Journal of Cleaner Production 209 (2019) 692e721
Contents lists available at ScienceDirect
Journal of Cleaner Production
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/jclepro
Review
Spatial assessment of solar energy potential at global scale. A
geographical approach
va
lie a, Cristian Patriche b, Georgeta Bandoc a, c, *
Remus Pra
lcescu str., 010041, Bucharest,
University of Bucharest, Faculty of Geography, Center for Coastal Research and Environmental Protection, 1 Nicolae Ba
Romania
b
Romanian Academy, Iaşi Division, Geography Department, 8 Carol I str., 700505, Iaşi, Romania
c
Academy of Romanian Scientists, 54 Splaiul Independenţei str., Bucharest, Romania
a
a r t i c l e i n f o
a b s t r a c t
Article history:
Received 10 March 2018
Received in revised form
25 September 2018
Accepted 22 October 2018
Available online 2 November 2018
Solar energy is a key renewable source for decarbonization and the future sustainable development of
human society. However, the success of the worldwide governments in the large-scale implementation
of solar technologies largely depends on the in-depth knowledge of global solar radiation distribution
and intensity levels, which is a difficult endeavour due to the fact that up-to-date global-scale information is generally limited. This study primarily aims to analyse solar radiation distribution and intensity
globally, continentally (all continents, except for Antarctica) and nationally (194 countries), based on the
global horizontal irradiation (GHI) and direct normal irradiation (DNI) data, released at the best spatial
resolution currently available in reliable international databases. By means of a statistical analysis of
seven potential classes, delimited based on established geostatistical methods, the results showed that,
globally, there are 6 major GHI hotspots (western South America, northern, eastern and southwestern
Africa, the Arabian Peninsula and Australia), with annual values of >2200 kWh/m2, and 6 other welldefined DNI hotspots (southwestern North America, western South America, southwestern Africa,
northwestern Arabian Peninsula, Tibetan Plateau and Australia), with values of >2500 kWh/m2. These
regions, with the most intense solar radiation values, assigned to the seventh potential class (superb) of
the two parameters, comprise most of the total global GHI (~15 mil km2, 10% of the world's land area) and
DNI (~8 mil km2, 5%) superb class areas. Continentally, Africa holds the most considerable GHI solar
resources (almost 10 mil km2 of the superb class, approximately one third of the continental area), while
Australia holds the most abundant DNI resources (~4 mil km2, ~50%). Nationally, there are 12 epicentre
countries for GHI, considering at least 50% superb potential threshold within national limits (9 in Africa
e Namibia, 96%, Sudan, 86%, Niger, 84%, Egypt, 77%, Western Sahara, 72%, Chad, 69%, Eritrea, 58%, Libya,
56%, and Djibouti, 52%, and 3 in Asia e Oman, 92%, Yemen, 87%, and Saudi Arabia, 74%), while for DNI
only 3 countries reach this percentual threshold of the maximum solar potential (Namibia, 77%, Jordan,
53%, and Australia, 51%). Our results suggest these epicentre countries (as well as others with extensive
absolute GHI and DNI superb class areas, such as the US, Mexico, Chile, Peru, Bolivia, Argentina and
China) are among the most favourable for the large-scale installation of photovoltaic and concentrating
solar power systems, which are currently the most important technologies used in solar energy
production.
© 2018 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Keywords:
Solar energy
Global horizontal irradiation
Direct normal irradiation
Solar resources
Photovoltaic systems
Concentrating solar power systems
Global analysis
Contents
1.
2.
Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 693
Data and methodology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 694
2.1.
Solar data collection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 694
* Corresponding author. University of Bucharest, Faculty of Geography, Center for Coastal Research and Environmental Protection, 1 Nicolae B
alcescu str., 010041, Bucharest,
Romania.
E-mail addresses: pravalie_remus@yahoo.com (R. Pr
av
alie), pvcristi@yahoo.com (C. Patriche), geobandoc@yahoo.com (G. Bandoc).
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.10.239
0959-6526/© 2018 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
va
lie et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 209 (2019) 692e721
R. Pra
3.
4.
693
2.2.
Solar data processing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 695
Results and discussions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 695
3.1.
Solar energy potential in the global context . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 695
3.2.
Solar energy potential in the continental context . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 697
3.2.1.
North and Central America . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 697
3.2.2.
South America . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 702
3.2.3.
Europe . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 705
3.2.4.
Africa . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 714
3.2.5.
Asia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 715
3.2.6.
Australia and Oceania . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 717
Conclusions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 718
Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 719
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 719
1. Introduction
More than two hundred years ago, energy became essential for
the development of humanity, and currently is a vital element that
influences human society in terms of sustainable socio-economic
development, food production, poverty eradication, health, peace
and security. The global energy consumption has grown constantly
since the Industrial Revolution and the trend is likely to continue at
least throughout the following decades. The world net electricity
generation is expected to reach ~26 trillion kWh (kilowatthours) in
2020 and almost 37 trillion kWh in 2040, compared to ~22 trillion
kWh in 2012 (IEO, 2016). A possible doubling of electricity needs by
2050 would be a major environmental challenge if future energy
technologies still rely heavily on fossil fuels.
Currently, a major problem of the global energy system is the
large prevalence of conventional energy sources, which are at the
origin of numerous global environmental issues. Climate change is
one of these issues, which, out of a wider range of environmental
perturbations with global repercussions, is probably the most
serious threat to the planet's ecological and anthropogenic systems
€ m et al., 2009). It is unanimously accepted that the source
(Rockstro
of this environmental issue and of other collateral ones consists of
carbon emissions (Davis et al., 2010; IPCC, 2013; Abram et al., 2016;
Rogelj et al., 2016; Millar et al., 2017), as the energy sector still relies
mostly (~80%) on fossil fuels (Don MacElroy, 2016), despite the
extensive international efforts to fight climate change and the
various technological advancements of the past decades.
Given this context, renewable energies are considered a highly
promising opportunity for worldwide decarbonization and sustainable development (Resch et al., 2008). They can be a major
pathway towards solving the so-called “world energy trilemma”,
one of the major current challenges of humanity that consists of
difficulties in reaching energy security, equity and environmental
sustainability (Bale et al., 2015). However, an efficient transition to a
secure, affordable and low-carbon energy system entails a complex
systemic approach based, for instance, on complexity science and
its associated modelling methods (Bale et al., 2015), which have
also proven useful in improving various other aspects of human
society (Helbing et al., 2015), or on energy saving mechanism
principles, which can be useful for understanding energy conservation in various environmental systems (Trenchard and Perc,
2016).
The share of renewable energies in the global energy production
has constantly grown over the past decade, and it is estimated that,
at the end of 2016, all renewables (hydro, wind, solar, bio and
geothermal power capacities) comprised ~30% (~2000 GW) of the
world's power installed capacity, and generated almost 25% of
global electricity, estimated at 24816 TWh (BPSRWE, 2017; REN,
2017). Even without the hydropower sector, the renewable power
capacity totals almost 1000 GW globally. However, its contribution
to global electricity production remains relatively low e ~8% in
2016 (REN, 2017). In the following decades, renewables will be
essential for reaching the objectives of the 2015 Paris Agreement.
However, in order for these low-carbon technologies to have a real
effect in stabilizing global warming bellow 2 C (compared to preindustrial levels), complex strategies are necessary for a rapid
€ m et al., 2017). For instance,
world decarbonization (Rockstro
reaching the 2 C climate goal will require renewables to reach a
share of over 50% of the worldwide electricity generation in 2040,
most of which is expected to be generated by wind and solar
photovoltaic systems, after the hydropower sector (IEO, 2016).
Solar technologies are therefore extremely important for shifting to a carbon-free global economy in the near future. In the
renewable energy sector, these technologies have had a particularly
forceful evolution, considering their 30% annual growth over the
past 30 years (Trancik, 2014). This was mainly due to the substantial
decrease in installation costs e e.g. ~10%/year over the past three
decades for photovoltaic modules, which are now estimated to be a
hundred times cheaper than in 1975 (Trancik, 2014). At the same
time, in the past decades, a mean overall reduction of 22.5% was
recorded in module costs for each doubling in installed PV capacity
(Creutzig et al., 2017). The reasons behind this evolution consist in
installation design improvement, higher energy efficiency and the
knowledge gained in building, installing and integrating this
technology in national energy infrastructures (Trancik, 2014; Chu
and Majumdar, 2012).
According to the most recent data, at the end of 2016, solar
power (electricity) systems, consisting of photovoltaics (PV),
concentrating solar thermal power (CSP) plants and concentrating
photovoltaic (CPV) technology, had a global installed capacity of
308 GW (roughly a third of renewables, excluding hydropower), of
which PV systems totalled by far the largest share, i.e. 98% (303 GW)
(REN, 2017). However, according to the same source, the solar PV
technology produced only 1.5% of global electricity, despite the
numerous advantages that arguably make this clean energy the
best renewable solution for the world's future energy needs. The
advantages consist in the high abundance of solar energy in vast
regions of the planet, its inexhaustibility nature, minimal negative
impact on ecosystems, easy industrial- or local-scale applicability
(villages and homes) or the highest power density among the
rez
renewable sources (Kannan and Vakeesan, 2016; Capell
an-Pe
et al., 2017). For instance, given the availability of solar energy, it
was suggested that the solar energy that reaches the Earth's
terrestrial surface in only 1 h is enough to cover a year's entire
global energy consumption (Lewis, 2007; IEA, 2011).
There are also other strengths of this energy technology. For
694
va
lie et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 209 (2019) 692e721
R. Pra
instance, recent studies showed that in the US alone this renewable
source determined air-quality/climate cumulative benefits of up to
US$ 4.9/8.3 billion between 2007 and 2015, by using large-scale
solar power and avoiding the emission of important air pollutants
and greenhouse gases (Millstein et al., 2017). Considering these
positive aspects, in addition to the previously mentioned ones, it is
surprising that some climate scenarios and assessments underestimated the role of solar (PV) systems in climate change mitigation, compared to other low-carbon technologies, like bioenergy
and carbon capture and storage systems (Creutzig et al., 2017).
However, there are also certain disadvantages to solar energy. In
addition to its intermittent nature, a major drawback resides in the
relatively low efficiency of PV systems in terms of sunlight-toelectricity conversion (10e20% in most cases), although solar
panels (based on perovskite solar cells) are available with an efficiency of up to 25.5% (Kabir et al., 2018). At the same time, the
installation of large-scale PV systems can be a problem due to the
removal of large areas of land use e generally ~4 acres (~1.6 ha) of
land for each MW installed capacity (Kabir et al., 2018). An increase
in competition for land is therefore foreseeable globally, which will
also be enhanced in the coming decades especially by other vectors
such as the expansion of agricultural land (Haberl, 2015), given the
expected increase in global demand for crop production by up to
100% by 2050, when the world population will reach at least 9
billion people (Godfray et al., 2010; Tilman et al., 2011).
However, considering its multiple advantages (which can be
considered far superior to the presented disadvantages), solar energy can be a major strategic resource for meeting this century's
increasing world energy demands, as a result of world population
(Bongaarts, 2009) and economic-industrial growth (OECD, 2012).
However, the success of a widespread, fast and efficient development of solar technologies in the following decades largely depends on the sound understanding of two environmental key
variables, i.e. the distribution and intensity of solar radiation. In
other words, to ensure the viability of the major upcoming projects
based on PV (solar technologies that use cells to convert sunlight
directly into electricity) and CSP (solar systems that use reflective
surfaces, such as parabolic mirrors, to concentrate sunlight to heat a
receiver, which subsequently transforms heat into electricity via a
thermoelectric power system), which currently are the dominant
solar technologies, it is vital they be developed in regions with a
high availability of solar resources. Acknowledging this spatial information on global, regional or local scales has various implications technologically (selection of the appropriate solar
installations), socio-economically (viability assessment for solar
projects in relation to proximity to demand) and financially (possibility to recover investments in solar projects) (Zell et al., 2015). In
a broader context of international policies, the assessment and
mapping of solar energy (or of other types of renewable energy)
represent a means for countries to meet the United Nations (UN)
Sustainable Development Goal 7, which aims to ensure universal
access to affordable, reliable, sustainable and modern energies by
2030 (ESMAP, 2016).
This review paper primarily aims to assess the distribution and
intensity of solar radiation on three spatial scales e global, continental and national (for all countries), based on recent high resolution spatial climate data available at global scale. Secondly, in
addition to the thorough analysis of global solar radiation resources, based on mapping and detailed statistical solar potential
data, this work also aims to briefly assess the current status of use
(through highlighting the implementation of solar systems
installed capacity) and necessity (assessed in relation to electricity
needs) of solar energy in different global areas, especially in those
our study categorized as high radiation potential regions. Thirdly,
this review attempts to capture the importance of solar
technologies for the future decarbonization of countries worldwide, especially for those that hold significant or abundant solar
resources, but which still account for considerable carbon emissions. Regarding the study's first objective (the most important), to
our knowledge, this is the first attempt to quantitatively assess
global, continental and national solar resources by means of a
detailed statistical analysis of different classes of solar potential,
delimited in our study based on spatial data obtained for two parameters e global horizontal irradiation and direct normal irradiation, recently released in reliable international databases.
2. Data and methodology
2.1. Solar data collection
In order to analyse global solar resources geographically, two
classic and representative parameters were used, i.e. global horizontal irradiation (GHI) and direct normal irradiation (DNI). The
spatial data (raster) for the two parameters were obtained from the
Global Solar Atlas, which is considered to be the most reliable
source of solar data currently available at global scale (http://
globalsolaratlas.info/). The GHI and DNI values from this online
database, financed by the World Bank Group through the Energy
Sector Management Assistance Program (ESMAP), were made
freely available in 2017 in order to support solar power systems
development in the world in certain key phases such as exploration, prospection, site selection and pre-feasibility evaluation
(http://globalsolaratlas.info/). Therefore, in upcoming years, for a
final feasibility assessment of solar projects, a validation of solar
radiation resources with ground-based measurements is expected,
which will further strengthen the solar data's reliability for various
users all around the world.
GHI (kWh/m2), computed as the sum of direct and diffuse solar
radiation, is considered relevant for assessing energy generation for
PV/flat-plate photovoltaics technologies (as well as for another
Sun-emitted energy capture vector, i.e. solar heating technologies,
such as hot water systems), while DNI (kWh/m2), which is the solar
radiation that reaches the Earth's surface directly, is important for
the development of CSP and CPV systems. Both data categories
were processed by means of a solar radiation model (1-km spatial
resolution) based on meteorological models and geostationary
satellites. In the first instance, a clear-sky model was developed
(clear-sky irradiance under the assumption of no cloud cover) that
considered the Sun's position, aerosol concentration, water vapor
content, and ozone. In the second instance, the effect of clouds on
irradiance was analysed by computing a cloud index using a
network of three geostationary satellites e EUMETSAT, Japanese
Meteorological Agency, and National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration. The two models were subsequently coupled in
order to obtain real sky irradiance values. For obtaining the GHI and
DNI, these values were subsequently processed using other models
that also took the effect of terrain shading on solar irradiation into
account (http://globalsolaratlas.info/).
The GHI and DNI values have worldwide geographical coverage
(global areas between latitudes 60 N to 45 S), except for polar and
subpolar regions (located to the north or to the south of the
aforementioned coordinates), where it was not possible to correctly
assess the cloud cover using satellite images. In terms of temporal
coverage, while the GHI and DNI values are representative for the
interval 1994e2015, they do not cover the same time periods for all
regions, as a result of different satellite data time coverage. The GHI
and DNI therefore cover the period 1994e2015 in Europe and Africa, 1999e2015 in North America, South America and partially Asia
(approx. up to 100 E longitude), and 2007e2015 in eastern Asia
(beyond 100 E longitude), Australia and Oceania, respectively
va
lie et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 209 (2019) 692e721
R. Pra
(http://globalsolaratlas.info/).
2.2. Solar data processing
The analysis of solar resource distribution and intensity,
assessed using the GHI and DNI, was conducted in two major
phases, i.e. delimitation and mapping of the two parameters
grouped in seven classes of solar potential, and the statistical
extraction of the areas covered by the delimited classes. In the first
phase, the daily values of the GHI and DNI were converted to annual
values (by multiplying raster values by 365.25), which are more
suggestive, and then grouped into seven potential classes, using the
natural breaks criterion. The natural breaks (or Jenks) method is an
iterative statistical classification of data aiming to minimize the
variance within classes (Jenks and Caspall, 1971; Jenks, 1977). The
method classifies by grouping similar values while maximizing the
differences between classes. Firstly, random class breaks are
generated, after which the boundary zone values are systematically
assigned to adjacent classes by adjusting class boundaries. The
process is repeated until the variance within a given class is as small
as possible, while the variance between classes is as large as
possible (de Smith et al., 2015). The Jenks method generates good
results especially when the histogram shows evident breaks, as is
the case with our data. Also, when there are no predefined,
scientifically-based classifications, which is the case of the radiation fluxes analysed in our study, the natural breaks algorithm may
be the best solution for generating an objective classification of data
lie et al., 2017a,b).
(Pr
ava
Therefore, this method was chosen due to the fact that we did
not find any general classification of solar potential in the international scientific literature that would describe solar radiation
intensity as, for instance, low, average or high in a given territory.
We chose to group the data into seven potential classes, instead of
three, for instance (low, average, high potential), as we considered
that a higher number of classes is more useful for an accurate
assessment of solar resources, which is necessary for the implementation of certain key-phases (exploration, prospection, site
selection and pre-feasibility evaluation) in the global, regional or
local development of future solar applications. For choosing and
naming the seven solar potential classes, we partially based our
approach on the methodology for analysing wind resources
developed by the National Renewable Energy Laboratory, which
proposes the assessment of a given territory's wind potential based
on seven classes (framed within clearly-defined numerical ranges),
named poor, marginal, fair, good, excellent, outstanding and superb
(http://rredc.nrel.gov/wind/pubs/atlas/). In other terms, our study's
classes, delimited according to the Jenks criterion, correspond to
insignificant, very low, low, average, high, very high and maximum
solar potential.
In the second phase, the absolute areas (in km2) and percentages (%) of the seven classes were extracted globally, continentally
and nationally using the equal-area Mollweide projection (Central
Meridian: 0.00). The vector data of global, continental and national
polygons were obtained at high spatial resolution from the Natural
Earth platform data (http://www.naturalearthdata.com/). In terms
of countries, the entire analysis covered the 193 UN member states,
except for Iceland and Finland, which are entirely located beyond
60 N latitude, where no solar data were available (countries that
are partially located beyond 60 N and 45 S latitudes were integrated in our analysis). At the same time, in addition to the
remaining 191 UN member states, our analysis also included other
three states with different UN status, i.e. Kosovo (member of two
UN specialized agencies), in Europe, and Palestine (UN observer
state) and Taiwan (observer in one UN specialized agency), in Asia,
695
so the study assessed solar energy resources for a total of 194 states
of the world.
Considering the immense global area totalled by the 194
countries (which exceeds 130 mil km2), our study only tackled the
analysis of the entire area covered by potential classes on global/
continental/national scales, without considering the specific
geographical constraints that could limit solar installation development spatially, in various restrictive environmental conditions.
In other words, we considered the total land area covered by the
seven potential classes, and not the total amount of land area
available for solar applications (which could in fact be significantly
lower), which defines a specific potential category, i.e. geographical
potential (this type of potential can also be used for the analysis of
other renewable sources, e.g. wind) (Mentis et al., 2015). This
possible objective would have been extremely difficult to undertake given the global scale in question, as it would have been almost
impossible to acquire all the geographical variable data needed for
delimiting the concrete geographical potential. As such, we believe
the assessed solar potential can essentially be considered a
geographical potential, but in a broad sense, and can help analyse
the general picture of solar radiation distribution and intensity
resources across the globe.
3. Results and discussions
3.1. Solar energy potential in the global context
Based on delimiting and mapping solar potential classes, it can
be noticed that extensive global areas have high solar resources
(Fig. 1), as excellent, outstanding and superb potential classes
(>1800 kWh/m2) total almost 60 mil km2 (~40% of the total Earth
land area of ~147 mil km2) for GHI, and ~40 mil km2 (almost 30%)
for DNI (Fig. 2). The superb class is considered the most important
and covers extensive areas that total 15 mil km2 (10%) for GHI
(values over 2200 kWh/m2) and 8 mil km2 (5%) for DNI
(>2500 kWh/m2) (Figs. 1 and 2). Upon analysis of the homogenous
spatial distribution of this maximum solar potential class, it can be
noticed that there are 6 major global hotspots for GHI (western
coast of South America, northern, eastern and southwestern Africa,
Arabian Peninsula and Australia) and DNI (southwestern North
America, western South America, southwestern Africa, northwestern Arabian Peninsula, Tibetan Plateau and Australia) (Fig. 1).
Continentally, Africa has by far the highest solar resources
(Fig. 1) in terms of absolute areas for GHI (~27 mil km2 of the total
excellent, outstanding and superb classes, or 90% of the continental
area) (Fig. 2a), while Australia is the first in terms of the area
expressed as percentage for both parameters (the three classes
cover the continent almost entirely) (Figs. 1 and 2). Considering
solely the maximum potential, Africa has the most intense solar
resources e almost 10 mil km2 (one third of the continent's area)
consist of highest solar energy potential, assessed using GHI
(Fig. 2a). The analysis of the same parameter revealed that Australia
and Asia are the next continents in terms of annual radiation flux,
as each of them comprises superb potential class areas that exceed
2 mil km2, equivalent to roughly a quarter of the same Africa's
potential (Fig. 2a). In terms of DNI, Australia has by far the most
substantial solar resources in the world (superb potential on almost
4 mil km2 exclusively for this continent, as this class is absent in
Oceania), and is followed by Africa (~1.5 mil km2) and North and
Central America (~1.4 mil km2) (Fig. 2b).
It can therefore be noticed that Africa is the most appropriate
continent for installing large-scale photovoltaic systems, while
Australia has the most favourable conditions for CSP systems.
However, the amplest industrial solar capacities are not located in
these global regions. Considering PV systems, which account for
va
lie et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 209 (2019) 692e721
R. Pra
696
Fig. 1. Global spatial representation of global horizontal irradiation (GHI) and direct normal irradiation (DNI).
Percentage of total area
Spatial units
0
Glob
North&Central America
South America
Europe
Africa
Asia
Australia&Oceania
10
20
Poor
Spatial units
40
50
Marginal
Fair
Good
30
40
50
Marginal
Fair
Good
60
70
80
90
Outstanding
Superb
100
116,853,085
16,842,830
17,186,731
7,317,931
30,055,347
36,925,772
8,524,474
0
Glob
North&Central America
South America
Europe
Africa
Asia
Australia&Oceania
30
10
20
Excellent
60
70
80
90
Outstanding
Superb
100
116,853,096
16,842,830
17,186,731
7,317,942
30,055,347
36,925,772
8,524,474
Poor
Excellent
Fig. 2. Percentage classes' extent of global horizontal irradiation (kWh/m2) (a) and direct normal irradiation (kWh/m2) (b) at global and continental level. Note: at global level and in
the cases of North and Central America, South America, Europe and Asia the percentage values were calculated based on the extracted absolute data for North and Central America,
Europe and Asia up to 60 N latitude, and South America down to 45 S; the absolute values on the left of the columns represent the total analysed global/continental area (in km2).
va
lie et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 209 (2019) 692e721
R. Pra
98% of the global installed solar electricity capacity (308 GW) in
2016 (REN, 2017), current detailed statistical data show that, in fact,
the solar potential assessed with GHI is the least used on this
continent (only ~2.5 GW installed capacity in 2016), after South
America (~2 GW) (IRENA, 2017). Asia is very far ahead in this
respect with ~140 GW PV capacity in 2017, and is followed by
Europe (over 100 GW), North and Central America (~37 GW), and
Australia and Oceania (~6 GW) (IRENA, 2017). This points to the fact
that major solar applications are mostly driven by various government policies around the world (Solangi et al., 2011; WEC,
2016). Regarding Africa, the low use of solar energy, despite the
massive available resources, is in close connection to a series of
shortcomings of national energy policies (which have blocked
numerous initiatives and solar projects launched years ago that
have yet to be finalized), as well as to weak legal frameworks, lack
of financing policies, poor transmission infrastructure or unclear
land rights (REN, 2017). To a considerable extent, this is also due to
the low continental electricity consumption e it is estimated that
the entire African continent produces 782 TWh (in 2016), which
only accounts for 3.2% of the total global electricity production
(BPSRWE, 2017).
In terms of countries, there are also major discrepancies between the maximum solar potential and the states with the most
developed solar energy industries. For instance, although China is
situated in a relatively low solar potential area in eastern Asia
(Fig. 1), it has by far the world's highest installed PV capacity
(almost 80 GW in 2016) (IRENA, 2017). This is also the case of Japan
(~42 GW) and Germany (~41 GW) (IRENA, 2017), which are the next
world leaders in terms of installed PV technologies, in spite of their
limited solar resources in eastern Asia and central Europe, respectively (Fig. 1). However, it is noteworthy that the next 7 countries in
this global energy hierarchy (United States, ~33 GW, Italy, ~19 GW,
United Kingdom, ~11 GW, India, ~10 GW, France, ~7 GW, Australia,
~6 GW, and Spain, ~5 GW) (IRENA, 2017) are located in regions that
generally have a favourable solar potential, except for France and
especially the United Kingdom (Figs. 3, 9, 15 and 18). These two
exceptions, alongside China, Japan and Germany, are however
explained by the high current electricity needs, which is specific to
these major global economies. For instance, China is the largest
electricity producer (and consumer) worldwide (totalling roughly
one quarter of the global electricity generation) (BPSRWE, 2017),
which is consistent with its global leader position in installed PV
capacity, despite its relatively limited GHI resources.
Regardless of the regional spatial discrepancies between
installed capacity and solar resources, it is important to note that
solar energy has a global dimension, as it is estimated that at the
end of 2016 at least 24 countries worldwide had installed at least
1 GW of PV capacity, or that at least 114 countries had over 10 MW
of PV capacity (REN, 2017). However, the extremely rapid development of this energy sector is what makes it particularly interesting. For instance, between 2010 and 2015, the global annual
growth rate of solar PV capacity exceeded the 40% threshold,
significantly more than non-solar renewable energy sources such
as wind (17%), geothermal power (3.7%) and hydropower (2.9%)
(REN, 2016). In fact, solar power is the fastest-growing energy
technology in the world (Devabhaktuni et al., 2013). In 2016 alone,
the global solar PV capacity grew by 75 GW (33%) compared to 2015
(when the installed capacity was estimated at 228 GW) (REN, 2017),
and reached 303 GW e an enormous progress compared to the year
2000, when the world's cumulative installed capacity was of only
1 GW (Huang et al., 2016). Approximately 85% of this new capacity
was installed in China (almost 35 GW, 46%), United States (~15 GW,
20%), Japan (~9 GW, 11%), India (~4 GW, 5%) and the United
Kingdom (2 GW, 3%) (REN, 2017). The remaining 15% of new PV
additions corresponds to over 100 countries, which in 2016
697
recorded different levels of growth compared to 2015 (IRENA,
2017). Even though two thirds of PV system growth occurred in
China and the United States alone, this trend is highly encouraging
for the decarbonization of these major world economies, which
have the largest contributions to global CO2 emissions e 29% China
re
et al., 2016).
and 15% the United States, in 2015 (Le Que
In the future, PV systems will most probably expand at the same
rate if political and financial initiatives continue to stimulate the
development of this renewable energy sector (Sampaio and
lez, 2017). There is however also hope for CSP systems.
Gonza
Even though the global CSP capacity currently only totals 5 GW
(80% of which is attributed to Spain e 2.3 GW, and the United States
e 1.7 GW) (REN, 2017), there are clear signs this solar power sector
will evolve in African countries such as Morocco and South Africa
(where there is an immense solar potential, shown by DNI) (Fig. 13),
or in Asian countries (e.g. China is planning a massive expansion of
this solar energy technology). China is already aiming to reach a
5 GW CSP growth over the next five years, ~1.4 GW of which by the
et al., 2017). However, despite the impressive
end of 2018 (Gauche
potential that could be used especially by countries located in
global DNI hotspots (Fig. 1), the implementation of CSP systems will
stay low compared to solar PV or to other renewable systems such
as wind power, due to certain inherent disadvantages (e.g. the
complicated nature of the technology, or higher installation costs)
et al., 2017).
(Gauche
3.2. Solar energy potential in the continental context
3.2.1. North and Central America
The analysis of spatial and numerical data indicates that the
United States (US) and Mexico have the most intense solar resources on this vast continent that stretches over ~24 mil km2, and
comprises 23 UN member states. Regarding the GHI, Mexico has the
highest solar energy potential, both in terms of area (over 1.8 mil
km2 of excellent, outstanding and superb classes, compared to less
than 1.7 mil km2 in the US, the second position) and intensity
(almost 300000 km2 exposed to peak GHI values corresponding to
the superb class, compared to the US, where the maximum potential is almost non-existent) (Figs. 3 and 5a). Over 90% of Mexico's
area is covered by the three classes that indicate the most favourable solar potential, while US only has 17% (Fig. 5a). However, it is
also important to note that certain countries in Central America
(e.g. Cuba, Haiti, Dominican Republic and El Salvador) are largely
dominated by the excellent and outstanding classes (Figs. 3 and 5a).
With regard to DNI, the US has the highest radiative potential
(Fig. 4), which totals ~3 mil km2 (areas with excellent, outstanding
and superb potential) and is equivalent to a third of the country's
area (Fig. 5b). The superb (or maximum) potential alone covers
immense areas in the south-western drylands (especially in the
Great Basin and Mojave deserts, but also in Sonoran and Chihuahuan, deserts located between the US and Mexico) (Fig. 4), estimated to reach 800000 km2, or 8% of the national area (Fig. 5b).
This maximum potential is however present on a large scale in
Mexico as well (~600000 km2, 30%) (Fig. 5b), especially in the
country's northern half (Fig. 4). Unlike GHI, the analysis of the DNI
parameter indicates a significantly lower solar potential in Central
American countries (Figs. 3 and 4).
Even though this continent has a considerably high solar potential that covers several states, the analysis of solar power capacity data (considered as an indicator of the extent to which this
renewable energy is used) shows that the US has by far the most
well-developed solar industry. In 2016, this country had almost 90%
(~33 GW) of the continent's total PV capacity (37 GW, of which
36 GW in North America and 1 GW in Central America), and 100% of
698
va
lie et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 209 (2019) 692e721
R. Pra
Fig. 3. Spatial representation of global horizontal irradiation (GHI) in the countries of North and Central America. Note: the rectangle (top) show the region in which a zoom was
applied (bottom) to enable a better view of the GHI classes; the names used for countries are the common ones, but the official UN names are: Mexico e The United Mexican States;
Bahamas e The Commonwealth of The Bahamas; Cuba e The Republic of Cuba; Haiti e The Republic of Haiti; Guatemala e The Republic of Guatemala; Honduras e The Republic of
Honduras; Dominica e The Commonwealth of Dominica; Nicaragua e The Republic of Nicaragua; El Salvador e The Republic of El Salvador; Trinidad and Tobago e The Republic of
Trinidad and Tobago; Costa Rica e The Republic of Costa Rica; Panama e The Republic of Panama; in the case of unmentioned countries, the official names are identical to the
common names.
the CSP power capacity (~1.7 GW) (IRENA, 2017). As expected, this is
consistent with its being the continent's top electricity producer
(4351 TWh in 2016, 17.5% of the global electricity generation) and
the world's second largest producer, after China (BPSRWE, 2017).
Although Mexico is the most important continental GHI hotspot, it
had under 0.4 GW PV capacity, which is surprisingly even lower
than Canada's capacity (~2.7 GW) (IRENA, 2017), a country that has
access to far lower radiative resources. Moreover, according to the
va
lie et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 209 (2019) 692e721
R. Pra
699
Fig. 4. Spatial representation of direct normal irradiation (DNI) in the countries of North and Central America. Note: the rectangle (top) show the region in which a zoom was
applied (bottom) to enable a better view of the DNI classes; the names used for countries are the common ones, but the official UN names are those listed in Fig. 3.
available statistical data, CSP systems are completely absent in this
country that has massive potential in terms of DNI. In addition to
the US, the Honduras also shows great promise, as it is already
covering 9.8% of its electricity demand with solar PV (the continent's and the world's highest share in 2016) (REN, 2017), even
though it only has a PV capacity of 0.4 GW (third place on the
continent) (IRENA, 2017).
Although the US is the continent's leader in terms of installed
solar capacity, solar PV only accounts for 1% of the total electricity
generation (NREL, 2016), which means the use of solar power in still
insignificant in the national energy context. This is due to certain
difficulties related to the rapid expansion of the solar sector, such as
relatively high costs of solar applications (e.g. installation and
maintenance) compared to other countries (e.g. European states)
(IEA, 2016), faulty financing mechanisms (Alafita and Pearce, 2014;
Mundada et al., 2017) and even various informational barriers for
va
lie et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 209 (2019) 692e721
R. Pra
700
Percentage of total area
Countries
0
Canada
USA
Mexico
Bahamas
Cuba
Haiti
Dom. Rep.
Jamaica
Belize
Guatemala
A-B
SKN
Honduras
Dominica
Nicaragua
El Salvador
Saint Lucia
SVG
Barbados
Grenada
T-T
Costa Rica
Panama
10
Countries
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
5,920,125
8,216,455
1,966,495
12,654
110,475
27,024
48,704
11,093
22,416
109,492
452
269
112,889
734
129,474
20,663
609
368
443
350
5,159
51,463
75,025
0
Canada
USA
Mexico
Bahamas
Cuba
Haiti
Dom. Rep.
Jamaica
Belize
Guatemala
A-B
SKN
Honduras
Dominica
Nicaragua
El Salvador
Saint Lucia
SVG
Barbados
Grenada
T-T
Costa Rica
Panama
20
Poor
Marginal
10
20
Poor
Marginal
Fair
30
Good
40
Excellent
50
60
Outstanding
70
80
Superb
90
100
5,920,125
8,216,455
1,966,495
12,654
110,475
27,024
48,704
11,093
22,416
109,492
452
269
112,889
734
129,474
20,663
609
368
443
350
5,159
51,463
75,025
Fair
Good
Excellent
Outstanding
Superb
Fig. 5. Percentage classes' extent of global horizontal irradiation (kWh/m2) (a) and direct normal irradiation (kWh/m2) (b) in the countries of North and Central America. Note: the
states are listed from up to down in a descending order considering the maximum latitude values of their northern limits; in the cases of Canada and the US, the percentage values
were calculated based on the extracted absolute data up to 60 N latitude; the absolute values on the left of the columns represent the total national area (in km2), except for the
cases of Canada and the US; country abbreviations: USA e United States of America; Dom. Rep. e Dominican Republic; A-B e Antigua and Barbuda; SKN e Saint Kitts and Nevis; SVG
e Saint Vincent and the Grenadines; T-T e Trinidad and Tobago; the names used for countries are the common ones, but the official UN names are those listed in Fig. 3.
potential solar adopters (Rai et al., 2016). However, by 2025, it is
possible for the solar contribution to increase by ~10% (8% from PV
and 2% from CSP), if the total PV capacity reaches 50 GW, and the
CSP capacity reaches ~7 GW (Solangi et al., 2011).
This target could be met if the implementation of the “Renewable portfolio standard” (RPS), the main political mechanism for
lez,
promoting renewable energy development (Sampaio and Gonza
2017; Carley, 2009), generates concrete results. This mechanism
was adopted in 29 American states (Trancik, 2014) and can be a
major driver to diversify energy sources, develop renewable technologies, reduce dependence on fossil fuels and decrease greenhouse gas emissions (Solangi et al., 2011; Barbose et al., 2016). In
fact, the effects of this mechanism can be felt strongly in southwestern states, e.g. California, where the 33% renewable sourcegenerated power RPS target by 2020 (Greenblatt, 2015) has led in
the past years to a rapid development of the solar energy sector.
This state is already the leader in the US in terms of solar power use
e ~12 GW PV capacity at the end of 2016 (Feldman et al., 2016).
Moreover, California is known to have some of the world's most
important PV solar megaprojects, such as Topaz Solar Farm
(operational since 2014) and the Desert Sunlight Solar Farm (2015),
each with a capacity of 550 MW (IEA, 2015). At the same time, it is
the region that hosts the world's two largest CSP plants e Ivanpah
Solar Power Facility (392 MW capacity), with modern solar power
tower technology (SPT, a system based on heliostats that concentrate sunlight onto a central receiver located at the top of a fixed
tower), and Solar Energy Generating Systems (354 MW), which
features the traditional parabolic trough collector technology (PTC,
a system based on parabolic curved mirrors that concentrate sunlight onto absorber tubes placed in the focal line of the mirrors)
(STE, 2016; Zhang et al., 2013a).
In the near future, it appears that Mexico is also planning to
harness solar power, in the context of current and future electric
energy requirements. Mexico already has a considerable electricity
generation (315 TWh, 1.3% of the global electricity production),
which is expected to grow significantly in the coming years,
considering that, in the past decade, it had the continent's highest
increase rate in electrical energy production (2.3% from 2005 to
2015, compared to 0.6% in Canada or 0.1% in the US over the same
period) (BPSRWE, 2017). In order to better respond to energy
va
lie et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 209 (2019) 692e721
R. Pra
701
Fig. 6. Spatial representation of global horizontal irradiation (GHI) in the countries of South America. Note: the names used for countries are the common ones, but the official UN
names are: Colombia e The Republic of Colombia; Venezuela e The Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela; Guyana e The Co-operative Republic of Guyana; Suriname e The Republic of
Suriname; Brazil e The Federative Republic of Brazil; Ecuador e The Republic of Ecuador; Peru e The Republic of Peru; Bolivia e The Plurinational State of Bolivia; Chile e The
Republic of Chile; Paraguay e The Republic of Paraguay; Argentina e The Argentine Republic; Uruguay e The Oriental Republic of Uruguay.
needs-related challenges, Mexico should rely, among others, on a
close collaboration with the United States focused on the development of possible large-scale solar projects in the transborder
area consisting of the Sonoran and Chihuahuan deserts, which hold
significant solar resources that can be used (Grossmann et al.,
2014).
Also, considering the 35% target for clean energy-sourced power
by 2024 (Garcia-Heller et al., 2016), as well as the massive available
solar resources across the country, solar power should be a major
pathway towards a fast decarbonization of its economy. In fact, the
Government plans to reach this target in the following years by
applying a renewable energy matrix that consists of solar PV, wind,
hydro and geothermal power plants. This renewable mix is also
essential for the Paris Agreement commitments, like the reduction
of greenhouse gases by 22% by 2030, below business-as-usual
levels (Garcia-Heller et al., 2016).
There are promising prospects and even noteworthy solar initiatives in Central America countries as well, even though they are
being implemented on a much smaller scale. In addition to
Honduras, which is the world leader in procentual PV electricity (as
previously mentioned), there are clear signs of solar PV energy
expansion in other countries such as Guatemala, El Salvador and
Panama, which currently still have an underdeveloped use of solar
resources, as each holds under 100 MW PV capacity (IRENA, 2017).
702
va
lie et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 209 (2019) 692e721
R. Pra
Fig. 7. Spatial representation of direct normal irradiation (DNI) in the countries of South America. Note: the names used for countries are the common ones, but the official UN
names are those listed in Fig. 6.
For instance, El Salvador has taken major steps towards meeting the
100 MW solar power target in the very near future (REN, 2017),
which is five times more than the current level of ~20 MW PV capacity (IRENA, 2017).
Prospects are promising in Central America in terms of transborder cooperation as well. A major regional initiative in this respect
is the Clean Energy Corridor of Central America, which was
developed in 2015 and which aims to accelerate the development
of renewable systems (especially solar PV power plants and wind
farms), of a regional transmission network and of cross-border
trade of renewable energy in Central American countries (IRENA,
2015a). With six countries included in this energy corridor
(Guatemala, El Salvador, Honduras, Nicaragua, Costa Rica and
Panama) and three others that may join this regional electricity
market (Belize, Mexico and even Colombia), this initiative provides
the region significant opportunities for supplying sustainable,
reliable and affordable energy in the near future (IRENA, 2015a).
3.2.2. South America
Of South America's total area of almost 18 mil km2, ~60% corresponds to GHI excellent, outstanding and superb classes (Fig. 2a),
which cover extensive regions in almost all 12 states, except for
Ecuador and Uruguay (Fig. 6). Out of the three classes with the most
favourable potential, the excellent class stands out due to its
dominance in countries such as Surinam (97% of the total area),
Guyana (88%), Paraguay (67%), Venezuela (63%), Brazil (56%) and
Bolivia (54%) (Fig. 8a). However, there are also significant percentual areas for the outstanding (Venezuela, 23%, Brazil, 17%, Peru,
va
lie et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 209 (2019) 692e721
R. Pra
703
Percentage of total area
Countries
0
Colombia
Venezuela
Guyana
Suriname
Brazil
Ecuador
Peru
Bolivia
Chile
Paraguay
Argentina
Uruguay
10
20
Poor
Marginal
10
20
Poor
Marginal
Countries
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
1,142,665
918,632
212,630
146,084
8,524,019
256,716
1,297,963
1,092,913
531,484
401,785
2,484,001
177,840
0
Colombia
Venezuela
Guyana
Suriname
Brazil
Ecuador
Peru
Bolivia
Chile
Paraguay
Argentina
Uruguay
30
Fair
30
Good
40
Excellent
50
60
Outstanding
70
80
Superb
90
100
1,142,665
918,632
212,630
146,084
8,524,019
256,716
1,297,963
1,092,913
531,484
401,785
2,484,001
177,840
Fair
Good
Excellent
Outstanding
Superb
Fig. 8. Percentage classes' extent of global horizontal irradiation (kWh/m2) (a) and direct normal irradiation (kWh/m2) (b) in the countries of South America. Note: the states are
listed from up to down in a descending order considering the maximum latitude values of their northern limits; in the cases of Chile and Argentina, the percentage values were
calculated based on the extracted absolute data down to 45 S latitude; the absolute values on the left of the columns represent the total national area (in km2), except for the cases
of Chile and Argentina; the names used for countries are the common ones, but the official UN names are those listed in Fig. 6.
11%) and superb (Chile, 36%, Bolivia, 20%, Peru, 15%) potentials
(Fig. 8a). Peak absolute values reach 4.8 mil km2 and ~1.5 mil km2 in
Brazil for the excellent and outstanding classes, and ~260000 km2
in Chile for the superb potential, which also cover similar, extensive
areas (approximately 200000 km2) in Bolivia, Peru and Argentina
(Fig. 8a).
The DNI potential is however notably lower on this continent
(especially in the north, where the high levels of cloud cover in the
Amazon region determine low values for this parameter) (Fig. 7), as
the three classes cover a total of 30% of South America, i.e. less than
half compared to GHI (Fig. 2b). Only 5 states have extensive areas
with high, very high and maximum potential e Argentina (2 mil
km2, 75% of the national area), Brazil (under 1.9 mil km2, 22%), Chile
(~400000 km2, 55%), Peru (~300000 km2, 24%) and Bolivia
(~270000 km2, 25%) (Fig. 8b). The superb potential is dominant in
only four states e Chile (~270000 km2, mostly in the Atacama
Desert, 37% of the country's terrestrial area), Argentina
(~240000 km2, 9%), Bolivia (~200000 km2, 18%) and Peru
(~100000 km2, mainly in the Sechura coastal desert, 8% of the
country's total area) (Fig. 8b).
Latin America is therefore a continent with an immense
geographic potential in terms of GHI resources, relevant for the use
of PV technologies. It is however the continent with the lowest use
of these resources, with only 1.9 GW installed PV capacity, or less
than 1% of the worldwide capacity, at the end of 2016. Moreover,
there are major discrepancies regarding size capacity in terms of
countries e over 80% (1.6 GW) of the continental installed capacity
is found in Chile, i.e. much more than the next two countries (Peru,
96 MW, 5%, Uruguay, 86 MW, 4.5%) (IRENA, 2017). Less than 7% is
totalled by the remaining countries, excluding Colombia and
Paraguay, where there are no PV installations. Upon analysis of the
most recent and comprehensive official statistical data, it was
found that South America is also the only continent with no CSP
installed capacity (IRENA, 2017).
Given this state of affairs, it can be noticed that Chile is the
continental leader in the promotion of photovoltaic power.
However, what is particularly interesting is its fulminating progress
of the PV sector, which in only two years grew approximately eight
times larger (~0.2 GW in 2014 vs 1.6 GW in 2016) (IRENA, 2017).
This massive solar development is due to the relatively recentlyenforced regulations that aim to cover 20% of national power requirements from renewable sources by 2025 (Escobar et al., 2014).
Moreover, by 2050, Chile aims for renewable sources to cover 70%
of the country's energy needs (Munguia, 2016). Given this context,
but also due to the fact that Chile needs to expand its installed
electric capacity in order to support industrial needs (especially
mining activities) (Moreno-Leiva et al., 2017), over the next years a
massive expansion of PV facilities is expected in the Atacama Desert
geda et al., 2016). In the same coastal region, the construction
(Gra
of Cerro Dominador Solar Power Plant is planned for 2018 (110 MW,
SPT system), which will be the first CSP operational plant in Latin
America (STE, 2016). Looking ahead, the acceleration of the solar
energy infrastructure development in this area of the country could
be supported by possible solar energy collaborations with Peru in
the northern area of Atacama Desert (in the transition area between Atacama and Sechura deserts), highly suitable for both PV
and CSP systems (Grossmann et al., 2014).
Even though Peru and Bolivia presently rely on solar power to a
very small extent, despite the fact they hold extensive areas of the
western South America GHI hotspot (Fig. 6), these countries are
making considerable efforts to develop the PV sector (including
hybrid systems e e.g. solar-wind technologies), mainly in poor,
isolated rural areas that do not have access to electricity (IRENA,
2014; Pansera, 2012). Moreover, Argentina is trying to use the
massive solar potential in the country's northwestern region
(Fig. 6), where the government has recently agreed to financially
support the development of a 3 GW solar PV complex (Parkes,
2016). In addition to solar resources, wind power is another major opportunity for the country's decarbonization (it is one of the
world's leading countries in terms of wind intensity and range,
especially in the Patagonian region) (Bandoc et al., 2018), as it is
currently heavily dependent on fossil fuels (Parkes, 2016).
704
va
lie et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 209 (2019) 692e721
R. Pra
Fig. 9. Spatial representation of global horizontal irradiation (GHI) in the countries of Europe. Note: the rectangle (top) show the region in which a zoom was applied (bottom) to
enable a better view of the GHI classes; the names used for countries are the common ones, but the official UN names are: Russia e The Russian Federation; Norway e The Kingdom
of Norway; Sweden e The Kingdom of Sweden; United Kingdom e The United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland; Estonia e The Republic of Estonia; Latvia e The
Republic of Latvia; Denmark e The Kingdom of Denmark; Lithuania e The Republic of Lithuania; Belarus e The Republic of Belarus; Ireland e The Republic of Ireland; Germany e
The Federal Republic of Germany; Poland e The Republic of Poland; Netherlands e The Kingdom of the Netherlands; Belgium e The Kingdom of Belgium; France e The French
Republic; Luxembourg e The Grand Duchy of Luxembourg; Slovakia e The Slovak Republic; Austria e The Republic of Austria; Moldova e The Republic of Moldova; Switzerland e
The Swiss Confederation; Liechtenstein e The Principality of Liechtenstein; Italy e The Italian Republic; Slovenia e The Republic of Slovenia; Croatia e The Republic of Croatia;
Serbia e The Republic of Serbia; Bulgaria e The Republic of Bulgaria; Spain e The Kingdom of Spain; Monaco e The Principality of Monaco; Kosovo e The Republic of Kosovo;
Albania e The Republic of Albania; Andorra e The Principality of Andorra; Macedonia e The Republic of Macedonia; Portugal e The Portuguese Republic; Greece e The Hellenic
Republic; Malta e The Republic of Malta; in the case of unmentioned countries, the official names are identical to the common names.
The most developed economy, Brazil, is also interested in
expanding solar power in the energy matrix, where solar energy is
highly underutilized e only 23 MW PV capacity at the end of 2016
(IRENA, 2017). Although the country is largely dependent on hydroenergy (over 60% of the country's entire installed capacity is hydroelectric), i.e. non-fossil sources, this renewable source is easily
affected by perturbations such as water storage decline of reservoirs, associated with intense droughts, as recorded in 2015 (de
Faria et al., 2017). A viable solution to this problem is increasing
the solar energy share in the renewable energy spectrum, which
would also help meet Brazil's 2015 Paris commitments (reducing
greenhouse gas emissions by 37% by 2025, relative to 2005 levels)
(Garcia-Heller et al., 2016). There is a high chance for this increase
to occur, as it is estimated that, by 2023, solar power (mainly PV
systems) will reach 3.5 GW installed capacity (de Faria et al., 2017).
This expansion is necessary also considering the high current demand for electrical energy (production of 582 TWh in 2016, by far
the highest value in Latin America, which is equivalent to 2.3% of
the worldwide total) which will most probably remain high over
the following years (or even decades), considering the notable
va
lie et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 209 (2019) 692e721
R. Pra
705
Fig. 10. Spatial representation of direct normal irradiation (DNI) in the countries of Europe. Note: the rectangle (top) show the region in which a zoom was applied (bottom) to
enable a better view of the DNI classes; the names used for countries are the common ones, but the official UN names are those listed in Fig. 9.
evolution of electricity generation of the 2005e2015 period (3.7%
annual increase) (BPSRWE, 2017). The future expansion of solar
energy relies however on the promotion of certain key-policies, e.g.
feed-in-tariff (FIT), which are highly recommended seeing as, in
many states (e.g. Germany), they have already generated excellent
results in stimulating the photovoltaic sector (Pinto et al., 2016;
Ferreira et al., 2018).
There are promising perspectives even for CSP systems, as Brazil
~o Francisco
has significant DNI resources in the southeast (in the Sa
River Basin and the Sobradinho area, in the northeastern part of the
Brazilian capital city) (Fig. 7) e there are already several CSP
commercial projects underway that total 130 MW capacity, which
are however only in an early stage of development (Vieira de Souza
and Cavalcante, 2017). Nevertheless, a faster transition towards
solar energy is still necessary, both in this country that has a high
energy demand, but also in other countries (including the ones
located in the northern region of the South American continent)
that have a significant radiative potential, but in which solar power
development is still low or very low.
3.2.3. Europe
With a total area of almost 10 mil km2, of which less than 1%
(~25000 km2)/5% (~420000 km2) corresponds to excellent,
outstanding and superb GHI/DNI classes, this continent has by far
the world's lowest solar resources (Fig. 2). It is also the only
continent with no GHI outstanding and superb potential, and no
superb DNI class (Fig. 2). Except for several limited areas with
excellent potential in Spain (~20000 km2, 4% of the country),
Greece (~4000 km2, 3%) and Portugal (<1000 km2, <1%), the most
favourable GHI intensity consists of good potential, currently present in extensive/relatively extensive areas in Spain, Greece,
Portugal and Italy (Figs. 9 and 11a). Excellent potential is however
va
lie et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 209 (2019) 692e721
R. Pra
706
Countries
0
Russia*
Norway
Sweden
UK
Estonia
Latvia
Denmark
Lithuania
Belarus
Ireland
Germany
Poland
Netherlands
Ukraine
Belgium
France
Czech Republic
Luxembourg
Slovakia
Austria
Hungary
Moldova
Romania
Switzerland
Liechtenstein
Italy
Slovenia
Croatia
Serbia
B-H
Bulgaria
Spain
Monaco
Montenegro
Kosovo**
Albania
Andorra
Macedonia
Portugal
Greece
Malta
10
Poor
Countries
Percentage of total area
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
2,462,720
55,155
142,819
242,305
45,646
64,422
42,616
64,784
207,103
69,434
357,174
312,924
36,997
598,427
30,635
547,660
78,647
2,613
48,407
83,938
93,167
33,216
236,306
41,427
135
301,130
20,325
54,800
77,613
51,866
112,709
499,954
17
13,731
10,910
28,361
450
25,413
90,664
130,999
310
0
Russia*
Norway
Sweden
UK
Estonia
Latvia
Denmark
Lithuania
Belarus
Ireland
Germany
Poland
Netherlands
Ukraine
Belgium
France
Czech Republic
Luxembourg
Slovakia
Austria
Hungary
Moldova
Romania
Switzerland
Liechtenstein
Italy
Slovenia
Croatia
Serbia
B-H
Bulgaria
Spain
Monaco
Montenegro
Kosovo**
Albania
Andorra
Macedonia
Portugal
Greece
Malta
20
10
Marginal
20
Fair
30
Good
40
50
Excellent
60
Outstanding
70
80
Superb
90
100
2,462,720
55,158
142,827
242,305
45,646
64,422
42,616
64,784
207,103
69,434
357,174
312,924
36,997
598,427
30,635
547,660
78,647
2,613
48,407
83,938
93,167
33,216
236,306
41,427
135
301,130
20,325
54,800
77,613
51,866
112,709
499,954
17
13,731
10,910
28,361
450
25,413
90,664
130,999
310
Poor
Marginal
Fair
Good
Excellent
Outstanding
Superb
Fig. 11. Percentage classes' extent of global horizontal irradiation (kWh/m2) (a) and direct normal irradiation (kWh/m2) (b) in the countries of Europe. Note: * area of Russia in
relation to the European continent; ** UN non-member states; the states are listed from up to down in a descending order considering the maximum latitude values of their
northern limits; in the cases of Russia, Norway, Sweden and the UK, the percentage values were calculated based on the extracted absolute data up to 60 N latitude; the absolute
values on the left of the columns represent the total national area (in km2), except for the cases of Russia, Norway, Sweden and the UK; country abbreviations: UK e United
Kingdom; B-H e Bosnia and Herzegovina; the names used for countries are the common ones, but the official UN names are those listed in Fig. 9.
va
lie et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 209 (2019) 692e721
R. Pra
707
Fig. 12. Spatial representation of global horizontal irradiation (GHI) in the countries of Africa. Note: the names used for countries are the common ones, but the official UN names
are: Tunisia e The Republic of Tunisia; Algeria - The People's Democratic Republic of Algeria; Morocco e The Kingdom of Morocco; Libya e The State of Libya; Egypt e The Arab
Republic of Egypt; Mauritania e The Islamic Republic of Mauritania; Mali e The Republic of Mali; Niger e The Republic of the Niger; Chad e The Republic of Chad; Sudan e The
Republic of the Sudan; Eritrea e The State of Eritrea; Cape Verde e The Republic of Cabo Verde; Senegal e The Republic of Senegal; Ethiopia e The Federal Democratic Republic of
Ethiopia; Nigeria e The Federal Republic of Nigeria; Gambia e The Republic of The Gambia; Cameroon e The Republic of Cameroon; Djibouti e The Republic of Djibouti; GuineaBissau e The Republic of Guinea-Bissau; Guinea e The Republic of Guinea; Benin e The Republic of Benin; South Sudan e The Republic of South Sudan; Somalia e The Federal
^te d'Ivoire; Sierra Leone e The Republic of Sierra Leone; Liberia
Republic of Somalia; Ghana e The Republic of Ghana; Togo e The Togolese Republic; Ivory Coast e The Republic of Co
e The Republic of Liberia; Kenya e The Republic of Kenya; Uganda e The Republic of Uganda; Equatorial Guinea e The Republic of Equatorial Guinea; Congo e The Republic of the
~o Tome
and Príncipe e The Democratic Republic of S~ao Tome
and Príncipe; Tanzania e The United Republic of Tanzania; Rwanda e The
Congo; Gabon e The Gabonese Republic; Sa
Republic of Rwanda; Burundi e The Republic of Burundi; Seychelles e The Republic of Seychelles; Angola e The Republic of Angola; Zambia e The Republic of Zambia; Malawi e The
Republic of Malawi; Mozambique e The Republic of Mozambique; Comoros e The Union of the Comoros; Madagascar e The Republic of Madagascar; Zimbabwe e The Republic of
Zimbabwe; Namibia e The Republic of Namibia; Botswana e The Republic of Botswana; Mauritius e The Republic of Mauritius; South Africa e The Republic of South Africa;
Swaziland e The Kingdom of Eswatini; Lesotho e The Kingdom of Lesotho; in the case of unmentioned countries, the official names are identical to the common names.
much more widespread for DNI, especially in the Iberic Peninsula
(~330000 km2/67% in Spain, and ~55000 km2/61% in Portugal)
(Figs. 10 and 11b).
Despite low radiative resources compared to the other continents, Europe does stand out with a high level of solar energy use,
and takes the second place globally (after Asia) in terms of PV capacity (102 GW, approximately one third of the global installed
capacity), and first place in CSP capacity (2.3 GW, almost half of the
world capacity) (IRENA, 2017). Approximately 95% (39) of the 41
states had at least 1 MW PV capacity in 2016, but only 32% (13) had
a considerable capacity of over 1 GW e Germany (~41 GW), Italy
(~19 GW), United Kingdom (~11 GW), France (~7 GW), Spain
(~5 GW), Belgium (~3 GW), Greece (~3 GW), Czech Republic
(~2 GW), Netherlands (2 GW), Switzerland (~2 GW), Romania
(~1 GW), Austria (~1 GW) and Bulgaria (~1 GW) (IRENA, 2017). The
state of affairs is radically different for CSP capacity, which in the
same year was almost entirely attributed to only one country, Spain
(IRENA, 2017).
Although at present this renewable sector is well developed on
the continent (as it is also associated with a high electricity requirements especially in highly industrialized countries, such as
Germany, 648 TWh/2.6% of worldwide production, France,
553 TWh/2.2%, United Kingdom, 339 TWh/1.4% or Italy, 286 TWh/
1.2%) (BPSRWE, 2017), Europe has experienced an obvious solar
708
va
lie et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 209 (2019) 692e721
R. Pra
Fig. 13. Spatial representation of direct normal irradiation (DNI) in the countries of Africa. Note: the names used for countries are the common ones, but the official UN names are
those listed in Fig. 12.
industry contraction lately. For instance, Germany's annual growth
in the solar PV market, the European leader in this particular
renewable source sector, remained at ~1.5 GW, which is below the
Renewable Energy Law annual target of 2.5 GW (REN, 2017).
Another such case is France, which in 2016 had the lowest annual
PV growth (0.6 GW) since 2009 (REN, 2017). A similar case is Italy,
which had an increase of only 0.4 GW in 2016 (compared to 2015),
despite ranking second in Europe. Causes relate to the lowering of
FIT incentives e one of the most effective governmental programs
that promote PV installations both in most European countries, as
well as worldwide (Solangi et al., 2011; Jia et al., 2016; Kilinc-Ata,
2016), in the favour of feed-in premium policies (that encourage
the development of large-scale solar projects), and electricity demand stagnation (REN, 2017). There are other technical barriers
that have directly or indirectly influenced the halt of PV penetration
in European countries, such as certain shortcomings of national
electricity distribution grids (Spertino et al., 2014; Kilinc-Ata, 2016;
Mateo et al., 2017).
However, FIT remains an important political instrument for
promoting renewable energies in numerous European countries,
including in the continent's two leading economies e Germany and
France (Klessmann et al., 2011), which have a large PV capacity. This
mechanism ensures a fixed price per unit of electricity for renewable source electricity producers over a long period of 10e20 years,
and is a viable support for developing alternative energies at the
expense of conventional ones (Zamfir et al., 2016; Fagiani et al.,
2013). In the near future, this instrument will continue to reduce
the countries' dependence on fossil fuels as well as nuclear energy,
as proven by France, where it is expected that the expansion of PV
and other renewable energies will reduce the country's reliance on
€gernuclear power to 50% of electricity by 2025 (Arantegui and Ja
va
lie and Bandoc,
Waldau, 2017), compared to 76% in 2015 (Pra
2018).
In fact, solar power and other renewable sources represent the
key to implementing development targets for clean energies in the
Member States of the European Union (EU), in the coming years.
These targets aim to increase the share of renewable energy sources
in power generation by 20% by 2020, while at the same time
improving energy efficiency by 20%, and reducing greenhouse gas
emissions by 20% (compared to 1990) (Carvalho, 2012; Liobikiene_
and Butkus, 2017). However, for the year 2030, these targets were
revised by the European Council, which set the objectives to at least
Countries
0
Tunisia
Algeria
Morocco
Libya
Egypt
Western Sahara
Mauritania
Mali
Niger
Chad
Sudan
Eritrea
Cape Verde
Senegal
Burkina Faso
Ethiopia
Nigeria
Gambia
Cameroon
Djibouti
Guinea-Bissau
Guinea
Benin
South Sudan
Somalia
Ghana
Togo
Central Afr. R.
Ivory Coast
Sierra Leone
Liberia
D. R. of Congo
Kenya
Uganda
Eq. Guinea
Congo
Gabon
STP
Tanzania
Rwanda
Burundi
Seychelles
Angola
Zambia
Malawi
Mozambique
Comoros
Madagascar
Zimbabwe
Namibia
Botswana
Mauritius
South Africa
Swaziland
Lesotho
10
Poor
Countries
Percentage of total area
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
156,996
2,317,486
414,630
1,630,179
1,004,866
269,976
1,041,851
1,259,479
1,187,816
1,273,554
1,868,489
123,257
2,931
197,374
274,406
1,134,571
913,268
10,571
467,368
21,985
33,032
245,869
116,832
630,942
643,396
240,230
57,239
622,046
322,758
72,084
95,921
2,340,593
589,653
243,383
26,879
347,193
261,708
1,038
947,775
25,476
27,234
444
1,252,357
756,486
120,116
792,774
1,682
596,077
391,408
826,564
581,775
2,025
1,223,912
17,179
30,213
0
Tunisia
Algeria
Morocco
Libya
Egypt
Western Sahara
Mauritania
Mali
Niger
Chad
Sudan
Eritrea
Cape Verde
Senegal
Burkina Faso
Ethiopia
Nigeria
Gambia
Cameroon
Djibouti
Guinea-Bissau
Guinea
Benin
South Sudan
Somalia
Ghana
Togo
Central Afr. R.
Ivory Coast
Sierra Leone
Liberia
D. R. of Congo
Kenya
Uganda
Eq. Guinea
Congo
Gabon
STP
Tanzania
Rwanda
Burundi
Seychelles
Angola
Zambia
Malawi
Mozambique
Comoros
Madagascar
Zimbabwe
Namibia
Botswana
Mauritius
South Africa
Swaziland
Lesotho
20
10
Marginal
20
Fair
30
Good
40
50
Excellent
60
Outstanding
70
80
Superb
90
100
156,996
2,317,486
414,630
1,630,179
1,004,866
269,976
1,041,851
1,259,479
1,187,816
1,273,554
1,868,489
123,257
2,931
197,374
274,406
1,134,571
913,268
10,571
467,368
21,985
33,032
245,869
116,832
630,942
643,396
240,230
57,239
622,046
322,758
72,084
95,921
2,340,593
589,653
243,383
26,879
347,193
261,708
1,038
947,775
25,476
27,234
444
1,252,357
756,486
120,116
792,774
1,682
596,077
391,408
826,564
581,775
2,025
1,223,912
17,179
30,213
Poor
Marginal
Fair
Good
Excellent
Outstanding
Superb
Fig. 14. Percentage classes' extent of global horizontal irradiation (kWh/m2) (a) and direct normal irradiation (kWh/m2) (b) in the countries of Africa. Note: the states are listed from
up to down in a descending order considering the maximum latitude values of their northern limits; the absolute values on the left of the columns represent the total national area
~o Tome
and
(in km2); country abbreviations: Central Afr. R. e Central African Republic; D.R. of Congo e Democratic Republic of the Congo; Eq. Guinea e Equatorial Guinea; STP e Sa
Príncipe; the names used for countries are the common ones, but the official UN names are those listed in Fig. 12.
710
va
lie et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 209 (2019) 692e721
R. Pra
Fig. 15. Spatial representation of global horizontal irradiation (GHI) in the countries of Asia. Note: the rectangle (top) show the region in which a zoom was applied (bottom) to
enable a better view of the GHI classes; UAE e United Arab Emirates; the names used for countries are the common ones, but the official UN names are: Russia e The Russian
Federation; Kazakhstan e The Republic of Kazakhstan; China e The People's Republic of China; Uzbekistan e The Republic of Uzbekistan; Kyrgyzstan e The Kyrgyz Republic; North
Korea e The Democratic People's Republic of Korea; Turkey e The Republic of Turkey; Azerbaijan e The Republic of Azerbaijan; Armenia e The Republic of Armenia; Tajikistan e The
Republic of Tajikistan; Iran e The Islamic Republic of Iran; South Korea e The Republic of Korea; Afghanistan e The Islamic Republic of Afghanistan; Iraq e The Republic of Iraq; Syria
e The Syrian Arab Republic; Pakistan e The Islamic Republic of Pakistan; Cyprus e The Republic of Cyprus; India e The Republic of India; Lebanon e The Lebanese Republic; Israel e
The State of Israel; Jordan e The Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan; Palestine e The State of Palestine; Saudi Arabia e The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia; Nepal e The Federal Democratic
Republic of Nepal; Kuwait e The State of Kuwait; Myanmar e The Republic of the Union of Myanmar; Bhutan e The Kingdom of Bhutan; Bangladesh e The People's Republic of
Bangladesh; Oman e The Sultanate of Oman; Bahrain e The Kingdom of Bahrain; Qatar e The State of Qatar; Taiwan e The Republic of China; Vietnam e The Socialist Republic of
Vietnam; Laos e The Lao People's Democratic Republic; Philippines e The Republic of the Philippines; Thailand e The Kingdom of Thailand; Yemen e The Republic of Yemen;
Cambodia e The Kingdom of Cambodia; Sri Lanka e The Democratic Socialist Republic of Sri Lanka; Maldives e The Republic of Maldives; Indonesia e The Republic of Indonesia;
Brunei e The Nation of Brunei, the Abode of Peace; Singapore e The Republic of Singapore; East Timor e The Democratic Republic of Timor-Leste; in the case of unmentioned
countries, the official names are identical to the common names.
va
lie et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 209 (2019) 692e721
R. Pra
711
Fig. 16. Spatial representation of direct normal irradiation (DNI) in the countries of Asia. Note: the rectangle (top) show the region in which a zoom was applied (bottom) to enable a
better view of the direct normal irradiation classes; UAE e United Arab Emirates; the names used for countries are the common ones, but the official UN names are those listed in
Fig. 15.
27% for the share increase of renewable energies, at least 27% for
energy efficiency improvement, and at least 40% for the reduction
of greenhouse gas emissions, below the 1990 levels (Arantegui and
€ger-Waldau, 2017). In a longer-term perspective, the EU proposes
Ja
a remarkable increase in renewable energies in order to reach 55%
of its total energy needs by 2050 (Yang et al., 2016).
Therefore, photovoltaic technologies and renewable sources in
general remain a viable option for decarbonizing European economies (Martins, 2017), which rank third in terms of global carbon
emissions (in 2015, the 28 Member States accounted for 10% of the
re
et al., 2016).
global CO2 emissions), after China and the US (Le Que
In this respect, in the following decades, the PV sector can significantly contribute to the transition towards a low carbon energy
system, in numerous countries on the continent. For instance, it
was suggested that the PV penetration in the energy matrix could
avoid 15.4 Gt (gigatons or billion tons) CO2, and 22.5 Gt CO2 in the
EU between 2013 and 2050, using the 2DS and Roadmap scenarios
of the International Energy Agency (Hern
andez-Moro and
Countries
a)
Countries
b)
0
Russia*
Kazakhstan
China
Mongolia
Uzbekistan
Japan
Georgia
Kyrgyzstan
North Korea
Turkmenistan
Turkey
Azerbaijan
Armenia
Tajikistan
Iran
South Korea
Afghanistan
Iraq
Syria
Pakistan
Cyprus
India
Lebanon
Israel
Jordan
Palestine**
Saudi Arabia
Nepal
Kuwait
Myanmar
Bhutan
Bangladesh
Oman
Bahrain
Qatar
UAE
Taiwan**
Vietnam
Laos
Philippines
Thailand
Yemen
Cambodia
Sri Lanka
Malaysia
Maldives
Indonesia
Brunei
Singapore
East Timor
20
Poor
Marginal
10
20
Poor
Marginal
Percentage of total area
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
5,663,245
2,716,262
9,393,812
1,564,021
448,157
374,197
69,506
199,172
122,516
471,502
780,946
86,248
29,625
142,445
1,627,086
98,720
643,826
438,574
186,366
875,540
9,176
3,164,410
10,035
21,540
89,154
6,278
1,930,324
147,652
17,534
666,425
40,530
137,530
312,792
589
11,198
71,416
36,356
330,715
229,336
295,059
517,433
455,658
182,154
66,728
330,074
117
1,892,353
5,754
515
15,173
0
Russia*
Kazakhstan
China
Mongolia
Uzbekistan
Japan
Georgia
Kyrgyzstan
North Korea
Turkmenistan
Turkey
Azerbaijan
Armenia
Tajikistan
Iran
South Korea
Afghanistan
Iraq
Syria
Pakistan
Cyprus
India
Lebanon
Israel
Jordan
Palestine**
Saudi Arabia
Nepal
Kuwait
Myanmar
Bhutan
Bangladesh
Oman
Bahrain
Qatar
UAE
Taiwan**
Vietnam
Laos
Philippines
Thailand
Yemen
Cambodia
Sri Lanka
Malaysia
Maldives
Indonesia
Brunei
Singapore
East Timor
10
Fair
30
Good
40
Excellent
50
60
Outstanding
70
80
Superb
90
100
5,663,245
2,716,262
9,393,812
1,564,021
448,157
374,197
69,506
199,172
122,516
471,502
780,946
86,248
29,625
142,445
1,627,086
98,720
643,826
438,574
186,366
875,540
9,176
3,164,410
10,035
21,540
89,154
6,278
1,930,324
147,652
17,534
666,425
40,530
137,530
312,792
589
11,198
71,416
36,356
330,715
229,336
295,059
517,433
455,658
182,154
66,728
330,074
117
1,892,353
5,754
515
15,173
Fair
Good
Excellent
Outstanding
Superb
Fig. 17. Percentage classes' extent of global horizontal irradiation (kWh/m2) (a) and direct normal irradiation (kWh/m2) (b) in the countries of Asia. Note: * area of Russia in relation
to the Asian continent; ** UN non-member states; the states are listed from up to down in a descending order considering the maximum latitude values of their northern limits; in
the case of Russia, the percentage values were calculated based on the extracted absolute data up to 60 N latitude; the absolute values on the left of the columns represent the total
national area (in km2), except for the case of Russia; country abbreviations: UAE e United Arab Emirates; the names used for countries are the common ones, but the official UN
names are those listed in Fig. 15.
va
lie et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 209 (2019) 692e721
R. Pra
713
Fig. 18. Spatial representation of global horizontal irradiation (GHI) and direct normal irradiation (DNI) in the countries of Australia and Oceania. Note: the other countries in Fig. 19
are not included in these map due to their limited areas, which generally did not allow spatial identification of the GHI and DNI classes; the names used for countries are the
common ones, but the official UN names are: Australia e The Commonwealth of Australia; Marshall Islands e The Republic of the Marshall Islands; Micronesia e The Federated
States of Micronesia; Palau e The Republic of Palau; Kiribati e The Republic of Kiribati; Nauru e The Republic of Nauru; Papua New Guinea e The Independent State of Papua New
Guinea; Vanuatu e The Republic of Vanuatu; Samoa e The Independent State of Samoa; Fiji e The Republic of Fiji; Tonga e The Kingdom of Tonga; in the case of unmentioned
countries, the official names are identical to the common names.
Martínez-Duart, 2015). However, according to a study, a fast and
effective penetration of PV power and other renewable energies in
the European energy spectrum still requires investments in the
expansion of the energy infrastructure, such as the cross-border
transmission network, especially in peripheral EU countries
(Martínez-Anido et al., 2013).
In terms of environmental conditions, the expansion of solar
power in Europe in the coming decades is easily achievable, especially if the areas that are suitable for solar energy, mainly located in
the Mediterranean region, are used to their full potential (Súri
et al.,
2007). According to recent research, several countries in Southern
Europe (e.g. Portugal, Spain, Italy) hold extensive areas that are
suitable for large-scale PV system development, not only in terms
of solar radiation, but also in terms of topographical (slope and
aspect) and anthropic (population, transportation network and
electricity grid) conditions (Castillo et al., 2016). At the same time,
another opportunity for the massive expansion of PV installations
in the near future could consist of a part of the lands that are highly
prone to degradation (less suitable for agricultural crops and
therefore preferred locations for solar PV applications), which are
found over extensive areas in Europe. For example, a very recent
study showed that the Mediterranean and Central Southeastern
714
va
lie et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 209 (2019) 692e721
R. Pra
regions of Europe hold >400000 km2 of lands with high and very
high sensitivity to degradation, found for the most part in Spain
(~240000 km2), Greece (~42000 km2), Bulgaria (~32000 km2), Italy
(~28000 km2), Romania (~27000 km2) and Portugal (~24000 km2)
lie et al., 2017a).
(Pr
ava
In addition to PV installations, CSP systems could be another
notable means to meet EU energy and climatic objectives, if the
installed capacity expansion continues in the Iberic Peninsula,
which has a high availability of DNI resources. However, even if
Spain (and implicitly Europe) is the global leader in CSP systems,
with over 40 large operating projects that have each an installed
capacity of 50 MW (traditional, PTC-type), but also with other
projects with a size capacity below this threshold, it seems the solar
energy market will stagnate in this country in the upcoming years,
while in other states in Asia (China, India) or Africa (South Africa,
Morocco) it will grow (considering the CSP projects currently under
construction) (STE, 2016). In fact, the country's CSP industry is
stagnating since 2013 (since no capacity has been installed), due to
major changes implemented in the policies that initially promoted
the nation-wide construction of new CSP plants (Perez et al., 2014;
Martín et al., 2015).
3.2.4. Africa
The African continent stands out with the world's most abundant solar resources, as 90% (~27 mil km2) of its total area of ~30 mil
km2 is covered by excellent, outstanding and superb GHI classes
(Fig. 2a), which, delimited based on the natural breaks criterion,
comprise annual solar irradiation values that exceed 1800 kWh/m2
(Fig. 12). One third (almost 10 mil km2) of these three classes' total
area, which in a simplified manner indicates a favourable potential
for solar energy use, corresponds to the superb potential class, with
more than 2200 kWh/m2 (Figs. 2a and 12). This maximum potential
is found for the most part in the Sahara Desert in northern Africa,
and in the Namib, Kalahari and Karoo deserts (located across the
Namibia, Botswana and South Africa countries), in the continent's
southern region (Fig. 12). With the exception of the countries
located in the continent's central and western regions, all African
states have favourable solar resources. However, it can be
concluded that only 9 states are actual GHI hotspots, considering at
least a 50% superb potential threshold within national limits e
Namibia (96%, continent and worldwide leader), Sudan (86%), Niger
(84%), Egypt (77%), Western Sahara (72%), Chad (69%), Eritrea (58%),
Libya (56%) and Djibouti (52%) (Fig. 14a). However, in terms of absolute areas, the first 9 hotspots are Sudan (~1.6 mil km2, first position on the continent, but second in the world, after Australia),
Niger (~1 mil km2), Libya (~900000 km2), Chad (~900000 km2),
Namibia
(~800000 km2),
Egypt
(~800000 km2),
Algeria
(~700000 km2),
Mali
(~400000 km2)
and
Mauritania
(~400000 km2) (Fig. 14a).
There are notable DNI resources as well (almost 16 mil km2, 52%
of the continental area) (Fig. 2b), quantified based on three
favourable classes that indicate a high potential of over 1800 kWh/
m2 (Fig. 13). Superb class areas (>2500 kWh/m2) are extensive as
well, totalling 5% (~1.5 mil km2) of Africa's area (Figs. 2b and 13).
Unlike GHI, these maximum DNI potential territories are mainly
found in the south, in the Namib, Kalahari and Karoo deserts
(Fig. 13). Therefore, this is where the states with the highest energy
potential are located and comprise the absolute and percentual DNI
hotspots e Namibia (over 600000 km2, 77% of the national area,
which makes it the African and global leader in terms of the percentual area of the superb class), South Africa (below 600000 km2,
46%) and Botswana (over 100000 km2, 20%) (Figs. 13 and 14b). The
case of another DNI hotspot country is remarkable as well e Egypt
(over 100000 km2, 10%), which is however located in the north
(Figs. 13 and 14b).
Nevertheless, there is a major deficit in the use of solar energy
throughout African states, despite the immense potential of their
GHI resources. Even though two thirds (37) of Africa's 55 states had
a solar PV capacity of at least 1 MW in 2016, South Africa was by far
the leader of this solar sector, with ~60% (~1.5 GW) of the total
continental capacity of ~2.5 GW (IRENA, 2017). This can be
explained, at least in part, by the country's electricity demand,
which is the highest on the continent (252 TWh, 1% of the worldwide total, or roughly one third of the electricity generation in
Africa), according to 2016 statistical data (BPSRWE, 2017). While
Algeria is a distant second (225 MW), its four-fold increase
compared to 2015 values is encouraging (IRENA, 2017). At the same
time, electricity production increase projections (and, implicitly,
solar electricity increase projections) are particularly encouraging
in Algeria, considering the annual growth rate it recorded over the
past decade (7.3%), which is one the highest on the continent
(BPSRWE, 2017). Also, the performance of solar applications in GHI
hotspot countries is low, as they hold below 50 MW PV capacity or
even none at all. While in terms of photovoltaic systems Africa
totals less than 1% of the global PV capacity, the continent's CSP
system performance is more favourable e over 400 MW installed
capacity in 2016 (of which 200 MW in South Africa, over 180 MW in
Morocco, and the rest in Algeria and Egypt), which represents
almost 9% of the worldwide capacity (IRENA, 2017).
The large-scale transition of African countries to solar PV or
other renewable sources does require massive investments, given
the continent's significant technical, economic, political and institutional shortcomings (REN, 2017). For instance, it is estimated that
over $18 billion are needed for building several major transmission
corridors alone (which entail the availability of at least 16500 km of
new transmission lines), in order to ensure power distribution to
various regions throughout the continent (Gies, 2016). Moreover, it
is estimated that renewable energy-related investments needed on
the continent for new generation capacity required in the period
2015e2030 will reach hundreds of billions of dollars (IRENA,
2015b), which makes implementation difficult for most African
countries that are struggling with various economic issues (UNP,
2016). In addition to these financial challenges, political instability is another apparent barrier standing in the way of continental
electrification, necessary on a large scale, considering that
approximately 650 million people in sub-Saharan Africa alone still
do not have access to electricity (Trotter et al., 2018). Nevertheless,
one of the current major opportunities for the continental solar
industry (which is affected by the lack of investments due to the
fact that African states are perceived as high-risk, due to a series of
reasons) is the Scaling Solar project (launched by the World Bank
Group in 2015), which is already supporting several solar projects
in several countries, such as Zambia, Senegal and Madagascar (Gies,
2016).
However, to ensure a large-scale expansion of solar power
throughout the continent (essential especially in the expected
context of many African states tripling their electricity consumption by 2030, compared to 2010) (Wu et al., 2017), transparent and
effective governmental initiatives are also needed, coupled with
clear legislation. An excellent example in this respect is the
“Renewable Energy Independent Power Producer Procurement
Programme”, launched in 2011 in South Africa, which until 2014
alone has generated private investments of up to $14 billion for
developing ~4 GW-worth of solar (mainly PV), wind and other
renewable projects (Eberhard et al., 2014). It was suggested that the
programme had led to a national progress in clean power generation that exceeds what had been achieved in the entire African
continent over the past two decades (Eberhard et al., 2014).
Nevertheless, there presently are common governmental
va
lie et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 209 (2019) 692e721
R. Pra
initiatives with huge potential in accelerating the use of African
solar/renewable resources. These initiatives aim to create three
major power centres on the continent, i.e. the West African Power
Pool, Eastern Africa Power Pool and Southern African Power Pool
(IRENA, 2015c; Oseni and Pollitt, 2016). The role of these three
power pools is to create common energy markets in the countries
located in the three continental regions, which would enhance the
use of renewable energy potential, develop power infrastructures,
expand cross-border trade with renewable power, increase investment in renewable power sectors and create new jobs in the
electricity sector (IRENA, 2015c). Therefore, creating these large
regional electricity markets represents a major pathway also for
promoting solar PV electricity cooperation across many African
nations.
While CSP may be another important option for green energy
option for Africa, notable progress is only being recorded in South
Africa (Baharoon et al., 2015) and Morocco (Kousksou et al., 2015;
Carafa et al., 2016), considering that the installed capacity of the
other two states that hold this technology (Algeria, 25 MW, Egypt,
20 MW) has been stagnating since 2011 (IRENA, 2017). Even though
the two states in the continent's southern and northwestern regions have a lower size capacity than other countries, e.g. Spain, US
and India, they are currently undergoing a massive CSP facility
expansion process, as several large-scale projects were launched in
2016 e Xina Solar One, Redstone and Ilanga (100 MW capacity
each) in South Africa, and NOOR 2 (170 MW) and NOOR 3
(200 MW) in Morocco (STE, 2016). The projects will increase the
two states' capacity to over 0.5 GW in the very near future.
However, northern Africa is known for the biggest solar project
in the world e the Desertec ultra mega project, founded in 2009
following impressive multinational efforts, which aims to export
clean electricity from North Africa and the Middle East to Europe.
The project, mainly based on CSP as the key-technology, initially
foresaw the construction of 100 GW concentrated solar power
plants by 2050, which would generate enough power to cover 15%
of Europe's energy needs until 2050 (Clery, 2010; IRENA, 2012). The
solar plants would have covered a total area of 17000 km2 in the
Sahara Desert and in the Middle East region, and the power would
have been transferred to Europe across the Mediterranean through
high-voltage direct current transmission lines (Clery, 2010). If ever
finalized according to the initial planning, this initiative would be
the greatest cross-border joint project in the world, considering the
extent of the solar energy production infrastructure in several
neighboring countries in Northern Africa and in the Middle East
(Komendantova and Patt, 2014). The project was however abandoned largely because of the extremely high associated costs e over
$400 billion (Clery, 2010), but also due to the high-risk political
context (governmental instability), security threats (terrorism)
(Komendantova et al., 2012), and to other more discreet issues with
which certain countries were struggling (Backhaus et al., 2015). It
was found that even the restrictive environmental conditions (e.g.
dust and sand particles) could be a secondary risk for CSP system
efficiency in the Sahara Desert (as proven by certain recent studies
conducted in several Moroccan sites) (Karim et al., 2014; Bouaddi
et al., 2017), which is known to be one of the world's largest
va
lie, 2016).
dusty hyper-arid and arid regions (Pra
3.2.5. Asia
The largest continent on Earth (~45 mil km2) also stands out in
terms of vast areas that correspond to excellent, outstanding and
superb GHI classes (almost 10 mil km2, 22% of the continent's area)
(Fig. 2a). As for the DNI, the 3 classes' potential is noteworthy as
well (over 8 mil km2, 19%) (Fig. 2b). However, the superb potential is
evident especially for GHI, as it covers an area five times greater (2.3
715
mil km2, 5%) then the one related to the DNI parameter (below
500000 km2, 1%) (Fig. 2). Spatially, the GHI major hotspots are
Middle East (southeastern Iran, and especially in the Arabian
Desert, which overlaps the countries of the Arabian Peninsula and
certain parts of Iraq and Jordan) and Southern Asia (especially in
the western half of Pakistan, Afghanistan, and partially Thar Desert,
northwestern India), while the main DNI hotspots partially include
these regions, as well as Tibetan Plateau (southwestern China) and
central Mongolia (northern half of Gobi Desert) regions (Figs. 15
and 16).
Although the continent's 50 states have different levels of solar
resources, the epicentres of the most favourable GHI potential are
found in Saudi Arabia (1.4 mil km2, by far the country with the
largest absolute superb class area in Asia, equivalent to three
quarters of the national area), Yemen (~400000 km2, 87%) and
Oman (below 300000 km2, 92%) (Figs. 15 and 17a). In terms of
absolute values, several extensive areas are also found in Iran
(>80000 km2) and Pakistan (>40000 km2) (Fig. 17a). In terms of
DNI, China is the leading country in terms of absolute area of superb
potential (>200000 km2, 2%), followed by Saudi Arabia
(~150000 km2, 8%) and Jordan (<50000 km2, 53%) (Figs. 16 and
17b).
The case of Asia is remarkable and particular due to the facts
that it has the highest level of solar PV energy use (139 GW size
capacity in 2016, which shows a high interest in this region's
abundant GHI resources), and that it comprises the country with
the world's highest PV installed capacity e China (77 GW), which in
2016 also had the highest growth rate in the world (more with
30 GW compared to 2015 level, assessed at 43 GW) (IRENA, 2017).
Other important continental PV size poles are Japan (>40 GW),
India (almost 10 GW), South Korea (5 GW), Thailand (>2 GW) and
Taiwan (>1 GW) (IRENA, 2017). Together, these six states total 99%
of the total Asian PV capacity. In contrast, Asia has one of the
world's lowest levels of DNI resource use, with a total CSP capacity
of less than 0.5 GW (most of which is found in India and the United
Arab Emirates), according to official 2016 statistics (IRENA, 2017).
China is therefore the leader of the solar (and, in general, of the
other renewable sources) energy sector globally, not only in terms
of installed capacity, but also in manufacturing field. This double
global supremacy was stimulated by international markets and
many national regulations and policies, including FIT incentives
and the Renewable Energy Law (Honghang et al., 2014; Zhang et al.,
2014; Qiang et al., 2014; Quitzow et al., 2017). From a governmental
policy standpoint, solar energy is considered to be a major pathway
towards a low carbon transition, considering that China is the
largest energy producer/consumer and carbon dioxide emitter in
the world (Liu et al., 2011; Urban et al., 2016). For instance, China
totalled 23% of global energy production in 2014 (Zhang et al.,
2017), but this value increased up to 25% in two years alone, in
2016, when China used 6143 TWh worth of electricity (BPSRWE,
2017).
As the world's most populous country recorded a mean annual
energy production increase of 7.5% over the period 2001e2015
(Yang et al., 2016) or 8.8% between 2005 and 2015 e among the
highest growth rates worldwide in this period (BPSRWE, 2017), it is
not surprising that China's National Development and Reform
Commission launched in 2007 the Medium and Long-term Plan of
Renewable Energy Source Development, which, as of 2014, foresees
a 15% share of non-fossil fuels (renewable and nuclear energy) by
2020 (Zhang et al., 2017). This share of non-fossil fuels in primary
energy consumption was raised to 20% by 2030 following the Paris
Agreement, when China also made the unprecedented commitment to reduce carbon emissions by 60e65% by that same year,
compared to the 2005 level (Yang et al., 2016). Solar energy can play
a primary role in this huge decarbonization plan e a study points
716
va
lie et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 209 (2019) 692e721
R. Pra
out that it is possible to reduce carbon emissions by as much as 80%
by 2050 if an optimal electricity mix of 27% solar, 26% carbon
capture and sequestration of coal energy, 23% wind, 14% nuclear, 6%
hydro, 3% coal and 1% gas is applied (He et al., 2016).
Considering that China is by far the world's leading country in
terms of financial investment in renewable energies (e.g. US$ 102.9
billion in 2015, 36% of the world's total investment of US$ 286
billion that year) (UNEP, 2016), it is highly likely that the solar (PV)
industry sees a spectacular expansion over the next decade e it is
projected to reach 400 GW installed capacity and to provide ~10% of
total electricity demand by 2030 (Li et al., 2014). This threshold is
possible if existing solar resources known for their abundance are
taken into account, especially in the north, west and southwest of
the country (Zou et al., 2017). In fact, it seems that 6300 km2 of the
wasteland from the northern and western parts of the country
alone have a solar potential of 1300 GW of electricity generation
capacity (Kabir et al., 2018). However, easy applicability of solar
energy-based PV technology use may become more complicated in
the context of the current intense aerosol pollution, which reduces
solar irradiance incident on PV panels e by up to 35% in certain
regions in northern and eastern China (Li et al., 2017).
China has already made extraordinary progress in terms of PV
capacity e in 2016 alone 15 provinces, located mostly in the
industrialized eastern parts of the country, added more than 1 GW
each (REN, 2017). Generally, the capacity added in the past years
consists of large-scale PV plants (despite the government's simultaneous efforts to develop small-scale PV installations), such as the
Yanchi project in the Ningxia province (up north), which has
recently become the largest PV plant in the world (1 GW) (REN,
2017), surpassing previous large-scale PV projects in China's
desert areas and other global regions (IEA, 2015). China is also the
world leader in PV manufacturing e in 2016, it accounted for 65% of
the global module production (REN, 2017). China reached this top
position in the past years as a result of a favourable social and
economic context, i.e. abundant human and material resources, low
resource costs, external context of PV markets and high governmental policy support (Zhang et al., 2013b; Huang et al., 2016).
While Japan is another huge PV market in Asia, certain shortcomings of the solar sector seem to persist, e.g. the relatively high
prices of PV systems, compared even with those of other advanced
industrialized nations like Germany (REI, 2016). However, PV and
other clean energies keep growing in this country especially after
the 2011 Fukushima nuclear crisis, which created a real opportunity
for the renewables' expansion into the national energy spectrum
(Ayoub and Yuji, 2012). In fact, this nuclear disaster had profound
repercussions that go beyond national boundaries, e.g. to countries
in Eastern Asia (South Korea and Taiwan) that have since turned
their attention towards the renewable sector (Chen et al., 2014).
However, even though in these instances there is a real interest
for the expansion of solar power especially given the high electricity demand (production of 1000 TWh, 4% of the global total in
Japan, 551 TWh, 2.2% in South Korea or 264 TWh, 1.1% in Taiwan)
(BPSRWE, 2017), an important problem for the future large-scale
installation of solar systems will lie in the limited availability of
solar resources in this Asian region. This issue can be solved in the
coming years once the Gobitec ultra mega project is completed, one
of the most important international energy-related cooperation
initiatives in Eastern Asia. Inspired by Desertec, the Gobitec project
(based on PV and CSP technolgies) aims to harness solar power in
the Gobi Desert (especially from Mongolia) and to deliver at least
100 GW of solar electricity in China, South Korea and Japan, via
approximately 4000 km of high-voltage direct current transmission
lines (Van de Graaf and Sovacool, 2014). While the project, with
total costs estimated at hundreds of billions of dollars, is still at the
planning stage, if completed, it will have a significant contribution
to increasing power security and decarbonizing these major Asian
economies, which are still highly dependent on fossil fuels (Van de
Graaf and Sovacool, 2014).
The solar PV industry will most likely see a notable progress also
in other Asian countries with limited solar resources. This is the
case of ASEAN (Association of Southeast Asian Nations) countries,
which, despite holding modest solar resources compared to Asian
hotspots, have had over the past years remarkable results in the
development of the solar PV sector (Ismail et al., 2015). The most
important reasons contributing to these advances in the field of
solar PV include economy- and energy-focused cooperation (e.g.
the development of a solar energy infrastructure in the transborder
area of neighboring countries such as Thailand, Laos and Vietnam)
(Ismail et al., 2015), as well as the need to reduce dependency on
fossil fuels, which are one of the main elements causing environmental degradation in ASEAN countries (Ahmed et al., 2017a).
Given these circumstances, these countries are already cooperating
closely in order to develop an ASEAN power grid, which has the role
to increase the regional power security, cross-border electricity
trade and harnessing clean and sustainable energy sources, both
solar and especially non-solar (onshore wind, hydro and biomass
resources, considered far more abundant in the region) (Ahmed
et al., 2017b).
In the past years, India has made at least a moderate progress in
the solar PV sector under the aegis of various governmental policies
and programs (Kumar et al., 2010), and has even explored the idea
of implementing large-scale solar farms across the country e e.g. in
2016, India hosted the world's largest solar PV power plant
(Gujarat, ~850 MW) (Sahoo, 2016; Manju and Sagar, 2017).
Considering its solar power targets of 20 GW by 2022, and 100 GW
by 2030 (Sahoo, 2016), the country's decarbonization plan is
remarkable as well as vital, seeing as India is the world's fourth
largest contributor to global CO2 emissions, after China, US and EU
re
et al., 2016). In 2015, it accounted for 6.3%
member states (Le Que
re
et al., 2016).
of worldwide carbon emissions (Le Que
However, by accelerating the development of the solar energy
sector (in addition to other energy sectors), it seems that the
world's second most populous nation is moving quickly towards a
carbon-free economy, in line with the commitments made under
the Paris Agreement e reducing carbon emissions by about one
third by 2030, compared to the 2005 level (Hairat and Ghosh, 2017).
Recently (2015), the initial 20 GW by 2022 target (launched in 2010
by the Jawaharlal Nehru National Solar Mission) was rectified to
100 GW by 2022 (Hairat and Ghosh, 2017; Rathore et al., 2018),
which will be implemented through the development of 40 GW of
PV systems and 60 GW of CSP or CSP/PV technologies, including in
the form of Ultra Mega Solar Power Projects (Hairat and Ghosh,
2017; Dawn et al., 2016). While such a highly ambitious target is
easily attainable in terms of solar resources availability (6000 GW
maximum solar PV potential or up to 2500 GW potential CSP
countrywide, according to relatively recent estimates) (Mahtta
et al., 2014), the rapid expansion of solar power across the country is still facing a number of major economic, technical and social
issues (Hairat and Ghosh, 2017; Kar et al., 2016).
At the same time, in addition to the need to decarbonize and
significant GHI resources (classified as excellent in most of the
country), another reason why India should continue to develop its
PV solar capacities is closely linked to its high electricity production
(and consumption), which in 2016 reached 1401 TWh or 5.6% of the
total worldwide generation (BPSRWE, 2017). India is therefore
placed fourth globally in terms of electricity production/consumption, after China, US and EU member states. Moreover, a solar
expansion in the national energy sector would also be consistent
with the increase in electricity demand, which will most probably
va
lie et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 209 (2019) 692e721
R. Pra
the global electricity generation in 2016) and one of the highest
annual increases in electricity production (6.4% in the past decade)
in the Middle East (BPSRWE, 2017), as a result of various reasons
such as relatively low energy costs, the growing population and
increasing living standards, a high energy demand associated with
seawater desalination and air conditioning, as well as the fast
development of the national infrastructure (Kassem et al., 2017).
It is important to mention that not only Saudi Arabia can
become a major Asian solar power hotspot, but actually the entire
Arabian Gulf region, if Arabian Peninsula states cooperate closely to
this end. In fact, this is an ongoing scenario, seeing as the six GCC
(Gulf Cooperation Council) countries e Saudi Arabia, United Arab
Emirates, Oman, Kuwait, Qatar and Bahrain, already have cooperation plans and national targets for expanding renewable technologies (IRENA, 2016). Despite the fact they are among the largest
oil and gas producers in the world, over the past years GCC countries have started focusing on solar energy, considering it is
believed to be the best renewable option in terms of availability,
cost-competitiveness and regional demand patterns (IRENA, 2016;
Al-Maamary et al., 2017). With regard to solar resources, it is estimated that roughly 60% of the GCC countries' combined area is
highly suitable for PV development, and that using only 1% of this
area could create approximately 470 GW of new solar PV capacity
(IRENA, 2016).
continue over the following years, considering the annual growth
rate of 6.4% recorded in the past decade, 2005e2015 (BPSRWE,
2017).
India's number of CSP installations is on the rise as well,
considering the huge solar potential especially in northwest
(Purohit et al., 2013). While India has already initiated a series of
projects mainly in the Rajasthan state, Thar Desert region
(Baharoon et al., 2015; Sudhakar and Baredar, 2016), there are other
Asian countries (Middle East) with CSP projects underway, such as
Saudi Arabia (where there are huge DNI resources that can support
the concentrating solar power technologies countrywide) (Zell
et al., 2015; Schillings et al., 2004) or even Jordan (Al-Soud and
Hrayshat, 2009). China also has a considerable CSP potential (He
and Kammen, 2016), but progress is still slow in this respect
(Vieira de Souza and Cavalcante, 2017). Together, these emerging
CSP Asian countries (and others that were not mentioned, e.g.
United Arab Emirates) will largely contribute to the possible growth
of up to 20 GW concentrating solar power, a global threshold which
is estimated to be reached in 2020 (Wright, 2015).
For a longer time frame, it appears that Saudi Arabia will become
an important Asian hotspot for solar energy use. There are ambitious plans, by 2040, to expand the renewable sector by 54 GW,
which are to be implemented by building 25 GW CSP, 16 GW PV
capacity, 9 GW wind, 3 GW waste-to-energy and 1 GW geothermal
power capacity (Almarshoud and Adam, 2018). To this end, in the
renewable solar sector alone it is expected that investments of over
US$100 billion will be made (Almarshoud and Adam, 2018), which
will be necessary considering this vast Asian country that holds
immense solar power opportunities had a very low PV capacity and
no CSP facilities in 2016. The implementation of this renewable
strategy would generate immense socio-economic benefits, such as
creating new jobs, increasing national energy security and an
overall sustainable economic development. However, reaching
these objectives over the next two decades is vital given that Saudi
Arabia already has the highest energy demand (331 TWh, 1.3% of
Countries
0
Australia
Marshall
Islands
M
Micronesia
Palau
Kiribati
Nauru
PNG
Tuvalu
Solomon Islands
Vanuatu
Samoa
Fiji
Tonga
New Zealand
Countries
20
3.2.6. Australia and Oceania
With a total area of over 8 mil km2, this region holds by far the
most abundant GHI and DNI resources in Australia (Figs. 18 and 19),
which makes up 95% (~7.7 mil km2) of the last global area our study
covers. Excellent, outstanding and superb GHI and DNI potential
classes total approximately 6.9 mil km2 (89%), i.e. 7.2 mil km2 (94%)
of Australia (Fig. 19), which makes it the world's leading continent
in terms of percentage-expressed solar potential. The maximum
potential (superb class) covers an immense area of 2.4 mil km2
(~30% of the total) for GHI (Fig. 19a), and almost 4 mil km2 (~50%)
Percentage of total area
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
7,723,134
171
629
494
950
31
468,113
25
27,391
12,383
2,801
19,021
605
268,726
0
Australia
M
Marshall Islands
Micronesia
Palau
Kiribati
Nauru
PNG
Tuvalu
Solomon Islands
Vanuatu
Samoa
Fiji
Tonga
New Zealand
10
717
Poor
Marginal
10
20
Fair
30
Good
40
Excellent
50
60
Outstanding
70
80
Superb
90
100
7,723,134
171
629
494
950
31
468,113
25
27,391
12,383
2,801
19,021
605
268,726
Poor
Marginal
Fair
Good
Excellent
Outstanding
Superb
Fig. 19. Percentage classes' extent of global horizontal irradiation (kWh/m2) (a) and direct normal irradiation (kWh/m2) (b) in the countries of Australia and Oceania. Note: the
states are listed from up to down in a descending order considering the maximum latitude values of their northern limits; the absolute values on the left of the columns represent
the total national area (in km2); country abbreviations: PNG e Papua New Guinea; the names used for countries are the common ones, but the official UN names are those listed in
Fig. 18.
718
va
lie et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 209 (2019) 692e721
R. Pra
for DNI (Fig. 19b). These absolute areas make Australia the world
leader in terms of DNI (both as country and continent) and GHI
(only as country, as the first continent is Africa) superb classes.
Spatially, the two parameters' maximum values are mainly found in
the central and western regions of the continent (Fig. 18), in the
Great Victoria, Great Sandy, Tanami, Simpson and Gibson main
deserts.
The analysis of 2016 statistics shows that Australia's solar installations are by far dominant only in terms of PV power (5.6 GW
installed capacity, 98% of the entire Australia and Oceania region,
estimated at 5.7 GW), as CSP systems are almost non-existent on
both continents (IRENA, 2017). In Oceania, a relatively notable PV
capacity of ~50 MW is found in New Zealand (IRENA, 2017). As for
the rest, all 12 remaining island countries have insignificant size
capacities, below 10 MW, or none at all (IRENA, 2017), which is
however not surprising, considering the limited solar resources,
small national territories and low electricity consumption.
Therefore, against the background of lacking governmental
initiatives, Australia has no CSP projects (except for several
demonstration projects) (Clifton and Boruff, 2010), despite having
the world's highest DNI potential, as found by this analysis or
determined by other studies that confirmed that Australia has some
of the planet's best solar resources (Prasad et al., 2015), even
though there is some variability in solar radiation (generally associated with weather conditions) across the continent (Elliston et al.,
2015; Troccoli and Morcrette, 2014). It is however one of the 10
global hotspots of PV technology use, as a result of the fact that, in
the past years, the country has recorded a spectacular growth in
this renewable power sector, amid a series of synergic causes such
as the high electricity demand (production of 257 TWh, 1% of the
global total) (BPSRWE, 2017), the decrease in PV system prices,
increasing governmental support and public awareness regarding
the importance of these solar technologies (Bahadori and Nwaoha,
2013), taking into account the country is heavily dependent on
fossil fuels (especially coal) (Mohr et al., 2015). In fact, it is paradoxical that Australia is the country with the world's highest per
capita carbon emissions (PBLNEAA, 2015), while simultaneously
having the highest annual per capita solar resources (Prasad et al.,
2015). Fortunately, this state of affairs will improve if the country
manages to meet its renewable energy share increase target
(especially solar and wind power), i.e. to 20% by 2020, from the
current level of 4.5% (Prasad et al., 2017).
4. Conclusions
By means of mapping and a detailed statistical analysis of the
GHI and DNI parameters' potential classes (poor, marginal, fair,
good, excellent, outstanding and superb), recently obtained at the
best available spatial resolution, our paper attempted to present, for
the first time, an up-to-date image of solar resource availability (in
terms of intensity and distribution) globally, continentally and
nationally. In line with the first proposed objective of this study
(the analysis of solar radiation distribution and intensity globally,
continentally and nationally), our approach essentially aimed to
analyse the solar geographic potential in a broad sense (the total
land area covered by the seven potential classes), without looking
into the total amount of land area available for solar applications in
various parts of the world (the concrete geographical potential).
However, based on this general initial approach, we plan to conduct
such detailed geographical analyses especially in the major radiation hotspots our study identified in this phase, where sufficient
spatial data on the geographic variables that limit solar technology
use is available (e.g. geospatial data on built, agricultural or protected areas, etc.).
Our results showed that there are several well-defined global
regions for superb (maximum) solar potential, assessed using GHI
and DNI. More specifically, 6 major global GHI and DNI hotspots
were identified (which total vast areas with values that exceed
2200 kWh/m2, and 2500 kWh/m2, respectively), and several national epicentres (delimited considering at least 50% superb potential threshold within national limits) for the two parameters'
maximum values, i.e. 12 for GHI (Namibia, Sudan, Niger, Egypt,
Western Sahara, Chad, Eritrea, Libya, Djibouti, Oman, Yemen and
Saudi Arabia) and 3 for DNI (Namibia, Jordan and Australia). In
terms of absolute areas, alongside some of the aforementioned
countries, the US, Mexico, Chile, Peru, Bolivia, Argentina and China
are also solar resource hotspots at global scale.
By identifying these global hotspots, our study also highlights
the possibility of international cooperation for developing the solar
industry. Considering the fact that many of the countries holding
the largest solar resources are neighboring states, according to our
cartographic results, the present study brings to the forefront opportunities to develop solar projects in numerous cross-border
areas in North America (US e Mexico), South America (Chile e
Peru e Bolivia e Argentina), Africa (especially Saharan states) or
Asia (especially the countries in the Arabian Peninsula). We
therefore believe our results can be a useful instrument for developing solar energy at national or international (regional) level.
However, we want to highlight the fact that, although these
findings are in line with our major objective to identify the solar
geographic potential based on global representative data, the actual
harvesting of solar resources in some identified epicentres is in fact
quite difficult. For instance, in the case of the African continent, it
must be noted that the large-scale use of solar resources becomes
complicated if considering additional factors that can affect solar
power generation, such as restrictive environmental (large
amounts of dust particles in the atmosphere, dust storms or high air
temperatures), economic (insufficient financial resources) or political (governmental instability or war conflicts) conditions. We
therefore recommend caution in interpreting the actual harvesting
of the abundant solar resources identified by us especially in areas
with various socio-political and environmental issues, such as Africa and the Middle East.
In order to partially solve this issue as well, we intend to analyse
the solar energy that can effectively be used in the countries of the
world, not only in terms of land area available for solar applications,
but also in terms of real electricity output that can be obtained
depending on environmental conditions and types of solar systems.
This issue can be addressed by using an already existing instrument
in the Global Solar Atlas, i.e. the PVOUT (PV Electricity output)
database, which constitute the amount of energy converted by a PV
system into electricity, that is expected to be produced according to
the geographical conditions of an area and to the configuration of a
given PV system. Therefore, in addition to analyzing the concrete
geographical potential of at least the major radiation hotspots
already identified in this study, we plan to conduct subsequent
statistical analyses of the solar power that can really be generated
in the world.
Also, our analyses, conducted in accordance with the second
objective (the investigation of the current status of use and necessity of solar energy), showed that contrary to expectations many
of the world's states with significant radiative resources do not
necessarily have a high level of solar power use. Representative
instances of severe solar energy under-exploitation consist first and
foremost of the African states, which hold the planet's amplest
solar resources. This can be broadly explained by the persistence of
the various aforementioned socio-economic and environmental
issues, particularly prominent on this continent. In this context, the
rapid expansion of solar electricity across the continent should be a
major priority for African governments and even international
va
lie et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 209 (2019) 692e721
R. Pra
institutions such as the Green Climate Fund or the World Bank,
which can finance large-scale development of solar projects in this
region and worldwide.
Regarding the third objective (the assessment of the solar resources and solar power systems' importance in the countries'
transition towards a carbon-free economy), our findings show that
the governments of numerous countries can rely on the main solar
technologies (PV and CSP) for an effective national energy sector
decarbonization strategy, as most of them are heavily dependent on
fossil fuels. We are therefore confident that our approach, by
providing more thorough and updated information on solar radiation distribution and intensity, can help support the development
of solar power systems at least in certain key-phases such as
exploration, prospection, site selection and pre-feasibility evaluation. Subsequently, the concrete large-scale implementation of
solar projects can substantially contribute to the transition towards
a carbon-free global economy, essential over the following decades
for fighting climate change and other global environmental issues.
Acknowledgements
The article has enjoyed the support of the LANDERSER project
(No. 107/2018) financed by UEFISCDI program. Also, the article has
enjoyed the support of the PN-III-P1-1.2-PCCDI-2017-0404/
31PCCDI⁄2018 (HORESEC) project. The authors are grateful to the
World Bank Group for providing the global raster data of global
horizontal irradiation and direct normal irradiation. Also, the authors would like to thank the anonymous reviewers for their highly
constructive comments and suggestions that helped improve this
paper. All authors contributed equally to this article.
References
Abram, N.J., McGregor, H.V., Tierney, J.E., Evans, M.N., McKay, N.P., Kaufman, D.S.,
et al., 2016. Early onset of industrial-era warming across the oceans and continents. Nature 536, 411e418.
Ahmed, K., Bhattacharya, M., Shaikh, Z., Ramzan, M., Ozturk, I., 2017a. Emission
intensive growth and trade in the era of the Association of Southeast Asian
Nations (ASEAN) integration: an empirical investigation from ASEAN-8. J. Clean.
Prod. 154, 530e540.
Ahmed, T., Mekhilef, S., Shah, R., Mithulananthan, N., Seyedmahmoudian, M.,
Horan, B., 2017b. ASEAN power grid: a secure transmission infrastructure for
clean and sustainable energy for South-East Asia. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev.
67, 1420e1435.
Al-Maamary, H.M.S., Kazem, H.A., Chaichan, M.T., 2017. Climate change: the game
changer in the Gulf cooperation Council region. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 76,
555e576.
Al-Soud, M.S., Hrayshat, E.S., 2009. A 50 MW concentrating solar power plant for
Jordan. J. Clean. Prod. 17, 625e635.
Alafita, T., Pearce, J.M., 2014. Securitization of residential solar photovoltaic assets:
costs, risks and uncertainty. Energy Pol. 67, 488e498.
Almarshoud, A.F., Adam, E., 2018. Towards VLS-PV deployment in Saudi Arabia:
challenges, opportunities and recommendations. Energy Pol. 114, 422e430.
€ger-Waldau, A., 2017. Photovoltaics and wind status in the EuroArantegui, R.L., Ja
pean union after the Paris agreement. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. doi.org/10.
1016/j.rser.2017.06.052.
Ayoub, N., Yuji, N., 2012. Governmental intervention approaches to promote
renewable energies e special emphasis on Japanese feed-in tariff. Energy Pol.
43, 191e201.
Backhaus, K., Gausling, P., 2015. Hildebrand L. Comparing the incomparable: lessons
to be learned from models evaluating the feasibility of Desertec. Energy 82,
905e913.
Bahadori, A., Nwaoha, C., 2013. A review on solar energy utilisation in Australia.
Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 18, 1e5.
Baharoon, D.A., Rahman, H.A., Omar, W.Z.W., Fadhl, S.O., 2015. Historical development of concentrating solar power technologies to generate clean electricity
efficiently e a review. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 41, 996e1027.
Bale, C.S.E., Varga, L., Foxon, T.J., 2015. Energy and complexity: new ways forward.
Appl. Energy 138, 150e159.
va
lie, R., Patriche, C., Degeratu, M., 2018. Spatial assessment of wind
Bandoc, G., Pra
power potential at global scale.A geographical approach. J. Clean. Prod. 200,
1065e1086.
Barbose, G., Wiser, R., Heeter, J., Mai, T., Bird, L., Bolinger, M., et al., 2016.
A retrospective analysis of benefits and impacts of U.S. renewable portfolio
standards. Energy Pol. 96, 645e660.
719
Bongaarts, J., 2009. Human population growth and the demographic transition.
Philos. Trans. R. Soc 364, 2985e2990.
Bouaddi, S., Ihlal, A., Fern
andez-García, A., 2017. Comparative analysis of soiling of
CSP mirror materials in arid zones. Renew. Energy 101, 437e449.
BPSRWE, 2017. BP Statistical Review of World Energy, June 2017. London, United
Kingdom.
n-Pe
rez, I., de Castro, C., Arto, I., 2017. Assessing vulnerabilities and limits in
Capella
the transition to renewable energies: land requirements under 100% solar energy scenarios. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 77, 760e782.
Carafa, L., Frisari, G., Vidican, G., 2016. Electricity transition in the Middle East and
North Africa: a de-risking governance approach. J. Clean. Prod. 128, 34e47.
Carley, S., 2009. State renewable energy electricity policies: an empirical evaluation
of effectiveness. Energy Pol. 37, 3071e3081.
Carvalho, M.G., 2012. EU energy and climate change strategy. Energy 40, 19e22.
Castillo, C.P., Silva, F.B., Lavalle, C., 2016. An assessment of the regional potential for
solar power generation in EU-28. Energy Pol. 88, 86e99.
Chen, W.M., Kim, H., Yamaguchi, H., 2014. Renewable energy in eastern Asia:
renewable energy policy review and comparative SWOT analysis for promoting
renewable energy in Japan, South Korea, and Taiwan. Energy Pol. 74, 319e329.
Chu, S., Majumdar, A., 2012. Opportunities and challenges for a sustainable energy
future. Nature 488, 294e303.
Clery, D., 2010. Sending African sunlight to Europe, special delivery. Science 329,
782e783.
Clifton, J., Boruff, B.J., 2010. Assessing the potential for concentrated solar power
development in rural Australia. Energy Pol. 38, 5272e5280.
Creutzig, F., Agoston, P., Goldschmidt, J.C., Luderer, G., Nemet, G., Pietzcker, R.C.,
2017. The underestimated potential of solar energy to mitigate climate change.
Nat. Energy 2. https://doi.org/10.1038/nenergy.2017.140.
Davis, S.J., Caldeira, K., Matthews, H.D., 2010. Future CO2 emissions and climate
change from existing energy infrastructure. Science 329, 1330e1333.
Dawn, S., Tiwari, P.K., Goswami, A.K., Mishra, M.K., 2016. Recent developments of
solar energy in India: perspectives, strategies and future goals. Renew. Sustain.
Energy Rev. 62, 215e235.
de Faria Jr., H., Trigoso, F.B.M., Cavalcanti, J.A.M., 2017. Review of distributed generation with photovoltaic grid connected systems in Brazil: challenges and
prospects. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 75, 469e475.
de Smith, M.J., Goodchild, M.F., Longley, P.A., 2015. Geospatial Analysis, fifth ed.
Accessed at. http://www.spatialanalysisonline.com/HTML/index.html.
Devabhaktuni, V., Alam, M., Depuru, S.S.S., Green II, R.C., Nims, D., Near, C., 2013.
Solar energy: trends and enabling technologies. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 19,
555e564.
Don MacElroy, J.M., 2016. Closing the carbon cycle through rational use of carbonbased fuels. AMBIO 45 (Suppl. 1), 5e14.
Eberhard, A., Kolker, J., Leigland, J., 2014. South Africa's Renewable Energy IPP
Procurement Program: Success Factors and Lessons. World Bank Group publication, Washington, D.C., United States.
Elliston, B., MacGill, I., Prasad, A., Kay, M., 2015. Spatio-temporal characterisation of
extended low direct normal irradiance events over Australia using satellite
derived solar radiation data. Renew. Energy 74, 633e639.
s, C., Pino, A., Pereira, E.B., Martins, F.R., Cardemil, J.M., 2014.
Escobar, R.A., Corte
Solar energy resource assessment in Chile: satellite estimation and ground
station measurements. Renew. Energy 71, 324e332.
ESMAP, 2016. Energy Sector Management Assistance Program e Assessing and
Mapping Renewable Energy Resources. Washington, D.C., United States.
Fagiani, R., Barquín, J., Hakvoort, R., 2013. Risk-based assessment of the costefficiency and the effectivity of renewable energy support schemes: certificate markets versus feed-in tariffs. Energy Pol. 55, 648e661.
Feldman, D., Boff, D., Margolis, R., 2016. Q3/Q4 2016 Solar Industry Update, SunShot
U.S. Department of Energy, Washington, D.C.. National Renewable Energy
Laborator (Denver), United States.
Ferreira, A., Kunh, S.S., Fagnani, K.C., De Souza, T.A., Tonezer, C., Dos Santos, G.R.,
et al., 2018. Economic overview of the use and production of photovoltaic solar
energy in Brazil. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 81, 181e191.
Garcia-Heller, V., Espinasa, R., Paredes, S., 2016. Forecast study of the supply curve of
solar and wind technologies in Argentina, Brazil, Chile and Mexico. Renew.
Energy 93, 168e179.
, P., Rudman, J., Mabaso, M., Landman, W.A., von Backstro
€m, T.W., Brent, A.C.,
Gauche
2017. System value and progress of CSP. Sol. Energy. doi.org/10.1016/j.solener.
2017.03.072.
Gies, E., 2016. Can wind and solar fuel Africa's future? Nature 539, 20e22.
Godfray, H.C., Beddington, J.R., Crute, I.R., Haddad, L., Lawrence, D., Muir, J.F., et al.,
2010. Food security: the challenge of feeding 9 billion people. Science 327,
812e818.
Gr
ageda, M., Escudero, M., Alavia, W., Ushak, S., Fthenakis, V., 2016. Review and
multi-criteria assessment of solar energy projects in Chile. Renew. Sustain.
Energy Rev. 59, 583e596.
Greenblatt, J.B., 2015. Modeling California policy impacts on greenhouse gas
emissions. Energy Pol. 78, 158e172.
Grossmann, W.D., Grossmann, I., Steininger, K.W., 2014. Solar electricity generation
across large geographic areas, Part II: a Pan-American energy system based on
solar. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 32, 983e993.
Haberl, H., 2015. Competition for land: a sociometabolic perspective. Ecol. Econ. 119,
424e431.
Hairat, M.K., Ghosh, S., 2017. 100 GW solar power in India by 2022 e a critical review. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 73, 1041e1050.
720
va
lie et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 209 (2019) 692e721
R. Pra
He, G., Kammen, D.M., 2016. Where, when and how much solar is available? A
provincial-scale solar resource assessment for China. Renew. Energy 85, 74e82.
He, G., Avrin, A.P., Nelson, J.H., Johnston, J., Mileva, A., Tian, J., Kammen, D.M., 2016.
SWITCH-China: a systems approach to decarbonizing China's power system.
Environ. Sci. Technol. 50, 5467e5473.
Helbing, D., Brockmann, D., Chadefaux, T., Donnay, K., Blanke, U., Woolley-Meza, O.,
et al., 2015. Saving human lives: what complexity science and information
systems can contribute. J. Stat. Phys. 158, 735e781.
ndez-Moro, J., Martínez-Duart, J.M., 2015. Economic analysis of the contriHerna
bution of photovoltaics to the decarbonization of the power sector. Renew.
Sustain. Energy Rev. 41, 1288e1297.
Honghang, S., Qiang, Z., Yibo, W., Qiang, Y., Jun, S., 2014. China's solar photovoltaic
industry development: the status quo, problems and approaches. Appl. Energy
118, 221e230.
Huang, P., Negro, S.O., Hekkert, M.P., Bi, K., 2016. How China became a leader in
solar PV: an innovation system analysis. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 64,
777e789.
IEA, 2011. International Energy Agency e Solar Energy Perspectives. Paris, France.
IEA, 2015. International Energy Agency e Energy from the Desert: Very Large Scale
PV Power Plants for Shifting to Renewable Energy Future. Paris, France.
IEA, 2016. International Energy Agency e World Energy Outlook 2016, Part B:
Special Focus on Renewable Energy. Paris, France.
IEO, 2016. International Energy Outlook. U.S. Energy Information Administration,
Washington, D.C., United States.
IPCC, 2013. Climate change, 2013 e the physical science basis. In: Contribution of
Working Group I to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel
on Climate Change (IPCC). Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United
Kingdom.
IRENA, 2012. International Renewable Energy Agency e Prospects for the African
Power Sector, Scenarios and Strategies for Africa Project. Abu Dhabi, United
Arab Emirates.
IRENA, 2014. International Renewable Energy Agency e Peru Renewables Readiness
Assessment 2014. Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates.
IRENA, 2015a. International Renewable Energy Agency. Clean Energy Corridor of
Central America (CECCA) strategy, Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates.
IRENA, 2015b. International Renewable Energy Agency. Africa Power Sector: Planning and Prospects for Renewable Energy, Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates.
IRENA, 2015c. Renewable Energy Zones for the Africa Clean Energy Corridor. Multicriteria Analysis for Planning Renewable Energy. Abu Dhabi, United Arab
Emirates.
IRENA, 2016. International Renewable Energy Agency e Renewable Energy Market
Analysis. The GCC region, Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates.
IRENA, 2017. International Renewable Energy Agency. Renewable Capacity Statistics
2017, Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates.
Ismail, A.M., Ramirez-Iniguez, R., Asif, M., Munir, A.B., Muhammad-Sukki, F., 2015.
Progress of solar photovoltaic in ASEAN countries: a review. Renew. Sustain.
Energy Rev. 48, 399e412.
Jenks, G.F., 1977. Optimal Data Classification for Choropleth Maps. Occasional Paper
No. 2. Department of Geography, University of Kansas, Kansas, United States.
Jenks, G.F., Caspall, F.C., 1971. Error on choroplethic maps: definition, measurement,
reduction. Ann. Am. Geogr. 61, 217e244.
Jia, F., Sun, H., Koh, L., 2016. Global solar photovoltaic industry: an overview and
national competitiveness of Taiwan. J. Clean. Prod. 126, 550e562.
Kabir, E., Kumar, P., Kumar, S., Adelodun, A.A., Kim, K.H., 2018. Solar energy: potential and future prospects. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 82, 894e900.
Kannan, N., Vakeesan, D., 2016. Solar energy for future world: - a review. Renew.
Sustain. Energy Rev. 62, 1092e1105.
Kar, S.K., Sharma, A., Roy, B., 2016. Solar energy market developments in India.
Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 62, 121e133.
Karim, M., Naamane, S., Hassani, I.E.A., Delord, C., Belcadi, S., Tochon, P., et al., 2014.
Towards the prediction of CSP mirrors wear: methodology of analysis of
influencing parameters on the mirrors surface degradation: application in two
different sites in Morocco. Sol. Energy 108, 41e50.
Kassem, A., Al-Haddad, K., Komljenovic, D., 2017. Concentrated solar thermal power
in Saudi Arabia: definition and simulation of alternative scenarios. Renew.
Sustain. Energy Rev. 80, 75e91.
Kilinc-Ata, N., 2016. The evaluation of renewable energy policies across EU countries and US states: an econometric approach. Energy Sustain. Develop. 31,
83e90.
Klessmann, C., Held, A., Rathmann, M., Ragwitz, M., 2011. Status and perspectives of
renewable energy policy and deployment in the European Uniondwhat is
needed to reach the 2020 targets? Energy Pol. 39, 7637e7657.
Komendantova, N., Patt, A., 2014. Employment under vertical and horizontal
transfer of concentrated solar power technology to North African countries.
Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 40, 1192e1201.
Komendantova, N., Patt, A., Barras, L., Battaglini, A., 2012. Perception of risks in
renewable energy projects: the case of concentrated solar power in North Africa. Energy Pol. 40, 103e109.
Kousksou, T., Allouhi, A., Belattar, M., Jamil, A., Rhafiki, T.E., Arid, A., et al., 2015.
Renewable energy potential and national policy directions for sustainable
development in Morocco. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 47, 46e57.
Kumar, A., Kumar, K., Kaushik, N., Sharma, S., Mishra, S., 2010. Renewable energy in
India: current status and future potentials. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 14,
2434e2442.
re
, C., Andrew, R.M., Canadell, J.G., Sitch, S., Korsbakken, J.I., Peters, G.P., et al.,
Le Que
2016. Global carbon budget 2016. Earth Syst. Sci. Data 8, 605e649.
Lewis, N.S., 2007. Toward cost-effective solar energy use. Science 315, 798e801.
Li, X., Wagner, F., Peng, W., Yang, J., Mauzerall, D.L., 2017. Reduction of solar
photovoltaic resources due to air pollution in China. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. Unit.
States Am. 114, 11867e11872.
_ G., Butkus, M., 2017. The European Union possibilities to achieve targets
Liobikiene,
of Europe 2020 and Paris agreement climate policy. Renew. Energy 106,
298e309.
Liu, W., Lund, H., Mathiesen, B.V., Zhang, X., 2011. Potential of renewable energy
systems in China. Appl. Energy 88, 518e525.
Mahtta, R., Joshi, P.K., Jindal, A.K., 2014. Solar power potential mapping in India
using remote sensing inputs and environmental parameters. Renew. Energy 71,
255e262.
Manju, S., Sagar, N., 2017. Progressing towards the development of sustainable
energy: a critical review on the current status, applications, developmental
barriers and prospects of solar photovoltaic systems in India. Renew. Sustain.
Energy Rev. 70, 298e313.
~ a, J.L.G., 2015. Promotion of
Martín, H., de la Hoz, J., Velasco, G., Castilla, M., de Vicun
concentrating solar thermal power (CSP) in Spain: performance analysis of the
period 1998e2013. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 50, 1052e1068.
Martínez-Anido, C.B., Vandenbergh, M., de Vries, L., Alecu, C., Purvins, A., Fulli, G.,
et al., 2013. Medium-term demand for European cross-border electricity
transmission capacity. Energy Pol. 61, 207e222.
Martins, F., 2017. PV sector in the European Union countries e clusters and efficiency. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 74, 173e177.
Mateo, C., Frías, P., Cossent, R., Sonvilla, P., Barth, B., 2017. Overcoming the barriers
that hamper a large-scale integration of solar photovoltaic power generation in
European distribution grids. Sol. Energy 153, 574e583.
Mentis, D., Hermann, S., Howells, M., Welsch, M., Siyal, S.H., 2015. Assessing the
technical wind energy potential in Africa a GIS-based approach. Renew. Energy
83, 110e125.
Millar, R.J., Fuglestvedt, J.S., Friedlingstein, P., Rogelj, J., Grubb, M.J., Matthews, H.D.,
et al., 2017. Emission budgets and pathways consistent with limiting warming
to 1.5 C. Nat. Geosci. 10, 741e747.
Millstein, D., Wiser, R., Bolinger, M., Barbose, G., 2017. The climate and air-quality
benefits of wind and solar power in the United States. Nat. Energy 2. https://
doi.org/10.1038/nenergy.2017.134.
Mohr, S.H., Wang, J., Ellem, G., Ward, J., Giurco, D., 2015. Projection of world fossil
fuels by country. Fuel 141, 120e135.
n, G., Haas, J., Telsnig, T., Díaz-Alvarado, F.A., PalmaMoreno-Leiva, S., Díaz-Ferra
Behnke, R., et al., 2017. Towards solar power supply for copper production in
Chile: assessment of global warming potential using a life-cycle approach.
J. Clean. Prod. 164, 242e249.
Mundada, A.S., Prehoda, E.W., Pearce, J.M., 2017. U.S. market for solar photovoltaic
plug-and-play systems. Renew. Energy 103, 255e264.
Munguia, M., 2016. Renewable energy investment in Chile: make hay while the sun
shines. Renew. Energy Focus 17, 234e236.
NREL, 2016. National Renewable Energy Laboratory e 2016 Standard Scenarios
Report. A U.S. Electricity Sector Outlook, Denver, United States.
OECD, 2012. Looking to 2060: Long-term Global Growth Prospects. OECD Economic
Policy Papers, Paris, France.
Oseni, M.O., Pollitt, M.G., 2016. The promotion of regional integration of electricity
markets: lessons for developing countries. Energy Pol. 88, 628e638.
Pansera, M., 2012. Renewable energy for rural areas of Bolivia. Renew. Sustain.
Energy Rev. 16, 6694e6704.
Parkes, R., 2016. Argentina: the new frontier. Renew. Energy Focus 17, 115e117.
PBLNEAA, 2015. Trends in Global CO2 Emissions: 2015 Report. PBL Netherlands
Environmental Assessment Agency (The Hague, Netherlands), European Commission. Joint Research Centre, Ispra, Italy.
~ o, S., Relancio, J., 2014. National incentive programs for CSP
Perez, I., Lopez, A., Bricen
e lessons learned. Energy Procedia 49, 1869e1878.
Pinto, J.T.M., Amaral, K.J., Janissek, P.R., 2016. Deployment of photovoltaics in Brazil:
scenarios, perspectives and policies for low-income housing. Sol. Energy 133,
73e84.
Prasad, A.A., Taylor, R.A., Kay, M., 2015. Assessment of direct normal irradiance and
cloud connections using satellite data over Australia. Appl. Energy 143,
301e311.
Prasad, A.A., Taylor, R.A., Kay, M., 2017. Assessment of solar and wind resource
synergy in Australia. Appl. Energy 190, 354e367.
Pr
av
alie, R., 2016. Drylands extent and environmental issues. A global approach.
Earth Sci. Rev. 161, 259e278.
Pr
av
alie, R., Bandoc, G., 2018. Nuclear energy: between global electricity demand,
worldwide decarbonisation imperativeness, and planetary environmental implications. J. Environ. Manag. 209, 81e92.
Pr
av
alie, R., Patriche, C., Bandoc, G., 2017a. Quantification of land degradation
sensitivity areas in Southern and Central Southeastern Europe. New results
based on improving DISMED methodology with new climate data. Catena 158,
309e320.
Pr
av
alie, R., S
avulescu, I., Patriche, C., Dumitraşcu, M., Bandoc, G., 2017b. Spatial
assessment of land degradation sensitive areas in southwestern Romania using
modified MEDALUS method. Catena 153, 114e130.
Purohit, I., Purohit, P., Shekhar, S., 2013. Evaluating the potential of concentrating
solar power generation in Northwestern India. Energy Pol. 62, 157e175.
Qiang, Z., Honghang, S., Yanxi, L., Yurui, X., Jun, S., 2014. China's solar photovoltaic
policy: an analysis based on policy instruments. Appl. Energy 129, 308e319.
va
lie et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 209 (2019) 692e721
R. Pra
Quitzow, R., Huenteler, J., Asmussen, H., 2017. Development trajectories in China's
wind and solar energy industries: how technology-related differences shape
the dynamics of industry localization and catching up. J. Clean. Prod. 158,
122e133.
Rai, V., Reeves, D.C., Margolis, R., 2016. Overcoming barriers and uncertainties in the
adoption of residential solar PV. Renew. Energy 89, 498e505.
Rathore, P.K.S., Rathore, S., Singh, R.P., Agnihotri, S., 2018. Solar power utility sector
in India: challenges and opportunities. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 81,
2703e2713.
REI, 2016. Renewable Energy Institute e Comparing Prices and Costs of Solar PV in
Japan and Germany e the Reasons Why Solar PV Is More Expensive in Japan.
Tokyo, Japan.
REN, 2016. Renewables 2016 e global status report. In: Renewable Energy Policy
Network for the 21st Century. Paris, France.
REN, 2017. Renewables 2017 e global status report. In: Renewable Energy Policy
Network for the 21st Century. Paris, France.
Resch, G., Held, A., Faber, T., Panzer, C., Toro, F., Haas, R., 2008. Potentials and
prospects for renewable energies at global scale. Energy Pol. 36, 4048e4056.
€ m, J., Steffen, W., Noone, K., Persson, A., Chapin III, F.S., Lambin, E.F., et al.,
Rockstro
2009. A safe operating space for humanity. Nature 461, 472e475.
€ m, J., Gaffney, O., Rogelj, J., Meinshausen, M., Nakicenovic, N.,
Rockstro
Schellnhuber, H.J., 2017. A roadmap for rapid decarbonization. Science 355,
1269e1271.
€hne, N., Fransen, T., Fekete, H., Winkler, H., et al., 2016.
Rogelj, J., den Elzen, M., Ho
Paris Agreement climate proposals need a boost to keep warming well below 2
C. Nature 534, 631e639.
Sahoo, S.K., 2016. Renewable and sustainable energy reviews solar photovoltaic
energy progress in India: a review. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 59, 927e939.
lez, M.O.A., 2017. Photovoltaic solar energy: conceptual
Sampaio, P.G.V., Gonza
framework. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 74, 590e601.
Schillings, C., Meyer, R., Mannstein, H., 2004. Validation of a method for deriving
high resolution direct normal irradiance from satellite data and application for
the Arabian Peninsula. Sol. Energy 76, 485e497.
Solangi, K.H., Islam, M.R., Saidur, R., Rahim, N.A., Fayaz, H., 2011. A review on global
solar energy policy. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 15, 2149e2163.
Spertino, F., Di Leo, P., Cocina, V., 2014. Which are the constraints to the photovoltaic
grid-parity in the main European markets? Sol. Energy 105, 390e400.
STE, 2016. Solar Thermal Electricity, Global Outlook 2016. Greenpeace International
(Amsterdam, Netherlands), European Solar Thermal Electricity Association
(Brussels, Belgium), SolarPACES (Tabernas, Spain).
Sudhakar, J.P.B., Baredar, P., 2016. Concentrated solar power technology in India: a
review. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 63, 593e603.
Súri,
M., Huld, T.A., Dunlop, E.D., Ossenbrink, H.A., 2007. Potential of solar electricity
generation in the European Union member states and candidate countries. Sol.
Energy 81, 1295e1305.
Tilman, D., Balzer, C., Hill, J., Befort, B.L., 2011. Global food demand and the sustainable intensification of agriculture. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. Unit. States Am. 108,
20260e20264.
Trancik, J.E., 2014. Back the renewables boom. Nature 507, 300e302.
Trenchard, H., Perc, M., 2016. Energy saving mechanisms, collective behavior and
the variation range hypothesis in biological systems: a review. Biosystems 147,
721
40e66.
Troccoli, A., Morcrette, J.J., 2014. Skill of direct solar radiation predicted by the
ECMWF global atmospheric model over Australia. J. Appl. Meteorol. Climatol.
53, 2571e2588.
Trotter, P.A., Maconachie, R., McManus, M.C., 2018. Solar energy's potential to
mitigate political risks: the case of an optimised Africa-wide network. Energy
Pol. 117, 108e126.
UNEP, 2016. United Nations Environment Programme e Global Trends in Renewable Energy Investment 2016. Frankfurt School e UNEP Collaborating Centre for
Climate & Sustainable Energy Finance, Frankfurt am Main, Germany.
UNP, 2016. United Nations Publication. World Economic Situation and Prospects
2016, Sales No. E.16.II.C.2. New York, United States.
Urban, F., Geall, S., Wang, Y., 2016. Solar PV and solar water heaters in China:
different pathways to low carbon energy. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 64,
531e542.
Van de Graaf, T., Sovacool, B.K., 2014. Thinking big: politics, progress, and security in
the management of Asian and European energy megaprojects. Energy Pol. 74,
16e27.
Vieira de Souza, L.E., Cavalcante, A.M.G., 2017. Concentrated Solar Power deployment in emerging economies: the cases of China and Brazil. Renew. Sustain.
Energy Rev. 72, 1094e1103.
WEC, 2016. World Energy Council. World Energy Resources 2016, London, United
Kingdom.
Wright, C.I., 2015. Case study in CSP plant performance. Renew. Energy Focus 16,
22e26.
Wu, G.C., Deshmukh, R., Ndhlukula, K., Radojicic, T., Reilly-Moman, J., Phadke, A.,
et al., 2017. Strategic siting and regional grid interconnections key to lowcarbon futures in African countries. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. Unit. States Am. 114
https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1611845114.
Yang, X.J., Hu, H., Tan, T., Li, J., 2016. China's renewable energy goals by 2050. Environ. Develop. 20, 83e90.
Zamfir, A., Colesca, S.E., Corbos, R.A., 2016. Public policies to support the development of renewable energy in Romania: a review. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev.
58, 87e106.
Zell, E., Gasim, S., Wilcox, S., Katamoura, S., Stoffel, T., Shibli, H., et al., 2015.
Assessment of solar radiation resources in Saudi Arabia. Sol. Energy 119,
422e438.
ve, J., Cace
res, G., 2013a. Concentrated solar power
Zhang, H.L., Baeyens, J., Degre
plants: review and design methodology. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 22,
466e481.
Zhang, S., Andrews-Speed, P., Zhao, X., He, Y., 2013b. Interactions between renewable energy policy and renewable energy industrial policy: a critical analysis of
China's policy approach to renewable energies. Energy Pol. 62, 342e353.
Zhang, S., Andrews-Speed, P., Ji, M., 2014. The erratic path of the low-carbon
transition in China: evolution of solar PV policy. Energy Pol. 67, 903e912.
Zhang, D., Wang, J., Lin, Y., Si, Y., Huang, C., Yang, J., et al., 2017. Present situation and
future prospect of renewable energy in China. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 76,
865e871.
Zou, H., Du, H., Ren, J., Sovacool, B.K., Zhang, Y., Mao, G., 2017. Market dynamics,
innovation, and transition in China's solar photovoltaic (PV) industry: a critical
review. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 69, 197e206.