW and a 2.4 kW. The curves
of power against wind velocity for the wind turbines considered are
presented in Fig. 4. These wind turbines are evaluated for each
location in the following sections.

15

Table 1
Energy produced by a single PV with different slopes located in Nicosia.

10

0
0

10

Wind speed [m /s]

Fig. 6. Wind prole of Nicosia, Cyprus.

12

14

16

Slope of the PV

Energy produced [Wh/yr]

27
28
29
30
31
32
33

89,516
89,650
89,748
89,810
89,835
89,823
89,775

The bold numbers show the optimal cases.

G. Panayiotou et al. / Renewable Energy 37 (2012) 355e363

359

Table 2
Results of the simulation process for the standalone PV system.
Conguration No

No of
PVs [e]

PV array
power [kW]

No of batteries
[e]

Battery capacity
[kWh]

Annual energy
deciency [kWh]

Annual period of energy

deciency [h]

1c
2c
3c
4c
5c
6c
7c
8c
9c
10c
11c
12c

40
45
50
60
63
65
40
45
50
55
58
59

7.2
8.1
9.0
10.8
11.34
11.7
7.2
8.1
9.0
9.9
10.44
10.62

36
36
36
36
36
36
48
48
48
48
48
48

108
108
108
108
108
108
144
144
144
144
144
144

566
381
228
25
12
2
496
320
193
80
13
0

607
451
220
33
2
10
503
365
186
97
29
0

March. During the summer period Cyprus, as an eastern Mediterranean territory, is affected by the seasonal low barometric which
has its center in the northwest Asia and this causes the high level of
temperatures. More specically during July and August the mean
daily temperatures that appear are around 29  C at the center of the
island and 22  C at the higher peaks of Troodos Mountain while the
mean monthly temperatures during those months are 36  C and
27  C respectively.
Cyprus lies in the outskirts of a sunny belt with an average
annual solar potential on a at surface to be around 1790 kWh/m2
as it can be seen in Fig. 5 [7]. Mean daily global solar radiation varies
from about 2.3 kWh/m2 during the cloudiest months to about
7.2 kWh/m2 in July [8]. The average number of hours of bright
sunshine per day over the summer period is equal to 11.5 h whilst
in winter period it is 5.5 h during the worst months (December and
January).
According to Pashardes and Christodes [9] the surface winds in
the general area of eastern Mediterranean are mostly western or
south-western in winter and north-western or northern in
summer. The wind prole of Nicosia according to the typical
meteorological year (TMY) used was graphically represented in
Fig. 6.
6.1. Simulation and economic analysis of standalone PV system
It is essential to know the slope of the PVs in order to use it
during the simulation. A rule of thumb followed by the PV technicians in Cyprus is that the slope of the PVs should be somewhere
between 27 and 31. In order to dene the optimum slope to be
used in the modeling process a small model consisting of a TMY and
a single PV was developed and a series of simulations were carried
out for slopes between 27 and 33 . The energy production for each
slope is recorded and presented in Table 1.
According to the results of Table 1 the maximum energy
production occurs for a slope of 31 (shown with bold on Table 1)
and thus this is the optimum angle for the location examined and
consequently for Cyprus.
After the proper setting up of the complete model for the
standalone PV system a series of simulations were carried out in
Table 3
Equipment costs used in the economic analysis.

1
2
3
4
5

Equipment description

Cost

Photovoltaic panels
Batteries
Inverter (2.5 kW, 24 V)
Mounting system (for at roof)
Electrical equipment (cables, etc.)

V3.2 per W
V640 per pc
V2069
V200/kW
V210/kW

order to specify the required storage capacity and PV array power

needed to cover the load over the time period of a typical year.
Before running the simulations it is essential to decide the
acceptable loss of load probability (LOLP) of the specic system
which denes the required battery autonomy in days. For example,
if a 1% acceptable LOLP is chosen it means that during the time
period of a year there is a probability to have 3.65 days where the
load will not be covered. Thus, if we want to design a system where
we will have a 100% annual load coverage, in order not to
compromise the occupants quality of living, then a rst estimate
for the required battery autonomy should be that of 4 days. It
should be noted that the batteries capacity must be larger than that
calculated for the 4 days of autonomy due to the fact that it is
impossible to start the 4 days of autonomy with the batteries fully
charged as these always supply electricity to the system during
nighttime. Thus, in the system examined, it is predened that one
of the most important parameters to consider for the selection of
the PV array size and the required storage capacity is to have 100%
annual load coverage.
Since the nominal voltage of the battery bank is decided to be at
24 V and the nominal voltage of each battery cell is 2 V then the
congurations of the battery bank used during the simulation
consisted of 1, 2, 3 or 4 strings of 12 batteries connected in parallel.
The results of the simulation process were recorded in a data le
and subsequently processed to evaluate the load coverage achieved
by each conguration. The most important results estimated during
the simulation are presented in Table 2.
From the results of Table 2 it can be seen that the systems that
achieve 100% annual load coverage over a typical year are those of
Congurations 6c and 12c. It should be noted that two different
approaches are considered for these systems with the difference

Table 4
Economic analysis results for the systems of Congurations 6c and 12c.
Number

Power

Lifetime

Cost

Overall cost

Conguration 6c
1 PV
2 Inverter/controller
3 Elec. equip.
4 Mounting
5 Batteries

Equipment

65
3
e
e
36

180
4500
e
e
1500 Ah

25
15
25
25
18

V37,440
V7977
V2457
V2340
V23,040
Total

V37,440
V15,954
V2457
V2340
V46,080
V104,271

Conguration 12c
1 PV
2 Inverter/controller
3 Elec. equip.
4 Mounting
5 Batteries

59
3
e
e
48

180
4500
e
e
1500 Ah

25
15
25
25
18

V33,984
V7977
V2230
V2124
V30,720
Total

V33,984
V15,954
V2230
V2124
V61,440
V115,732

360

G. Panayiotou et al. / Renewable Energy 37 (2012) 355e363

Table 5
Energy produced by a 1.5 kW and a 2.4 kW wind turbine located in Nicosia.
Energy produced [Wh]

1.5 kW wind turbine

2.4 kW wind turbine

Maximum
Average
Annual

1500
146
1,279,346

2274
145
1,271,074

between the two being that Conguration 12c has larger energy
storage capacity and lower PV array power (smaller size) while
Conguration 6c has larger PV array power (larger size) and lower
energy storage capacity. This is a very important fact to consider
when deciding which is the optimum conguration for the system
to be designed. To do so, Congurations 6c and 12c are evaluated in
terms of life cycle analysis for a total system life of 25 years. During
this process the lifetime of each component is taken into consideration (with its consequent replacement cost) along with its
current cost and is recorded in Table 3. The results of this analysis
are presented in Table 4.
By evaluating the results of the economic analysis it is concluded
that the optimum system is Conguration 6c which consists of 65
PVs (11.7 kW) and 36 batteries (108 kWh). The cost of such a system
is V104,271. It is very important to notice that in all cases examined
the main part of the cost, around 50%, concerns the batteries. Since
the optimum conguration estimated has 36 batteries it is
concluded that the decision for the nominal voltage of the battery
bank to be at 24 V was correct due to the fact that if 48 V was
chosen then the battery bank conguration should have been
either 1 or 2 strings of 24 batteries and it is obvious that the option
of 24 batteries (1 string) would be undersized and thus insufcient
while the option of 48 batteries (2 strings) would be oversized with
a consequent increase of the overall cost of the system.
6.2. Simulation and economic analysis of standalone PVeWind
system
By analyzing the power curves of each wind turbine (Fig. 4) in
conjunction with the wind prole of the examined location (Fig. 6)
it is hypothesized that the most suitable wind turbine to be used in
the system designed is the 1.5 kW one. This of course is only
a hypothesis and in order to be validated a series of simulations
using a simple model consisting of a TMY and a wind turbine were
carried out. The results obtained are presented in Table 5. From
these results it is concluded that the hypothesis was correct since
the 1.5 kW wind turbine generates more energy than the 2.4 kW
one. This is caused by the fact that the 1.5 kW wind turbine operates with higher efciency at low wind velocity which prevails at
the location examined.
The simulation process followed for this system was similar to
the one carried out for the PV system. From the results concerning
the two wind turbines it is clear that the wind turbine that should
be used in the system designed is that of 1.5 kW.
Since the optimum capacity of the batteries to cover the load
over a typical year was calculated during the simulation process for

Table 7
Economic analysis results for the hybrid PVeWind system.
Conguration Fc

1
2
3
4
5
6

Equipment

Number

PV
Wind turbine
Inverter/controller
Elec. Equip.
Mounting system
Batteries

61
1
3
e
e
36

Power
180
1500
4500
e
e
1500 Ah

Lifetime

Cost

25
25
15
25
25
18

V35,136
V2250
V7977
V2192
V2088
V23,040

Overall cost
V35,136
V2250
V15,954
V2192
V2088
V46,080
V103,700

Total

the PV system and found to be 108 kWh it is decided that this

capacity should also be the same for the case of the PVeWind
system. The number of batteries in the systems should be as small
as possible primarily due to the important negative environmental
impacts of the batteries and also due to their high cost.
The results of the simulation process were recorded and processed to evaluate the load coverage achieved by each conguration. The most important of the results calculated during the
simulation process are presented in Table 6. From these results it
can be seen that the system able to achieve 100% annual load
coverage over a typical year is that of Conguration Fc which
consists of one 1.5 kW wind turbine, 61 PVs (10.98 kW) and 36
batteries (108 kWh) and it is consequently the optimum
Conguration.
In order to compare the optimum conguration of the hybrid
PVeWind system with that of the PV system an economic analysis
was carried out for Conguration Fc which is presented in Table 7.
6.3. Comparison for Case 1
Summarizing, the two optimum systems to be applied to power
a household in Nicosia are those of Conguration 6c which consists
of 65 PVs (11.7 kW) and 36 batteries (108 kWh) and Conguration
Fc which consists of one 1.5 kW wind turbine, 61 PVs (10.98 kW)
and 36 batteries (108 kWh). The cost of each system is V104,271 for
the PV system and V103,700 for the PVeWind system.
By comparing the two systems, PV and PVeWind, it can be
observed that they have the same life cycle cost with a slight
decrease in favor of the PVeWind system. Nevertheless, the
difference in cost is very small (V500) and it is judged to be
insignicant (0.5%) for the cost range of the systems examined.
From the results presented in Case 1 it is concluded that in spite
of the fact that due to their ability to diversify the energy sources,
hybrid systems are generally considered to be a better option for
standalone applications, in the case of the location examined, as
indicated from the results of both simulation and economic analysis
processes, the PV-only system is a better option. This lies on the fact
that the PV system is based fully on the very high solar potential of
Cyprus in contradiction to the PVeWind system which is based on
the very low wind potential observed in the area examined, which
is also typical for the whole island.

Table 6
Results of the simulation process for the standalone PVeWind system.
Conguration No

No of
PVs [e]

PV array
power [kW]

No of batteries
[e]

Battery capacity
[kWh]

Energy deciency
[kWh/yr]

Period of energy
deciency [h/yr]

Ac
Bc
Cc
Dc
Ec
Fc

55
57
58
59
60
61

9.90
10.26
10.44
10.62
10.80
10.98

36
36
36
36
36
36

108
108
108
108
108
108

24
15
11
7
1
0

33
22
7
10
10
0

G. Panayiotou et al. / Renewable Energy 37 (2012) 355e363

361

Fig. 7. Yearly sum of global irradiation (kWh/m2) for France [3].

It should also be noted that by not using the wind turbine in

a domestic area several other possible negative aspects are avoided
such as noise caused from the operation of the wind turbine,
esthetic integration on the building and maintenance requirements
which are not considered in the above analysis. By observing the

7. Case 2: household application in Nice, France

Nice is located in the southern part of France on the Mediterranean Sea at a latitude of 43 4201200 N and a longitude of 7150 5900 E.

18
16

Table 8
Energy produced by a single PV with different slopes located in Nice.

14
12
Frequ ency [%]

cost analysis of both systems it can be seen that batteries represent

over 50% of the overall systems cost.

10
8
6
4
2
0
0

10

12

14

Wind speed [m /s]

Fig. 8. Wind prole of Nice, France.

16

18

20

Slope of the PV

Energy Produced [Wh/yr]

26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39

77,430
77,799
78,137
78,444
78,720
78,963
79,174
79,353
79,499
79,613
79,694
79,742
79,757
79,739

The bold numbers show the optimal cases.

362

G. Panayiotou et al. / Renewable Energy 37 (2012) 355e363

Table 9
Results of the simulation process for the standalone PV system.
Conguration No

No of
PVs [e]

PV array
power [kW]

No of batteries
[e]

Battery
capacity [kWh]

Annual energy
deciency [kWh]

Annual period of
energy deciency [h]

1f
2f
3f
4f
5f
6f
7f
8f

60
70
80
85
83
75
77
78

10.8
12.6
14.4
15.3
14.94
13.5
13.86
14.04

36
36
36
36
36
48
48
48

108
108
108
108
108
144
144
144

262
81
24
0
8
13
2
0

313
92
52
0
12
8
11
0

Thus, its climate is a typical Mediterranean climate with hot and

dry summers and mild winters. The average maximum temperature during summer months is about 27  C while on winter time
the average minimum temperature is around 5  C.
The average annual solar potential on a at surface in Nice is
around 1482 kWh/m2 (Fig. 7) [7]. Mean daily global solar radiation
varies from about 1.84 kWh/m2 during the cloudiest months to
about 6.77 kWh/m2 in July [7]. The wind prole of Nice according to
the TMY used in the simulation is presented in Fig. 8.

7.1. Simulation and economic analysis of standalone PV system

The simulation process followed in this Case as well as the
parameters of the system (PVs, batteries and typical load prole)
was the same as in Case 1 so as to have a common base for
comparison. Due to the different latitudes and longitudes of the
examined location the slope of the PVs must be determined. In
order to dene the optimum slope, again a small model consisting
of a typical meteorological year (TMY) and a single PV was developed and a series of simulations were carried out for several
different slopes. The energy production for each slope is recorded
and presented in Table 8.
According to the results of Table 8 the maximum energy
production occurs for a slope of 38 (shown with bold on Table 8)
and so this is the optimum angle for the Nice. As it can be noted the
optimum angle for Nice is higher than that of Nicosia (38 instead
of 31 ) which is logical due to the different latitudes of the areas
examined (43 4201200 N instead of 35100 N).
After the proper setting up of the complete model for the
standalone PV system a series of simulations were carried out in
order to specify the required storage capacity and PV array power
needed to cover the load over the time period of a typical year.

Table 10
Economic analysis results for the systems of Congurations 4f and 8f.
Number

Power

Lifetime

Cost

Overall cost

Conguration 4f
1 PV
2 Inverter/controller
3 Elec. equip.
4 Mounting
5 Batteries

Equipment

85
4
e
e
36

180
4500
e
e
1500 Ah

25
15
25
25
18

V48,960
V10,636
V3137
V3060
V23,040
Total

V48,960
V21,272
V3137
V3060
V46,080
V122,509

Conguration 8f
1 PV
2 Inverter/controller
3 Elec. equip.
4 Mounting
5 Batteries

78
3
e
e
48

180
4500
e
e
1500 Ah

25
15
25
25
18

V44,928
V7977
V2948
V2808
V30,720
Total

V44,928
V15,954
V2948
V2808
V61,440
V128,078

The results of the simulation process were recorded in a data le

and subsequently processed to evaluate the load coverage achieved
by each conguration. The most important results estimated during
the simulation are presented in Table 9.
From the results of Table 9 it can be seen that the systems that
achieve 100% annual load coverage over a typical year are those of
Congurations 4f and 8f. As in Case 1 also two different approaches
are considered for these systems with the difference between the
two being that Conguration 4f has larger energy storage capacity
and lower PV array power (smaller size) while Conguration 8f has
larger PV array power (larger size) and lower energy storage
capacity. This is a very important fact to consider when deciding
which is the optimum conguration for the system to be designed.
To do so, Congurations 4f and 8f are evaluated in terms of economic
viability for a total system life of 25 years. During this process the
lifetime of each component is taken into consideration along with its
current cost. The results of this analysis are presented in Table 10.
By evaluating the results of the economic analysis it is concluded
that the optimum system is Conguration 4f which consists of 85
PVs (15.3 kW) and 36 batteries. The cost of such a system is
V122,509 where again the main part of the cost, around 50%,
concerns the batteries.

7.2. Simulation and economic analysis of standalone PVeWind

system
In order to dene which wind turbine (1.5 and 2.4 kW) is better
suited for application in Nice, a series of simulations using a simple
model consisting of a TMY and a wind turbine were again carried
out. The results obtained are presented in Table 11 where it can be
seen that the 2.4 kW wind turbine generates more energy than the
1.5 kW one and consequently is the one to be used in the model.
This happens due to the better wind prole of Nice (Fig. 8)
compared to that of Nicosia.
The model for the hybrid standalone PVeWind is based on the
previously developed model for the standalone PV system and the
simulation follows the same process with the same parameters as
in Case 1.
The results of the simulation process were recorded and processed to evaluate the load coverage achieved by each conguration. The most important of the results calculated during the
simulation process are presented in Table 12. It should be noted

Table 11
Energy produced by a 1.5 kW and a 2.4 kW wind turbine located in Nice.
Energy produced [Wh]

1.5 kW wind turbine

2.4 kW wind turbine

Maximum
Average
Annual

1500
237
2,077,550

2400
269
2,353,048

G. Panayiotou et al. / Renewable Energy 37 (2012) 355e363

363

Table 12
Results of the simulation process for the standalone PVeWind system.
Conguration no

No of WT

No of
PVs [e]

PV array
power [kW]

No of batteries
[e]

Battery
capacity [kWh]

Annual energy
deciency [kWh]

Annual period of
energy deciency [h]

Af
Bf
Cf
Df
Ef
Ff
Gf
Hf

1
1
1
1
2
2
2
2

60
65
67
66
66
55
50
53

10.8
11.7
12.06
11.88
11.88
9.9
9.0
9.54

36
36
36
36
36
36
36
36

108
108
108
108
108
108
108
108

20
6
0
1
0
0
11
1

13
15
0
9
0
0
24
6

Table 13
Economic analysis results for the systems of Congurations Cf and Ff.
Equipment

Number

Conguration Cf
1 PV
2 Wind turbine
3 Inverter/controller
4 Elec. Equip.
5 Mounting system
6 Batteries

67
1
4
e
e
36

Conguration Ff
1 PV
2 Wind turbine
3 Inverter/controller
4 Elec. equip.
5 Mounting system
6 Batteries

55
2
3
e
e
36

Power
180
2400
4500
e
e
1500 Ah

180
2400
4500
e
e
1500 Ah

Lifetime

Cost

Overall cost

25
25
15
25
25
18

V38,592
V3600
V10,636
V2532
V2412
V23,040
Total

V38,592
V3600
V21,272
V2532
V2412
V46,080
V114,488

25
25
15
25
25
18

V31,680
V7200
V7977
V2079
V1980
V23,040
Total

V31,680
V7200
V15,954
V2079
V1980
V46,080
V104,973

that initially, as in Case 1, a single wind turbine was implemented

into the system. By observing the results coming out of Congurations AfeDf and due to the wind prole of the examined location
another 3 Congurations (FfeHf) were simulated where two 2.4 kW
wind turbines were implemented into the system.
From these results it can be seen that the systems achieving
100% annual load coverage over a typical year are that of Congurations Cf and Ff. The differences between these two congurations
are the number of PVs and wind turbines. In order to determine the
optimum conguration both Congurations are evaluated in terms
of economic viability for a total system life of 25 years. During this
process the lifetime of each component is taken into consideration
along with its current cost. The results of this analysis are presented
in Table 13.
By evaluating the results of the economic analysis it is clear that
Conguration Ff is a better solution than Conguration Cf since the
cost is reduced by V10,000 due to the implementation of the
second wind turbine to the system and the consequent reduction
on the number of PVs.
7.3. Comparison for Case 2
Summarizing, the two optimum systems to be applied to power
a household in Nice are those of Conguration 4f which consists of
85 PVs (15.3 kW) and 36 batteries (108 kWh) and Conguration Ff
which consists of two 2.4 kW wind turbines, 55 PVs (9.9 kW) and
36 batteries (108 kWh). The cost of each system is V122,509 for the
PV system and V104,973 for the PVeWind system.
It is clear that in Case 2 the optimum conguration to be applied
is that of the hybrid PVeWind system due to the better wind prole
of the location which leads to a better choice of equipment and
a consequent reduction of the overall cost.

8. Conclusions
In this paper the simulation of two renewable-based standalone
energy systems for application in two different locations was
carried out. More specically, the systems examined were a standalone PV system and a standalone hybrid PVeWind system. The
locations considered were those of Nicosia, Cyprus and Nice,
France. The reason for choosing these two locations is the fact that
they have similar Mediterranean climates with different wind
potential and slightly different solar potential which lead to interesting conclusions concerning the application of such systems.
The results from the two locations show that the application of
a solely solar based PV system appears to be a much better solution
in Nicosia than in Nice due to the higher annual solar potential. This
results in a PV array power of 11.7 kW for Nicosia and 15.3 kW for
Nice for a 108 kWh storage capacity batteries in both cases.
On the other hand when applying a hybrid PVeWind system in
both locations then Nice shows better characteristics due to the
much better wind prole with the optimum system consisting of
two 2.4 kW wind turbines, 9.9 kW of PV array power and 108 kWh
batteries. The application of such a system in Nicosia is not considered to be a feasible solution because the life cycle cost of the hybrid
system is only very marginally lower than the life cycle cost of the
PV-only system. However the PV-only system avoids a number of
other disadvantages of the hybrid system which include increased
maintenance costs and visual and noise pollution.
Summarizing, the results of this paper clearly lead to the
conclusion that the viability of the application of any kind of
renewable-based standalone energy system at a particular location
depends very strongly on the climate characteristics of the location
which should be used in the analysis of the economic viability of
the system.
References
[1] Dalton GJ, Lockington DA, Baldock TE. Feasibility analysis of stand-alone
renewable energy supply options for a large hotel. Renewable Energy 2008;
33:1475e90.
[2] Bekele G, Palm B. Feasibility study for a standalone solarewind-based hybrid
energy system for application in Ethiopia. Applied Energy 2010;87:487e95.
[3] Shen WX. Optimally sizing of solar array and battery in a standalone photovoltaic system in Malaysia. Renewable Energy 2009;34:348e52.
[4] Ekren O, Ekren BY, Ozerdem B. Break-even analysis and size optimization of
a PV/Wind hybrid energy conversion system with battery storage e a case
study. Applied Energy 2009;86:1043e54.
[5] Panayiotou GP, Kalogirou SA, Florides GA, Maxoulis CN, Papadopoulos AM,
Neophytou M, Fokaides P, Georgiou G, Symeou A, Georgakis G. The characteristics and the energy behaviour of the residential building stock of Cyprus in
view of Directive 2002/91/EC. Energy and Buildings 2010;42:2083e9.
[6] Klein SA, Beckman WA, Mitchell JW, Dufe JA, Dufe NA, Freeman TL. TRNSYS
user manual. University of Wisconsin; 2006.
[7] PVGIS (c) European Communities. Available from: http://re.jrc.ec.europa.eu/
pvgis/; 2001e2010.
[8] Three years of operation of the Radiation Centre in Nicosia. Cyprus: Ministry of
Agriculture and Natural Resources, Meteorological Services; 1987.
[9] Pashardes S, Christodes C. Statistical analysis of wind speed and direction in
Cyprus. Solar Energy 1995;55:405e14.