Foundations of Business Computing - Business Solar Power Solutions - Example

Name of student Student number Date Version number Student Declaration: Executive Summary It is estimated by NASA that 174 Petawatts of solar energy hit the surface of the earth every single day (Kirkland 2010). About 30 percent of this value goes back to space after reflection while a considerable amount is absorbed by the atmosphere (Lomborg 2001). Solar panels are a way of harnessing this energy to be used as a source of electricity. This report analyzes 9 different types of solar panels available in the market with the intention of determining the best option. Fusion catcha turned out to be the best alternative with reference to all 3 parameters of analysis; efficiency, gross returns per year and greenhouse gas reductions. It is however the most expensive. Table of Contents Table of Contents 3 Introduction 1 Discussion 1 Methodology 1 Analysis 2 Price and Gross Return Per year 2 Overall score based on all variables and parameters 3 Overall Score based on Greenhouse Gas Reductions alone 3 Overall Score based on Efficiency alone 4 Overall Score with Greenhouse Gas reductions weighted 3 times 5 Conclusions and Recommendation 6 Conclusion 6 Recommendations 6 References 7 Introduction The use of renewable resources has become rampant in various institutions across the globe (Glenn & Gordon 2002). This could be due to the costs associated with alternative solutions. Learning institutions, small and big businesses have resorted to less use of electricity as a source of energy and embarked on solar power; a more pocket friendly alternative (Parker 2011). CQ University is one of the institutions not left behind in this solar power buzz. The University is currently embarked on a mission to install solar panels on the roofs of all the buildings in the institution. With the solar power buzz in place, various electronic companies have come up with different types of solar panels that facilitate the tapping of this precious source of energy (Business Solar Power Solutions 2012). These come in different shapes sizes and specifications (O'Silliven 2009). Some of these solar panels are very efficient while others are not worth the cause of replacing electricity (Consumer's guide to buying a solar power system 2011). The major types of solar panels available in the market include Sharp E350, Fusion Catcha, SolarLife AB200, Proto-Panel Red-UV, Wang Solar W100, Full Sun 33, Mr. Solar EKS, NanoSolar 10 Stripe, MegaSol 10000 and SolarMax 200. Manufacturers of solar panels have tried in their capacity to deliver products with different characteristics and output (Qurashi & Hussai 2005). The management of CQ University is not aware of the best solar panel to invest in, just like many other institutions. The purpose of this report is to analyze at length, the mentioned types of solar panels and discuss the pros and cons of all of them; thereby advising the management of CQ University on the best alternative to embark on. This analysis is important because all variables of these solar panels will be analyzed in detail for referral by the management at any time. Discussion Methodology Sharp E350, Fusion Catcha, SolarLife AB200, Proto-Panel Red-UV, Wang Solar W100, Full Sun 33, Mr. Solar EKS, NanoSolar 10 Stripe, MegaSol 10000 and SolarMax 200 are the solar panels investigated in this report. Various variables were measured in each solar panel, and recorded. These are Length (mm), Width (mm), Price ($) and output capacity. The values obtained were used to calculate the Area (sqM), Efficiency (%), Electricity Generated (KW/Year), Gross Return per Year (%), Value of Electricity Generated ($/Year), Greenhouse Gas Reductions (Tons/Year) and the Overall Score. The formulae used for these calculations are as below: The calculations for these items are as follows: 1. Area (sqM) = Length (mm) * Width (mm) / 1,000,000 2. Efficiency (%) = Output Capacity (W) / (1000 * Area (sqM)) 3. Electricity Generated (KW/Year) = Output Capacity (W) * Number Days in Year * Average Sunlight per Day / 1,000 4. Gross Return per Year (%) = Value of Electricity Generated ($/Year) / Price ($) 5. Value of Electricity Generated ($/Year) = Electricity Generated (KW/Year) * Price of Electricity ($/KWh) 6. Greenhouse Gas Reductions (Tons/Year) = Electricity Generated (KW/Year) / (1000 * Greenhouse Reduction Factor) 7. Overall Score = (1 x Efficiency (%) / Maximum Efficiency (%) for all Solar Panels analysed + 1 x Greenhouse Gas Reductions (Tons/Year) / Maximum Greenhouse Gas Reductions (Tons/Year) for all Solar Panels analysed + 1 x Gross Return per Year (%) / Maximum Gross Return per Year (%) for all Solar Panels analysed) * 10 Analysis Price and Gross Return Per year Each solar panel cost differently. The price is set by the manufacturers; hence it is not in order to rush for the cheapest in order to cut on costs. Cheap is always expensive. An analysis of price against the gross return per year shall be achieved. A gross return per year is a measure of the percentage of the initial price of the solar panel that will be gained every year. Since the gross return per year was already calculated for each type of solar panel, a simple line graph is plotted to ease the analysis. This is shown below. The x-axis contains the list of different types of solar panels, the y-axis is the price of the solar panels and the secondary axis shows the gross return per year. Fig 1.0 Simple line graph comparing the price and the gross return per year From the graph, it is easy to observe that the greatest gross return per year is realized with Mr. Solar EKS and SolarLife AB200 solar panels. 64% of cost of each of the two solar panels would be recovered by the management within a year. This implies that in 2 years, more than the cost of the solar panel will be realized. These two types of solar panels are also among the cheapest in that category. Fusion Catcha solar panel is the most expensive as observed in the chart above. Its gross return per year is not encouraging if the two are compared. If it is so important that the solar panel chosen returns a significant value of its price after a given duration, then the best option would be Mr. Solar EKS and SolarLife AB200. Overall score based on all variables and parameters The overall score is calculated using all the parameters. These are efficiency, greenhouse gas reductions and gross returns per year using the formula: Overall Score = (1 x Efficiency (%) / Maximum Efficiency (%) for all Solar Panels analysed + 1 x Greenhouse Gas Reductions (Tons/Year) / Maximum Greenhouse Gas Reductions (Tons/Year) for all Solar Panels analysed + 1 x Gross Return per Year (%) / Maximum Gross Return per Year (%) for all Solar Panels analysed) * 10 Based on this criterion, a pie chart showing the overall scores of all solar panels is as shown below. Fig 2.0 Overall score From the simple line graph, Fusion Catcha is the best solar panel to be used if efficiency, gross returns per year and greenhouse gas reductions are all taken into consideration. It has an overall score of 21.94. It is also the most expensive solar panel with a price of $4950. The second best solar panel based on all the 3 variables is SolarLife AB200 with a score of 14.77. SolarLife AB200 is much cheaper compared to Fusion Catch. It costs only $120. Overall Score based on Greenhouse Gas Reductions alone Suppose the overall score was determined using Greenhouse Gas reductions alone. This would reduce the formula for overall score to the one shown below: Overall Score = (1 x Greenhouse Gas Reductions (Tons/Year) / Maximum Greenhouse Gas Reductions (Tons/Year) for all Solar Panels analyzed) * 10 A pie chart to illustrate the outcome is shown below: Fig 2.0 Overall score with Greenhouse gas alone It is noted from the simple line graph that Fusion Catcha is still the best when efficiency and gross returns per year are both eliminated from determination of the overall score. This means that if all the solar panels are compared based on their ability to reduce greenhouse gasses, Fusion Catcha will be the best. MegaSol 10000 will be the second best alternative if importance is emphasized on greenhouse gas reduction. MegaSol 10000 is relatively cheaper than Fusion Catcha. Overall Score based on Efficiency alone Suppose the overall score was determined using efficiency alone. This would reduce the formula for overall score to the one shown below: Overall Score = (1 x Efficiency (%) / Maximum Efficiency (%) for all Solar Panels analyzed) * 10 A pie chart to illustrate this outcome is shown below: If efficiency is the only important factor, Fusion Catcha would be the best alternative. Overall Score with Greenhouse Gas reductions weighted 3 times If more wait is given to green house gas reductions alone (3 times), the formula for the overall score would be change so: Overall Score = (1 x Efficiency (%) / Maximum Efficiency (%) for all Solar Panels analysed + 3 x Greenhouse Gas Reductions (Tons/Year) / Maximum Greenhouse Gas Reductions (Tons/Year) for all Solar Panels analysed + 1 x Gross Return per Year (%) / Maximum Gross Return per Year (%) for all Solar Panels analysed) * 10 The chart generated out of this new development is as shown in the figure below. Fusion Catcha will be the best alternative if greenhouse gas reduction is weighted 3 times. The second best alternative in this case is MegaSol 10000. Conclusions and Recommendation Conclusion The following conclusions are drawn from this analysis: Fusion Catcha is the best solar panel to be used if efficiency, gross returns per year and greenhouse gas reductions are all taken into consideration. Mr. Solar EKS and SolarLife AB200 are the best alternatives if it is important that the money spent on the solar panel is ploughed back after a given period of time. Fusion Catcha is the best alternative when efficiency and gross returns per year are both eliminated from determination of the overall score. This outcome is achieved when the calculation is based on the solar panels compared based on their ability to reduce greenhouse gasses. If efficiency is the only important factor, Fusion Catcha would be the best alternative. Fusion Catcha will be the best alternative if greenhouse gas reduction is weighted 3 times. The second best alternative in this case is MegaSol 10000. Recommendations It is recommended that the management of CQ University settle for Fusion Catcha solar panel. This is because it is the solar panel that gives desirable satisfaction in terms of efficiency, greenhouse gas reduction and gross returns per year. It is however the most expensive of all the 9 solar panels analyzed. The management of CQ University is able to afford it; hence eliminating issues of cost. References Business Solar Power Solutions [Online]. Available: http://www.theecoexperts.co.uk/business-solar-power-solutions [Accessed 12 Mar. 2012]. Consumer's guide to buying a solar power system and choosing a solar installer. Energy matters [Online]. Available: http://www.energymatters.com.au/renewable-energy/solar-power/solar-consumer-guide.php [Accessed 12 Mar. 2012]. Glenn, J. & Gordon, T. Creating a better world: 15 global challenges. Foresight, 4. Kirkland, G. 2010. Solar Panels for sale. [Online]. Available: http://www.articlesbase.com/computers-articles/solar-panels-for-sale-3589675.html [Accessed 12 Mar. 2012]. Lomborg, J. 2001. The Skeptical Environmentalist: Measuring the Real State of the World, Cambridge, Cambridge University press. O'silliven, A. 2009. DIY Solar Panel - Complete Analysis on Home Solar Power Systems [Online]. Available: http://www.prlog.org/10295698-diy-solar-panel-complete-analysis-on-home-solar-power-s ystems.html [Accessed 12 Mar. 2012]. Parker, H. 2011. The Cost-Benefit Analysis of Solar Power Residential Use [Online]. Available: http://www.solarpowerbuzzmedia.com/2011/04/cost-benefit-analysis-of-solar-power.html [Accessed 12 Mar. 2012]. Qurashi, M. & Hussai, T. 2005. Renewable Energy Technologies for Developing Countries. Islamic Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization [Online]. Available: http://www.isesco.org.ma/english/publications/Renewable%20Energy%20Technologies/Renewable.pdf [Accessed 12 Mar. 2012]. Read More