TY - JOUR
T1 - Sowing Watts, Reaping Sustainability: Multi-Dimensional Performance of Agrivoltaic Electric Vehicle Charging Systems
AU - Goh, Hui Hwang
AU - Huang, Changhe
AU - Yew, Weng Kean
AU - Xie, Haonan
AU - Zhang, Dongdong
AU - Dai, Wei
AU - Kurniawan, Tonni Agustiono
AU - Pang, Wai Leong
AU - Vaithilingam, Chockalingam Aravind
AU - Phang, Swee King
PY - 2025/12
Y1 - 2025/12
N2 - The transportation sector accounts for a significant portion of global energy consumption and emits substantial greenhouse gas (GHG). Utilizing photovoltaic (PV) charging facilities to power electric vehicles offers a viable pathway for decarbonizing transportation from both supply and demand perspectives. However, the expansion of PV installations has led to conflicts over agricultural land use. Agricultural photovoltaic charging facility (APCF) presents a solution to these challenges, yet there is currently a lack of lifecycle assessments evaluating their energy, environmental, and economic performance to demonstrate their sustainability potential. This study evaluates six types of APCF by employing cumulative energy demand, global warming potential, and techno-economic approaches, with PV charging facilities as a comparative baseline to demonstrate their value relative to the reference system. The results indicate: (1) The systems with the highest energy return on investment, GHG emissions, and net income are Full-panel Density (FD) + Level 2 charger (L2), FD + Direct Current charger (DC), and Single-axis Tracking (Axis) + L2, respectively. However, based on comprehensive ranking, the Axis + L2 emerges as the optimal configuration. (2) Fossil fuel consumption constitutes a significant share of both energy input and GHG emissions. The PV system's impact on energy, environment, and economics outweighs that of the agricultural and charging components. DC equipment underperforms L2 equipment across energy, environmental, and economic metrics. (3) The impact of electricity prices on the energy performance of APCF and the influence of APCFs on terrestrial organisms within ecosystems are more pronounced. Although all six APCF configurations surpassed their respective baseline systems in terms of overall indicators representing both environmental and economic performance, their energy return on investment was not as high as that of the baseline systems. This highlights the potential for APCF to enhance its performance through technological advancements.
AB - The transportation sector accounts for a significant portion of global energy consumption and emits substantial greenhouse gas (GHG). Utilizing photovoltaic (PV) charging facilities to power electric vehicles offers a viable pathway for decarbonizing transportation from both supply and demand perspectives. However, the expansion of PV installations has led to conflicts over agricultural land use. Agricultural photovoltaic charging facility (APCF) presents a solution to these challenges, yet there is currently a lack of lifecycle assessments evaluating their energy, environmental, and economic performance to demonstrate their sustainability potential. This study evaluates six types of APCF by employing cumulative energy demand, global warming potential, and techno-economic approaches, with PV charging facilities as a comparative baseline to demonstrate their value relative to the reference system. The results indicate: (1) The systems with the highest energy return on investment, GHG emissions, and net income are Full-panel Density (FD) + Level 2 charger (L2), FD + Direct Current charger (DC), and Single-axis Tracking (Axis) + L2, respectively. However, based on comprehensive ranking, the Axis + L2 emerges as the optimal configuration. (2) Fossil fuel consumption constitutes a significant share of both energy input and GHG emissions. The PV system's impact on energy, environment, and economics outweighs that of the agricultural and charging components. DC equipment underperforms L2 equipment across energy, environmental, and economic metrics. (3) The impact of electricity prices on the energy performance of APCF and the influence of APCFs on terrestrial organisms within ecosystems are more pronounced. Although all six APCF configurations surpassed their respective baseline systems in terms of overall indicators representing both environmental and economic performance, their energy return on investment was not as high as that of the baseline systems. This highlights the potential for APCF to enhance its performance through technological advancements.
KW - Agricultural photovoltaic charging facility
KW - Cumulative exergy demand
KW - Global warming potential
KW - Technical - economic analysis
KW - Life cycle assessment
UR - https://www.scopus.com/pages/publications/105020377134
U2 - 10.1016/j.psep.2025.108053
DO - 10.1016/j.psep.2025.108053
M3 - Article
SN - 0957-5820
VL - 204
JO - Process Safety and Environmental Protection
JF - Process Safety and Environmental Protection
M1 - 108053
ER -
