Floating photovoltaics (FPV) on existing hydropower reservoirs

Posted on
irst continental scale study weighs floating solar panels against new dam construction

DAILY SCIENCE in Anthropocene magazine

First continental scale study weighs floating solar panels against new dam construction

The conclusion: floating solar could negate the need for many—if not all—planned dams in Africa, and add climate change resilience at the same time.
By Sarah DeWeerdt
May 7, 2024

Floating solar panels on existing hydropower reservoirs could, in the best-case scenario, make it unnecessary to construct any of the new hydropower dams currently planned in Africa, according to a new analysis. The study is among the first to analyze the potential for floating solar panels (or FPV, short for floating photovoltaics) at a continental scale.

Population growth and economic development are predicted to triple Africa’s electricity demand by 2050. Meanwhile, hydropower generation has become less certain because of climate change-related droughts.

Putting solar panels on hydropower reservoirs has gained increasing attention in the past few years and has a lot of potential advantages. Floating solar panels may generate electricity more efficiently than land-based panels because the water helps cool them to an optimum operating temperature, and the electricity they generate can be fed right into the grid via the hydropower dam’s existing infrastructure.

“Floating photovoltaics (FPV) is fast becoming cost-competitive, but its social and environmental impacts are under debate,” researchers write in a paper published in Nature Energy. “Meanwhile, developing economies anticipate hundreds of new dams over the next decade, with social and environmental implications for the next century.”

In the new study, researchers used a comprehensive model of the energy system across the entire African continent to explore the tradeoffs among energy production, agriculture, environmental protection, and economic development involved with floating solar.

FPV power production potential varies from one region of Africa to another. But if floating solar panels were deployed as widely as possible across the continent, they could produce between 20 and 100% of the electricity expected from hydropower dams currently slated for construction in Africa, the researchers report.

Floating solar could supply 6-7% of the continent’s total projected energy demand in 2050. The most cost-effective way to incorporate floating solar in Africa’s energy system depends on the panels’ efficiency and their cost.

The researchers also conducted a case study of FPV and hydropower potential in the Zambezi watercourse, a river system that traverses eight countries in southern Africa. This analysis showed that it would be more efficient to take the money earmarked for new dams in the river system and use it to build floating solar instead.

This approach would result in an electricity generation system with 12% less variability from year to year compared to a hydropower-heavy approach. “Adopting FPV in place of intensive hydropower development results in a more predictable output over longer timescales, which could lead to greater electricity reliability and lower reliance on imports in times of drought,” the researchers write. In other words, floating solar is a strategy for climate change resilience.

Floating solar does have drawbacks, such as disrupting existing uses like fishing and recreation on reservoirs. But new hydropower dams have much bigger environmental and social impacts, the researchers point out, and are prone to cost overruns as well.

Source: . et al. “Floating photovoltaics may reduce the risk of hydro-dominated energy development in Africa.” Nature Energy 2024.

Floating photovoltaics may reduce the risk of hydro-dominated energy development in Africa

Nature Energy volume 9, pages 602–611 (2024)Cite this article

Abstract

Floating photovoltaics (FPV) is fast becoming cost-competitive, but its social and environmental impacts are under debate. Meanwhile, developing economies anticipate hundreds of new dams over the next decade, with social and environmental implications for the next century. In this context, we estimate that FPV could produce 20–100% of the electricity expected from Africa’s planned hydropower depending on the scale of FPV deployment and its cost and efficiency relative to land-based photovoltaics. Here, at the system scale, we show that the same capital investment earmarked for planned dams in the Zambezi watercourse could be used more efficiently by building fewer reservoirs and substituting the energy supply with FPV. This approach yields an energy output 12% less variable and more robust to long-term hydrological changes. Our findings suggest that FPV’s potential to avoid the environmental, social and financial risks of hydro-dominated energy development may outweigh its potential impacts on existing reservoir uses.

References

  1. Moran, E. F., Lopez, M. C., Moore, N., Müller, N. & Hyndman, D. W. Sustainable hydropower in the 21st century. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 115, 11891–11898 (2018).

    Google Scholar

  2. Zarfl, C., Lumsdon, A. E., Berlekamp, J., Tydecks, L. & Tockner, K. A global boom in hydropower dam construction. Aquat. Sci. 77, 161–170 (2015).

    Google Scholar

  3. Hydropower Special Market Report (International Energy Agency, 2021).

  4. Xu, R. et al. A global-scale framework for hydropower development incorporating strict environmental constraints. Nat. Water 1, 113–122 (2023).

    Google Scholar

  5. Hydroelectricity—Analysis and Key Findings (International Energy Agency, 2022).

  6. Karanfil, F. & Li, Y. Electricity consumption and economic growth: exploring panel-specific differences. Energy Policy 82, 264–277 (2015).

    Google Scholar

  7. Almeida Prado, F. et al. How much is enough? An integrated examination of energy security, economic growth and climate change related to hydropower expansion in Brazil. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 53, 1132–1136 (2016).

    Google Scholar

  8. Aweke, A. T. & Navrud, S. Valuing energy poverty costs: household welfare loss from electricity blackouts in developing countries. Energy Econ. 109, 105943 (2022).

    Google Scholar

  9. Yalew, S. G. et al. Impacts of climate change on energy systems in global and regional scenarios. Nat. Energy 5, 794–802 (2020).

    Google Scholar

  10. Spalding-Fecher, R., Joyce, B. & Winkler, H. Climate change and hydropower in the Southern African Power Pool and Zambezi River Basin: system-wide impacts and policy implications. Energy Policy 103, 84–97 (2017).

    Google Scholar

  11. van Vliet, M. T. H., Wiberg, D., Leduc, S. & Riahi, K. Power-generation system vulnerability and adaptation to changes in climate and water resources. Nat. Clim. Chang. 6, 375–380 (2016).

    Google Scholar

  12. Conway, D., Dalin, C., Landman, W. A. & Osborn, T. J. Hydropower plans in eastern and southern africa increase risk of concurrent climate-related electricity supply disruption. Nat. Energy 2, 946–953 (2017).

    Google Scholar

  13. Foster, B. T., Kern, J. D. & Characklis, G. W. Mitigating hydrologic financial risk in hydropower generation using index-based financial instruments. Water Resour. Econ. 10, 45–67 (2015).

    Google Scholar

  14. Hamilton, A. L., Characklis, G. W. & Reed, P. M. Managing financial risk trade-offs for hydropower generation using snowpack-based index contracts. Water Resour. Res. 56, e2020WR027212 (2020).

    Google Scholar

  15. Almeida, R. M. et al. Climate change may impair electricity generation and economic viability of future Amazon hydropower. Glob. Environ. Change 71, 102383 (2021).

    Google Scholar

  16. Global Renewables Outlook: Energy Transformation 2050 (International Renewable Energy Agency, 2020).

  17. Zhang, Y. et al. Long-term basin-scale hydropower expansion under alternative scenarios in a global multisector model. Environ. Res. Lett. 17, 114029 (2022).

    Google Scholar

  18. Carlino, A. et al. Declining cost of renewables and climate change curb the need for African hydropower expansion. Science 381, eadf5848 (2023).

    Google Scholar

  19. Jin, Y. et al. Energy production and water savings from floating solar photovoltaics on global reservoirs. Nat. Sustain. 6, 865–874 (2023).

    Google Scholar

  20. Almeida, R. M. et al. Floating solar power could help fight climate change—let’s get it right. Nature 606, 246–248 (2022).

    Google Scholar

  21. Kougias, I., Szabó, S., Monforti-Ferrario, F., Huld, T. & Bódis, K. A methodology for optimization of the complementarity between small-hydropower plants and solar PV systems. Renew. Energy 87, 1023–1030 (2016).

    Google Scholar

  22. Ming, B. et al. Optimizing utility-scale photovoltaic power generation for integration into a hydropower reservoir by incorporating long- and short-term operational decisions. Appl. Energy 204, 432–445 (2017).

    Google Scholar

  23. Fang, W. et al. Optimal sizing of utility-scale photovoltaic power generation complementarily operating with hydropower: a case study of the world’s largest hydro-photovoltaic plant. Energy Convers. Manag. 136, 161–172 (2017).

    Google Scholar

  24. Lee, N. et al. Hybrid floating solar photovoltaics-hydropower systems: benefits and global assessment of technical potential. Renew. Energy 162, 1415–1427 (2020).

    Google Scholar

  25. World Population Prospects 2022: Summary of Results (United Nations, 2023).

  26. Puig, D. et al. An action agenda for Africa’s electricity sector. Science 373, 616–619 (2021).

    Google Scholar

  27. Africa Energy Outlook (International Energy Agency, 2022).

  28. Schmitt, R. J. P., Kittner, N., Kondolf, G. M. & Kammen, D. M. Joint strategic energy and river basin planning to reduce dam impacts on rivers in myanmar. Environ. Res. Lett. 16, 054054 (2021).

    Google Scholar

  29. Siala, K., Chowdhury, A. K., Dang, T. D. & Galelli, S. Solar energy and regional coordination as a feasible alternative to large hydropower in southeast asia. Nat. Commun. 12, 4159 (2021).

    Google Scholar

  30. Sterl, S. et al. Smart renewable electricity portfolios in west africa. Nat. Sustain. 3, 710–719 (2020).

    Google Scholar

  31. Wu, G. C. et al. Strategic siting and regional grid interconnections key to low-carbon futures in african countries. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 114, E3004–E3012 (2017).

    Google Scholar

  32. Chowdhury, A. F. M. K. et al. Enabling a low-carbon electricity system for Southern Africa. Joule 6, 1826–1844 (2022).

    Google Scholar

  33. Winemiller, K. O. et al. Balancing hydropower and biodiversity in the Amazon, Congo, and Mekong. Science 351, 128–129 (2016).

    Google Scholar

  34. Schmitt, R. J. P., Bizzi, S., Castelletti, A., Opperman, J. J. & Kondolf, G. M. Planning dam portfolios for low sediment trapping shows limits for sustainable hydropower in the mekong. Sci. Adv. 5, eaaw2175 (2019).

    Google Scholar

  35. Bertoni, F., Castelletti, A., Giuliani, M. & Reed, P. M. Discovering dependencies, trade-offs, and robustness in joint dam design and operation: an ex-post assessment of the Kariba Dam. Earths Future 7, 1367–1390 (2019).

    Google Scholar

  36. Giuliani, M., Lamontagne, J. R., Hejazi, M. I., Reed, P. M. & Castelletti, A. Unintended consequences of climate change mitigation for African River Basins. Nat. Clim. Chang.12, 187–192 (2022).

    Google Scholar

  37. Opperman, J. J. et al. Balancing renewable energy and river resources by moving from individual assessments of hydropower projects to energy system planning. Front. Environ. Sci. Eng. China 10, 1036653 (2023).

    Google Scholar

  38. Almeida, R. M. et al. Strategic planning of hydropower development: balancing benefits and socioenvironmental costs. Curr. Opin. Environ. Sustain. 56, 101175 (2022).

    Google Scholar

  39. Chowdhury, A. F. M. K., Kern, J., Dang, T. D. & Galelli, S. PowNet: a network-constrained unit commitment/economic dispatch model for large-scale power systems analysis. J. Open Res. Softw. 8, 5 (2020).

    Google Scholar

  40. Hauer, C., Siviglia, A. & Zolezzi, G. Hydropeaking in regulated rivers—from process understanding to design of mitigation measures. Sci. Total Environ. 579, 22–26 (2017).

    Google Scholar

  41. Liu, X. & Xu, Q. Hydropeaking impacts on riverine plants downstream from the world’s largest hydropower dam, the three gorges dam. Sci. Total Environ. 845, 157137 (2022).

    Google Scholar

  42. Gonzalez, J. M. et al. Designing diversified renewable energy systems to balance multisector performance. Nat. Sustain. 6, 415–427 (2023).

    Google Scholar

  43. Matheu, E. E., Yezierski, M. E., Rtzer, K. S. & Freer, C. Security considerations for protecting dams and levees. J. Dam Saf. 19, 40–48 (2022).

    Google Scholar

  44. Liu, H., Krishna, V., Lun Leung, J., Reindl, T. & Zhao, L. Field experience and performance analysis of floating PV technologies in the tropics. Prog. Photovolt. Res. Appl. 26, 957–967 (2018).

    Google Scholar

  45. Sen, A., Mohankar, A. S., Khamaj, A. & Karmakar, S. Emerging OSH issues in installation and maintenance of floating solar photovoltaic projects and their link with sustainable development goals. Risk Manag. Healthc. Policy 14, 1939–1957 (2021).

    Google Scholar

  46. Cousse, J. Still in love with solar energy? Installation size, affect, and the social acceptance of renewable energy technologies. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 145, 111107 (2021).

    Google Scholar

  47. Kohsaka, R. & Kohyama, S. Contested renewable energy sites due to landscape and socio-ecological barriers: comparison of wind and solar power installation cases in Japan. Energy Environ. 34, 2619–2641 (2023).

    Google Scholar

  48. Blumstein, S. & Kramer, A. Deliverable 6.1: Common Approach and Methodological Roadmap for the Nexus Dialogues at Local and Basin level (Adelphi Consult, 2022).

  49. Pappis, I. et al. Energy Projections for African Countries (European Commission Joint Research Centre, 2019).

  50. Taliotis, C. et al. An indicative analysis of investment opportunities in the African electricity supply sector—using TEMBA (the electricity model base for Africa). Energy Sustain. Dev. 31, 50–66 (2016).

    Google Scholar

  51. Frieler, K. et al. Assessing the impacts of 1.5 °C global warming—simulation protocol of the Inter-Sectoral Impact Model Intercomparison Project (ISIMIP2b). Geosci. Model Dev.10, 4321–4345 (2017).

    Google Scholar

  52. Sterl, S. et al. A spatiotemporal atlas of hydropower in Africa for energy modelling purposes. Open Res. Eur. 1, 29 (2021).

    Google Scholar

  53. Where Sun Meets Water: Floating Solar Market Report (World Bank, 2019).

  54. Lee, Y.-G., Joo, H.-J. & Yoon, S.-J. Design and installation of floating type photovoltaic energy generation system using FRP members. Sol. Energy 108, 13–27 (2014).

    Google Scholar

  55. Oliveira-Pinto, S. & Stokkermans, J. Assessment of the potential of different floating solar technologies—overview and analysis of different case studies. Energy Convers. Manag.211, 112747 (2020).

    Google Scholar

  56. Dörenkämper, M. et al. The cooling effect of floating PV in two different climate zones: a comparison of field test data from the netherlands and singapore. Sol. Energy 219, 15–23 (2021).

    Google Scholar

  57. Arnold, W., Salazar, J. Z., Carlino, A., Giuliani, M. & Castelletti, A. Operations eclipse sequencing in multipurpose dam planning. Earths Future 11, e2022EF003186 (2023).

    Google Scholar

  58. PVGIS 5.2 (2022). EU Science Hub. European Commission Joint Research Centrehttps://re.jrc.ec.europa.eu/pvg_tools/en/ (2023).

  59. Giuliani, M., Castelletti, A., Pianosi, F., Mason, E. & Reed, P. M. Curses, tradeoffs, and scalable management: advancing evolutionary multiobjective direct policy search to improve water reservoir operations. J. Water Resour. Plan. Manag. 142, 04015050 (2016).

    Google Scholar

  60. Data and code in support of ‘Floating PV reduces risks of hydro-dominated energy development in Africa’. Zenodo https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.10576226 (2024).

  61. CORDEX Africa. Climate System Analysis Group http://www.csag.uct.ac.za/cordex-africa/(2013).

  62. Data in support of ‘Declining cost of renewables and climate change curb the need for African hydropower expansion’. Zenodo https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.7931050(2023).

  63. First release of ZambeziWatercourse_GCAM code. Zenodohttps://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.5726941 (2021).

  64. ZRB-PowNet. GitHub https://github.com/EILab-Polimi/ZRB-PowNet (2024).

Download references

References

  1. Moran, E. F., Lopez, M. C., Moore, N., Müller, N. & Hyndman, D. W. Sustainable hydropower in the 21st century. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 115, 11891–11898 (2018).

    Google Scholar

  2. Zarfl, C., Lumsdon, A. E., Berlekamp, J., Tydecks, L. & Tockner, K. A global boom in hydropower dam construction. Aquat. Sci. 77, 161–170 (2015).

    Google Scholar

  3. Hydropower Special Market Report (International Energy Agency, 2021).

  4. Xu, R. et al. A global-scale framework for hydropower development incorporating strict environmental constraints. Nat. Water 1, 113–122 (2023).

    Google Scholar

  5. Hydroelectricity—Analysis and Key Findings (International Energy Agency, 2022).

  6. Karanfil, F. & Li, Y. Electricity consumption and economic growth: exploring panel-specific differences. Energy Policy 82, 264–277 (2015).

    Google Scholar

  7. Almeida Prado, F. et al. How much is enough? An integrated examination of energy security, economic growth and climate change related to hydropower expansion in Brazil. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 53, 1132–1136 (2016).

    Google Scholar

  8. Aweke, A. T. & Navrud, S. Valuing energy poverty costs: household welfare loss from electricity blackouts in developing countries. Energy Econ. 109, 105943 (2022).

    Google Scholar

  9. Yalew, S. G. et al. Impacts of climate change on energy systems in global and regional scenarios. Nat. Energy 5, 794–802 (2020).

    Google Scholar

  10. Spalding-Fecher, R., Joyce, B. & Winkler, H. Climate change and hydropower in the Southern African Power Pool and Zambezi River Basin: system-wide impacts and policy implications. Energy Policy 103, 84–97 (2017).

    Google Scholar

  11. van Vliet, M. T. H., Wiberg, D., Leduc, S. & Riahi, K. Power-generation system vulnerability and adaptation to changes in climate and water resources. Nat. Clim. Chang. 6, 375–380 (2016).

    Google Scholar

  12. Conway, D., Dalin, C., Landman, W. A. & Osborn, T. J. Hydropower plans in eastern and southern africa increase risk of concurrent climate-related electricity supply disruption. Nat. Energy 2, 946–953 (2017).

    Google Scholar

  13. Foster, B. T., Kern, J. D. & Characklis, G. W. Mitigating hydrologic financial risk in hydropower generation using index-based financial instruments. Water Resour. Econ. 10, 45–67 (2015).

    Google Scholar

  14. Hamilton, A. L., Characklis, G. W. & Reed, P. M. Managing financial risk trade-offs for hydropower generation using snowpack-based index contracts. Water Resour. Res. 56, e2020WR027212 (2020).

    Google Scholar

  15. Almeida, R. M. et al. Climate change may impair electricity generation and economic viability of future Amazon hydropower. Glob. Environ. Change 71, 102383 (2021).

    Google Scholar

  16. Global Renewables Outlook: Energy Transformation 2050 (International Renewable Energy Agency, 2020).

  17. Zhang, Y. et al. Long-term basin-scale hydropower expansion under alternative scenarios in a global multisector model. Environ. Res. Lett. 17, 114029 (2022).

    Google Scholar

  18. Carlino, A. et al. Declining cost of renewables and climate change curb the need for African hydropower expansion. Science 381, eadf5848 (2023).

    Google Scholar

  19. Jin, Y. et al. Energy production and water savings from floating solar photovoltaics on global reservoirs. Nat. Sustain. 6, 865–874 (2023).

    Google Scholar

  20. Almeida, R. M. et al. Floating solar power could help fight climate change—let’s get it right. Nature 606, 246–248 (2022).

    Google Scholar

  21. Kougias, I., Szabó, S., Monforti-Ferrario, F., Huld, T. & Bódis, K. A methodology for optimization of the complementarity between small-hydropower plants and solar PV systems. Renew. Energy 87, 1023–1030 (2016).

    Google Scholar

  22. Ming, B. et al. Optimizing utility-scale photovoltaic power generation for integration into a hydropower reservoir by incorporating long- and short-term operational decisions. Appl. Energy 204, 432–445 (2017).

    Google Scholar

  23. Fang, W. et al. Optimal sizing of utility-scale photovoltaic power generation complementarily operating with hydropower: a case study of the world’s largest hydro-photovoltaic plant. Energy Convers. Manag. 136, 161–172 (2017).

    Google Scholar

  24. Lee, N. et al. Hybrid floating solar photovoltaics-hydropower systems: benefits and global assessment of technical potential. Renew. Energy 162, 1415–1427 (2020).

    Google Scholar

  25. World Population Prospects 2022: Summary of Results (United Nations, 2023).

  26. Puig, D. et al. An action agenda for Africa’s electricity sector. Science 373, 616–619 (2021).

    Google Scholar

  27. Africa Energy Outlook (International Energy Agency, 2022).

  28. Schmitt, R. J. P., Kittner, N., Kondolf, G. M. & Kammen, D. M. Joint strategic energy and river basin planning to reduce dam impacts on rivers in myanmar. Environ. Res. Lett. 16, 054054 (2021).

    Google Scholar

  29. Siala, K., Chowdhury, A. K., Dang, T. D. & Galelli, S. Solar energy and regional coordination as a feasible alternative to large hydropower in southeast asia. Nat. Commun. 12, 4159 (2021).

    Google Scholar

  30. Sterl, S. et al. Smart renewable electricity portfolios in west africa. Nat. Sustain. 3, 710–719 (2020).

    Google Scholar

  31. Wu, G. C. et al. Strategic siting and regional grid interconnections key to low-carbon futures in african countries. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 114, E3004–E3012 (2017).

    Google Scholar

  32. Chowdhury, A. F. M. K. et al. Enabling a low-carbon electricity system for Southern Africa. Joule 6, 1826–1844 (2022).

    Google Scholar

  33. Winemiller, K. O. et al. Balancing hydropower and biodiversity in the Amazon, Congo, and Mekong. Science 351, 128–129 (2016).

    Google Scholar

  34. Schmitt, R. J. P., Bizzi, S., Castelletti, A., Opperman, J. J. & Kondolf, G. M. Planning dam portfolios for low sediment trapping shows limits for sustainable hydropower in the mekong. Sci. Adv. 5, eaaw2175 (2019).

    Google Scholar

  35. Bertoni, F., Castelletti, A., Giuliani, M. & Reed, P. M. Discovering dependencies, trade-offs, and robustness in joint dam design and operation: an ex-post assessment of the Kariba Dam. Earths Future 7, 1367–1390 (2019).

    Google Scholar

  36. Giuliani, M., Lamontagne, J. R., Hejazi, M. I., Reed, P. M. & Castelletti, A. Unintended consequences of climate change mitigation for African River Basins. Nat. Clim. Chang.12, 187–192 (2022).

    Google Scholar

  37. Opperman, J. J. et al. Balancing renewable energy and river resources by moving from individual assessments of hydropower projects to energy system planning. Front. Environ. Sci. Eng. China 10, 1036653 (2023).

    Google Scholar

  38. Almeida, R. M. et al. Strategic planning of hydropower development: balancing benefits and socioenvironmental costs. Curr. Opin. Environ. Sustain. 56, 101175 (2022).

    Google Scholar

  39. Chowdhury, A. F. M. K., Kern, J., Dang, T. D. & Galelli, S. PowNet: a network-constrained unit commitment/economic dispatch model for large-scale power systems analysis. J. Open Res. Softw. 8, 5 (2020).

    Google Scholar

  40. Hauer, C., Siviglia, A. & Zolezzi, G. Hydropeaking in regulated rivers—from process understanding to design of mitigation measures. Sci. Total Environ. 579, 22–26 (2017).

    Google Scholar

  41. Liu, X. & Xu, Q. Hydropeaking impacts on riverine plants downstream from the world’s largest hydropower dam, the three gorges dam. Sci. Total Environ. 845, 157137 (2022).

    Google Scholar

  42. Gonzalez, J. M. et al. Designing diversified renewable energy systems to balance multisector performance. Nat. Sustain. 6, 415–427 (2023).

    Google Scholar

  43. Matheu, E. E., Yezierski, M. E., Rtzer, K. S. & Freer, C. Security considerations for protecting dams and levees. J. Dam Saf. 19, 40–48 (2022).

    Google Scholar

  44. Liu, H., Krishna, V., Lun Leung, J., Reindl, T. & Zhao, L. Field experience and performance analysis of floating PV technologies in the tropics. Prog. Photovolt. Res. Appl. 26, 957–967 (2018).

    Google Scholar

  45. Sen, A., Mohankar, A. S., Khamaj, A. & Karmakar, S. Emerging OSH issues in installation and maintenance of floating solar photovoltaic projects and their link with sustainable development goals. Risk Manag. Healthc. Policy 14, 1939–1957 (2021).

    Google Scholar

  46. Cousse, J. Still in love with solar energy? Installation size, affect, and the social acceptance of renewable energy technologies. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 145, 111107 (2021).

    Google Scholar

  47. Kohsaka, R. & Kohyama, S. Contested renewable energy sites due to landscape and socio-ecological barriers: comparison of wind and solar power installation cases in Japan. Energy Environ. 34, 2619–2641 (2023).

    Google Scholar

  48. Blumstein, S. & Kramer, A. Deliverable 6.1: Common Approach and Methodological Roadmap for the Nexus Dialogues at Local and Basin level (Adelphi Consult, 2022).

  49. Pappis, I. et al. Energy Projections for African Countries (European Commission Joint Research Centre, 2019).

  50. Taliotis, C. et al. An indicative analysis of investment opportunities in the African electricity supply sector—using TEMBA (the electricity model base for Africa). Energy Sustain. Dev. 31, 50–66 (2016).

    Google Scholar

  51. Frieler, K. et al. Assessing the impacts of 1.5 °C global warming—simulation protocol of the Inter-Sectoral Impact Model Intercomparison Project (ISIMIP2b). Geosci. Model Dev.10, 4321–4345 (2017).

    Google Scholar

  52. Sterl, S. et al. A spatiotemporal atlas of hydropower in Africa for energy modelling purposes. Open Res. Eur. 1, 29 (2021).

    Google Scholar

  53. Where Sun Meets Water: Floating Solar Market Report (World Bank, 2019).

  54. Lee, Y.-G., Joo, H.-J. & Yoon, S.-J. Design and installation of floating type photovoltaic energy generation system using FRP members. Sol. Energy 108, 13–27 (2014).

    Google Scholar

  55. Oliveira-Pinto, S. & Stokkermans, J. Assessment of the potential of different floating solar technologies—overview and analysis of different case studies. Energy Convers. Manag.211, 112747 (2020).

    Google Scholar

  56. Dörenkämper, M. et al. The cooling effect of floating PV in two different climate zones: a comparison of field test data from the netherlands and singapore. Sol. Energy 219, 15–23 (2021).

    Google Scholar

  57. Arnold, W., Salazar, J. Z., Carlino, A., Giuliani, M. & Castelletti, A. Operations eclipse sequencing in multipurpose dam planning. Earths Future 11, e2022EF003186 (2023).

    Google Scholar

  58. PVGIS 5.2 (2022). EU Science Hub. European Commission Joint Research Centrehttps://re.jrc.ec.europa.eu/pvg_tools/en/ (2023).

  59. Giuliani, M., Castelletti, A., Pianosi, F., Mason, E. & Reed, P. M. Curses, tradeoffs, and scalable management: advancing evolutionary multiobjective direct policy search to improve water reservoir operations. J. Water Resour. Plan. Manag. 142, 04015050 (2016).

    Google Scholar

  60. Data and code in support of ‘Floating PV reduces risks of hydro-dominated energy development in Africa’. Zenodo https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.10576226 (2024).

  61. CORDEX Africa. Climate System Analysis Group http://www.csag.uct.ac.za/cordex-africa/(2013).

  62. Data in support of ‘Declining cost of renewables and climate change curb the need for African hydropower expansion’. Zenodo https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.7931050(2023).

  63. First release of ZambeziWatercourse_GCAM code. Zenodohttps://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.5726941 (2021).

  64. ZRB-PowNet. GitHub https://github.com/EILab-Polimi/ZRB-PowNet (2024).

Pledge Your Vote Now
Change language