JUSTIFICATION OF FEASIBILITY OF THE APPLICATION PHOTOVOLTAIC POWER PLANTS FOR THE DECARBONISATION OF THERMAL POWER PLANTS
The paper explores the potential of photovoltaic power plants as a tool for partial decarbonisation of thermal power plants, which remain a major source of pollutants and greenhouse gas emissions. The relevance of integrating renewable energy sources into national energy systems is substantiated by...
Збережено в:
| Дата: | 2025 |
|---|---|
| Автор: | |
| Формат: | Стаття |
| Мова: | Англійська |
| Опубліковано: |
General Energy Institute of the National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine
2025
|
| Теми: | |
| Онлайн доступ: | https://systemre.org/index.php/journal/article/view/910 |
| Теги: |
Додати тег
Немає тегів, Будьте першим, хто поставить тег для цього запису!
|
| Назва журналу: | System Research in Energy |
| Завантажити файл: |  |
Репозитарії
System Research in Energy| _version_ | 1871104420490510336 |
|---|---|
| author | Matushkin, Dmytro |
| author_facet | Matushkin, Dmytro |
| author_institution_txt_mv | [
{
"author": "Dmytro Matushkin",
"institution": null
}
] |
| author_sort | Matushkin, Dmytro |
| baseUrl_str | https://systemre.org/index.php/journal/oai |
| collection | OJS |
| datestamp_date | 2026-07-18T12:57:50Z |
| description | The paper explores the potential of photovoltaic power plants as a tool for partial decarbonisation of thermal power plants, which remain a major source of pollutants and greenhouse gas emissions. The relevance of integrating renewable energy sources into national energy systems is substantiated by reducing dependence on fossil fuels, decreasing CO₂ emissions, and achieving climate goals. The current state of thermal power plants, their role in ensuring energy balance, and the key environmental challenges associated with their operation are analyzed. The research methodology is based on a comprehensive analysis of the economic and environmental efficiency of integrating photovoltaic power plants into thermal power plants. The economic assessment includes key indicators such as Total Cost of Ownership (TCO), Net Present Value (NPV), Internal Rate of Return (IRR), Payback Period (PP), and Levelized Cost of Electricity (LCOE). The environmental aspect is evaluated using the Carbon Abatement Cost (CAC) and Energy Return on Investment (EROI). Six integration scenarios for photovoltaic power plants in thermal power plants are proposed, differing in terms of fossil fuel substitution levels, economic feasibility, and technological complexity. The baseline scenario of partial daytime substitution enables for a 41.6 % reduction in fuel consumption and an annual CO₂ emissions reduction of 300 thousand tons. Implementing hybrid battery storage systems or AI-based management enables achieving a 50−55 % substitution rate, leading to a maximum CO₂ emissions reduction of up to 396 thousand tons per year and operational cost savings of up to $26.4 million annually. The study also identifies key barriers to implementing these solutions, including the technical complexity of integrating photovoltaic power plants into the existing thermal power plant infrastructure, insufficient regulatory frameworks, and the need for significant investment. |
| doi_str_mv | 10.15407/srenergy2025.03.109 |
| first_indexed | 2026-03-24T02:03:36Z |
| format | Article |
| fulltext |
Системні дослідження в енергетиці. 2025. 3(83) 109
ISSN 2786-7102 (Online), ISSN 2786-7633 (Print)
https://doi.org/10.15407/srenergy2025.03.109
UDC 621.311.25:621.314:504.5
Dmytro Matushkin, PhD (Engin.), https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4431-7862
General Energy Institute of NAS of Ukraine, 172, Antonovycha St., Kyiv, 03150, Ukraine
e-mail: Matushkin_DS@nas.gov.ua
_______________________________________________________________________________________
JUSTIFICATION OF FEASIBILITY OF THE APPLICATION
PHOTOVOLTAIC POWER PLANTS FOR THE DECARBONISATION OF
THERMAL POWER PLANTS
Abstract. The paper explores the potential of photovoltaic power plants as a tool for partial
decarbonisation of thermal power plants, which remain a major source of pollutants and greenhouse gas
emissions. The relevance of integrating renewable energy sources into national energy systems is
substantiated by reducing dependence on fossil fuels, decreasing CO₂ emissions, and achieving climate
goals. The current state of thermal power plants, their role in ensuring energy balance, and the key
environmental challenges associated with their operation are analyzed. The research methodology is based
on a comprehensive analysis of the economic and environmental efficiency of integrating photovoltaic
power plants into thermal power plants. The economic assessment includes key indicators such as Total
Cost of Ownership (TCO), Net Present Value (NPV), Internal Rate of Return (IRR), Payback Period (PP),
and Levelized Cost of Electricity (LCOE). The environmental aspect is evaluated using the Carbon
Abatement Cost (CAC) and Energy Return on Investment (EROI). Six integration scenarios for photovoltaic
power plants in thermal power plants are proposed, differing in terms of fossil fuel substitution levels,
economic feasibility, and technological complexity. The baseline scenario of partial daytime substitution
enables for a 41.6 % reduction in fuel consumption and an annual CO₂ emissions reduction of 300 thousand
tons. Implementing hybrid battery storage systems or AI-based management enables achieving a 50−55 %
substitution rate, leading to a maximum CO₂ emissions reduction of up to 396 thousand tons per year and
operational cost savings of up to $26.4 million annually. The study also identifies key barriers to
implementing these solutions, including the technical complexity of integrating photovoltaic power plants
into the existing thermal power plant infrastructure, insufficient regulatory frameworks, and the need for
significant investment.
Keywords: photovoltaic power plants, decarbonization, thermal power plants, renewable energy sources,
CO₂ emission reduction, energy transition.
1. Introduction
Thermal power plants remain a crucial component of the global energy mix, providing a significant
portion of electricity production, especially in regions with limited renewable energy penetration. These plants
primarily rely on fossil fuels, such as coal, natural gas, and oil, to generate electricity [1]. In many countries,
they form the backbone of energy supply, ensuring base-load generation to meet constant demand (Fig. 1).
Fig. 1. World electricity generation mix by source [1]
However, the environmental impact of thermal power plants (TPPs) or combined heat and power plants
(CHPPs) is substantial. They are among the largest sources of carbon dioxide (CO₂) emissions, along with
https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4431-7862
mailto:Matushkin_DS@nas.gov.ua
Системні дослідження в енергетиці. 2025. 3(83) 110
other pollutants such as sulfur dioxide (SO₂), nitrogen oxides (NOx), and particulate matter [2, 3]. This has led
to increasing scrutiny and pressure from governments and international bodies to reduce emissions to meet
climate targets outlined in global agreements such as the Paris Agreement [2].
In terms of infrastructure, many TPPs are ageing, with a considerable number of facilities operating
beyond their optimal lifespan. This results in inefficiencies, increased maintenance costs, and a greater risk of
plant failure. Additionally, the reliance on fossil fuels for energy generation is becoming increasingly
unsustainable, as it exacerbates environmental degradation and is subject to the volatility of global fuel
markets.
Despite the growing recognition of the need for transition, TPPs continue to play a central role in
ensuring grid stability and energy security in many regions. They provide dispatchable power, meaning they
can be quickly ramped up or down to respond to fluctuations in electricity demand or supply from variable
renewable energy sources (RES) (e.g., wind and solar).
In the context of decarbonization efforts, the integration of RES, particularly photovoltaic power plants
(PVPPs), into the operation of TPPs has gained traction. Such integration allows for a reduction in the amount
of fossil fuel consumed while maintaining the reliability of the grid and reducing CO₂ emissions. However,
the transition to more sustainable operations requires addressing challenges related to infrastructure
modifications, investment, and regulatory frameworks [4].
The current state of TPPs underscores the need for transformation, with a clear emphasis on modernizing
and decarbonizing existing facilities while preparing for the integration of cleaner energy alternatives.
The objective of this research is to analyze the potential for integrating photovoltaic power plants into
the operation of thermal power plants to reduce their carbon footprint, enhance energy efficiency, and decrease
dependence on fossil energy resources.
2. State of the Issue
2.1. Overview of the Emission Levels of Thermal Power Plants
Traditional TPPs that use coal and natural gas as fuel have a significant environmental impact, as they
are among the primary sources of greenhouse gas emissions, including CO₂, NOₓ, and SO₂. The emissions of
these harmful gases can vary depending on several factors, including the type of fuel used, the technological
characteristics of the combustion process, and the efficiency and reliability of emission control systems at a
specific facility.
Coal-fired TPPs in Ukraine rank among the top polluters in Europe. According to analysts' estimates,
Ukrainian TPPs account for 72 % of all fly ash emissions in Europe. This exceeds the total emissions of similar
power plants in EU countries, Turkey, and the Western Balkans combined, highlighting a significant
environmental issue associated with coal use in Ukraine's energy sector (Fig. 2). This situation not only
threatens the country’s environmental security but also necessitates a review of energy policy to reduce
emissions and transition to cleaner and more efficient energy sources.
Fig. 2. Contribution of Countries to Air Pollution from Coal-Fired Power Plants [5]
Системні дослідження в енергетиці. 2025. 3(83) 111
Coal-fired power generation is one of the most carbon-intensive sources of electricity, emitting
approximately 900 gCO₂ per kilowatt-hour produced [5]. Before the war, Ukraine operated 20 coal-fired
thermal power plants, some of which were among the largest polluters in Europe and globally. The operation
of these plants has significantly deteriorated the environmental situation, contributing to increased
concentrations of harmful substances in the atmosphere.
Notably, there had been a rise in fine particulate matter (PM2.5), sulfur dioxide (SO₂), nitrogen dioxide
(NO₂), and ozone levels, which adversely affect public health not only in Ukraine but also in neighboring
countries (Fig. 3 and 4) [6].
Fig. 3. Annual average concentrations of PM2.5, NO2, and SO2 from TPPs in 2018 and 2019 [6]
Системні дослідження в енергетиці. 2025. 3(83) 112
Fig. 4. Maximum daily concentration of PM2.5, NO2, and SO2 from TPPs in 2018 and 2019 [6]
These figures focus specifically on air pollution from TPPs, illustrating the annual average (Fig. 3) and
maximum daily (Fig. 4) concentrations of PM2.5, NO₂, and SO₂ in 2018 and 2019. The maps highlight
pollution hotspots near major TPP locations, where emissions from coal and fossil fuel combustion
significantly contribute to deteriorating air quality.
The annual average concentrations (Fig. 3) reveal persistent levels of PM2.5, NO₂, and SO₂ in regions
with high TPP activity. While SO₂ emissions appear slightly reduced in 2019, likely due to fuel transitions or
emission control measures, PM2.5 and NO₂ remain concerning, indicating continued reliance on fossil fuel-
based power generation.
The maximum daily concentrations (Fig. 4) emphasize periods of extreme pollution, demonstrating
short-term spikes in emissions. These peaks suggest the impact of high-demand periods, seasonal variations,
and operational conditions of TPPs, where increased energy production leads to intensified pollutant release.
Overall, the data confirm that TPPs remain a major source of air pollution, with fine particulate matter
(PM2.5) and nitrogen dioxide (NO₂) posing significant environmental and health risks. While some progress
in SO₂ reduction is observed, further emission control strategies and cleaner energy alternatives are necessary
to mitigate TPP-related pollution.
Системні дослідження в енергетиці. 2025. 3(83) 113
According to the data from the State Statistics Service of Ukraine, in 2021, carbon dioxide emissions
from stationary sources of pollution amounted to 111.9 million tons. The highest CO2 emission levels (over
22 million tons) were recorded in Donetsk and Dnipropetrovsk regions, while the lowest emissions (less than
0.5 million tons) were observed in Chernivtsi, Kherson, Ternopil, Volyn, and Zakarpattia regions (Fig. 5) [7].
Fig. 5. Carbon dioxide emissions by regions of Ukraine, 2021 [7]
In 2021, approximately 4.5 million tons of carbon dioxide were emitted into the atmosphere of Kyiv,
placing the city 6th among Ukraine's regions for air pollution levels. In Kyiv region, this figure amounted to
around 4.3 million tons, ranking it 7th. The main sources of emissions in the region are industrial enterprises,
thermal power plants, and the transport sector, which plays a significant role in air pollution due to the high
concentration of vehicles.
One of the largest industrial polluters is the Darnytsia CHPP, which emits significant amounts of
nitrogen oxides, sulfur dioxide, and fine particulate matter, negatively affecting air quality in Kyiv and
surrounding areas. A similar situation is observed in the region, where power-generating enterprises, along
with industrial facilities, contribute to local increases in pollution levels.
An additional environmental issue for the region is the accumulation of ash and slag waste generated by
thermal power plants. Their volumes reach hundreds of thousands of tons annually, and the dumps occupy
large areas. Due to erosion processes, ash particles are released into the air, worsening the environmental
situation, while heavy metals from the waste migrate into soils and groundwater. The chemical composition
of these wastes contains elevated concentrations of CaO (4−12 times higher), Al₂O₃ (2 times higher), Fe₂O₃
(1.5−3 times higher), and MgO (2−3 times higher), which may lead to geochemical anomalies [8, 9].
Thus, the high volumes of industrial emissions and the accumulation of ash and slag waste in Kyiv and
Kyiv region create serious environmental threats, requiring comprehensive measures to reduce pollution levels,
modernize energy facilities, and introduce environmentally safe methods for industrial waste disposal.
2.2. Decarbonization Technologies
Decarbonization involves the reduction of carbon oxide emissions into the atmosphere, particularly in
electricity generation, industrial sectors (such as coal, oil and gas, and metallurgy), and the transportation
sector. The primary approaches to decarbonization include improving technologies to reduce CO₂ emissions,
the development of alternative energy sources, the use of alternative fuels, and the efficient utilization of
mineral resources. Key stages of decarbonization encompass the capture, storage, and utilization of CO₂, and
its transportation to storage or utilization sites.
Carbon dioxide capture is a critical stage in decarbonization, as it allows for the reduction of CO₂
emissions into the atmosphere [10−14]. The capture process involves separating CO₂ from the main gas stream
and creating a concentrated CO₂ stream under high pressure for transportation to a storage site. Various
methods are used for this purpose, such as solvents, membranes, solid sorbents, or cryogenic separation [2].
The choice of the capture system depends on the concentration of CO₂ in the gas stream and the pressure.
Системні дослідження в енергетиці. 2025. 3(83) 114
Advancements in such systems can reduce gas emissions by up to 90 %, while the use of oxy-fuel combustion
allows nearly all CO₂ to be captured.
After CO₂ capture, the next step is its transportation to storage sites [5, 6, 15, 16]. Transportation is
carried out for the concentrated CO₂ stream under high pressure using pipelines, road, or rail transport, each
with its characteristics. Pipeline transportation requires maintaining a pressure above 8 MPa, which reduces
the cost of CO₂ but requires additional compressor stations [10]. Road or rail transport is carried out in special
tankers at a temperature of -20°C and a pressure of 2 MPa, which may impact economic efficiency. The
advantage of pipelines is that dry gas, even with impurities (such as sulfur or nitrogen oxides), does not cause
pipeline corrosion. High-pressure transportation also reduces the cost of CO₂ due to increased density.
However, to prevent pipeline corrosion, moisture must be removed from the CO₂ stream or special pipeline
coatings must be used. Additionally, pipeline transportation carries the same leak risks that exist with
hydrocarbon transport.
The storage of carbon dioxide [5−7, 10, 11, 17] is carried out to maintain reservoir pressure and enhance
oil and gas recovery, particularly in reservoir rocks and shale formations with a high organic content. This can
involve the use of depleted oil and gas fields, with storage depths exceeding 800 meters. The CO₂ injection
process can utilize oil and gas industry technologies for enhanced oil recovery, where gas is injected into the
reservoir. At these depths, the gas density is similar to certain types of oil, and when CO₂ is injected, the
compressed gas displaces oil or gas, thereby increasing the porous volume for further storage. During CO₂
storage in geological formations, chemical reactions occur between CO₂, the rock, and water, leading to the
formation of carbonate minerals. In saline formations, the volume for CO₂ storage will not exceed 30 % of the
total rock volume. When storing CO₂ in shale formations with a high organic content, the gas will displace
methane, and this process may occur at shallower depths.
For the storage of CO₂ in deep geological formations, several steps must be taken: identifying optimal
storage sites with minimal risk of CO₂ leakage, considering the presence of impermeable cap rocks and the
absence of tectonic faults; identifying potential CO₂ leakage zones; modelling processes that may occur in
natural reservoirs; assessing environmental contamination risks; and developing a monitoring system to
oversee the storage process.
Industrial fixation of carbon dioxide through mineral carbonation, using alkali and alkaline earth oxides
such as MgO and CaO, can significantly reduce CO₂ emissions into the atmosphere. To fix 1 ton of CO₂,
between 1,6 and 3,7 tons of silicate rock are required [18]. One advantage of this technology is that CO₂ does
not enter the environment. The products obtained during the process can be used in the construction industry
for producing building materials [19]. The raw material for this process may include power plant waste
containing MgO and CaO, particularly fly ash and slag.
The carbonation process is based on the natural rock weathering process, but it can be accelerated by
mechanochemical activation. This method increases the chemical activity of materials through ultrafine
grinding, which promotes the breakdown of the crystalline lattice. The activation mechanism may involve
grinding minerals in the presence of CO₂, resulting in the formation of stable Mg and Ca carbonates. Unlike
traditional technologies, the mechanochemical activation method is less energy-intensive, making it promising
for industrial applications.
2.3. Prospects for Photovoltaic Power Plants
Since a significant portion of greenhouse gas emissions is linked to the use of fossil fuels, it is critically
important to transition quickly from oil, gas, and coal to cleaner energy sources. The primary driver for
transitioning to 100 % RES has been global warming, which causes serious environmental consequences, as
well as economic issues related to dependence on non-renewable resources. The use of RES, such as solar,
wind, and hydropower, not only helps reduce climate impact but also ensures more stable economic conditions
for development by decreasing dependence on fluctuations in oil and gas prices.
Wind and solar energy have great potential for producing low-carbon energy at competitive costs. The
prices of photovoltaic (PV) modules have decreased by more than 80 % since the early 2010s, while the prices
of wind turbines have dropped by 30−40 %. However, even with the combination of these sources, variable
Системні дослідження в енергетиці. 2025. 3(83) 115
RES generation remains susceptible to significant fluctuations. This issue can be addressed by expanding
networks over large areas with sufficient capacity or by using efficient energy storage systems. According to
the International Renewable Energy Agency (IRENA), the deployment of RES needs to be significantly
accelerated – by a factor of six – while maintaining a pace that ensures global temperature rise does not exceed
2°C. Additionally, managing industrial energy consumption loads can play a key role in balancing RES
production and its demand.
Solar PVs have become the most cost-effective method of electricity generation in many regions of the
world, reducing production costs to $0.015−0.02 per kWh. The growth of PV capacity follows an exponential
pattern, with the number of installed PV panels doubling every three years. This trend highlights the consistent
reduction in technology costs and their rapid development, making solar energy increasingly accessible to
various countries and regions.
Another technology is Concentrated Solar Power, which uses mirrors or lenses to focus a large amount
of sunlight onto a receiver. This process significantly increases the efficiency of energy collection. With CSP,
energy can be stored for several hours, enabling continuous electricity generation even after sunset or under
cloudy conditions.
Decarbonizing the energy sector through the implementation of PVPPs is a key step in reducing the
carbon footprint and achieving sustainable development goals. The installation of PVPPs also contributes to
the development of local economies by creating new jobs and reducing long-term energy costs.
Estimates suggest that replacing 1 MWh of energy produced by coal can reduce CO₂ emissions by
800−1200 kg [20]. Transitioning to solar energy can lead to significant emission reductions, especially in
regions where a large portion of the energy sector still depends on fossil fuel sources. This transition has the
potential not only to reduce emissions but also to substantially improve the environmental situation in these
areas.
For example, in the EU, the implementation of solar energy has led to a reduction of CO₂ emissions by
over 200 million tons in the last decade. This has been made possible by the large-scale development of PVPPs,
which replaced old coal and gas power plants. As the analysis shows, the transition to RES significantly
reduces greenhouse gas emissions and improves the environmental situation. Fig. 6 shows the average CO₂
emissions for different energy sources in 2020, demonstrating the substantial impact of solar energy on
reducing the carbon footprint.
Fig. 6. Greenhouse Gas Emissions Over the Life Cycle of Different Energy Sources
As shown in Fig. 6, the average CO₂ emission intensity over the life cycle of PVPPs is approximately
0.04 kg CO₂/kWh, while the emission intensity of coal usage reaches about 1 kg CO₂/kWh. This means that
coal generates 25 times more CO₂ per unit of energy produced compared to solar energy, highlighting the
significant environmental potential of transitioning to RES to reduce greenhouse gas emissions from traditional
energy.
Системні дослідження в енергетиці. 2025. 3(83) 116
3. Assessment of the Economic and Environmental Efficiency of Photovoltaic Power Plants for
the Decarbonization of Thermal Power Plants
The assessment of the economic and environmental effectiveness of PVPPs applying for partial
decarbonization of TPPs is a key step in determining the feasibility of integrating RES into traditional energy
supply systems. A comprehensive approach, including indicators such as Total Cost of Ownership (TCO), Net
Present Value (NPV), Internal Rate of Return (IRR), Payback Period (PP), and Levelized Cost of Energy
(LCOE) for evaluating economic efficiency, as well as Carbon Abatement Cost (CAC) and Energy Return on
Investment (EROI) for analyzing environmental impact, allows for a detailed analysis of both financial aspects
and the contribution to CO₂ emissions reduction. This analysis supports the development of well-grounded
decisions for the modernization of the energy sector and the transition to more sustainable and environmentally
friendly electricity generation technologies.
TCO refers to the total cost of owning a PVPP, which includes all expenses over its lifecycle. TCO
enables the evaluation of actual costs and is used to compare different energy technology options. It is
calculated using the following expression (1).
( )
, ,
1
1
N t t
t t
OpE REPLAC
Ca
Ex
pEx
C C
TCO C
r
=
+
= +
+
, (1)
where CapExC represents the capital costs (investments in construction, equipment, and infrastructure) for the
construction of a PVPP; ,tOpExC denotes operational and technical costs (maintenance, insurance, component
replacement) in year t; ,REPLACE tC indicates the costs for equipment replacement (financing costs such as
loans and interest) in a year t; r is the discount rate; N is the lifetime of a PVPP.
NPV assesses the total value of a project in present monetary terms.
Interpretation:
• NPV > 0 – the project is profitable;
• NPV < 0 – the project is unprofitable.
( )
0
1
N t
t t CapEx
CF
NPV C
r
=
= −
+
, (2)
where tCF is the net cash flows in a year t.
IRR is the discount rate at which the Net Present Value (NPV) of a project equals zero. This indicator
helps evaluate the profitability of an investment project in comparison with alternative financing options. It is
formally described as:
( )
0
0
1
N t
t t CapEx
CF
C
IRR
=
− =
+
, (3)
where N is the total number of periods (years, months, etc.).
PP evaluates the time required to recover the initial investment through net cash flows, without
considering discounting. A shorter PP indicates a faster return on investment, which is a positive factor:
minPP T= , at which
1
T
Tt CapExCF C
=
, (4)
LCOE for a PVPP replacing fossil fuel-based generation at a TPP involves analyzing the costs of
electricity generation, taking into account capital expenditures, operational costs, financing costs, and the
amount of energy produced by the plant throughout its lifecycle.
( )
( )
, , ,1
1
1
N
t t tt
N
t t
REPLA
t
CapE x CE
PV otal
x OpEC C C
LCOE
E
r
=
=
+ +
=
+
, (5)
where PVtotalE is the electricity generated per year t by a PVPP, kWh.
Системні дослідження в енергетиці. 2025. 3(83) 117
CAC describes the cost of reducing 1 ton of CO₂ through a PVPP implementation. A lower CAC
indicates a more economically efficient reduction in emissions.
2
TCO
CAC
CO
=
, (6)
where ΔCO2 is the reduction of CO₂ emissions (tons/year or over the entire lifecycle).
EROI evaluates the ratio of energy produced by a PVPP to the energy invested in its production,
construction, and operation. This indicator demonstrates energy efficiency: the higher the EROI, the more
energy is obtained compared to the energy expended.
total prod
total invest
E
EROI
E
= , (7)
where total prodE is the total generated energy, kWh; total investE is the total energy expended on the creation,
construction, and maintenance of a PVPP, kWh.
4. Calculation of Economic and Environmental Indicators for the Replacement of a Thermal
Power Plant with a Photovoltaic Power Plant
It should be noted that directly comparing the installed capacity of a PVPP with that of a TPP is not
entirely accurate, as PVPPs have a significantly lower capacity factor. Thermal power plants, such as the
Darnytsia CHPP, operate almost continuously, resulting in a capacity factor of 50−80 %, whereas, for PVPPs,
typical values range from 15−25 %.
The primary consideration regarding the following calculation is that the values are approximate and
depend on specific market, technological, and regional conditions.
4.1. Estimation of the Energy Generated by a Photovoltaic Power Plant Compared to the Energy
Demand from a Thermal Power Plant
1. Assessment of the energy performance of Darnytsia CHPP:
– Total Energy Output: 800 million kWh/year [21];
– Assumptions on production distribution: If the CHPP operates continuously for 24 hours a day, the
energy output can be approximately distributed as follows:
• Daytime Segment (10 hours):
day
10
E 800 333 ( mi )kW hllion
2
s
4
· our / year= ;
• Nighttime Segment (14 hours):
night
14
E 800 467 ( m )kWillion
2
· s
4
hour / year= .
The distribution may vary depending on the actual load; however, for the sake of example, we will
consider this simplified allocation.
2. Calculation of the required capacity of a PVPP to replace the Darnytsia CHPP:
1. Assume a capacity factor of the PVPP of ~17 %.
2. Annual electricity generation from 1 MW of installed capacity of a PVPP:
1MWE 1 MW 8760 Hours 0.17 1.489 ( million )kW·hours / MW= .
3. Required installed capacity of a PVPP to Generate 333 million kWh per year:
( )PV
333 million
P 224 MW .
9
kW·hours / year
kW·hou. rs / yea r / MW1 48 million
=
Thus, to estimate the replacement of the Darnytsia CHPP, which supplies 333 million kWh of electricity
per year during daytime hours, a PVPP project with a total installed capacity of approximately 220−230 MW
should be considered as a reference.
Below is a step-by-step approach for calculating the economic impact and emission reductions resulting
from the partial replacement of the Darnytsia CHPP with a PVPP.
Системні дослідження в енергетиці. 2025. 3(83) 118
The calculations were performed under the following conditions:
– installed capacity of the PVPP: 224 MW;
– annual electricity generation by the PVPP: ≈ 333 million kWh;
– operational lifetime: 25 years (the standard lifespan of a PVPP is 20−30 years, considering PV panel
degradation of approximately 0.5 % per year) [22];
– discount rate: 7 % [23].
Key Assumptions:
– CapEx: $1 million/MW → $224 million (the construction cost of 1 MW of PVPP ranges between
$850,000 and $1.2 million, depending on technology and location.) [24];
– OpEx: 1.5 % of CapEx → $33.36 million/year (Standard operational costs for large-scale PVPPs are
1−2 % of CapEx annually, including maintenance of the plant, inverters, communication systems, monitoring,
insurance, and administrative expenses) [24];
– equipment replacement costs: $11.2 million (at years 10 and 20) (most equipment has a long lifespan,
but inverters typically require replacement after 10−12 years, accounting for 5 % of CapEx):
– electricity sale price: $0.08/kWh (the average market price of electricity in Ukraine ranges between
$0.07-0.09/kWh [25]);
– emission factor of the CHPP: 0.9 kg CO₂/kWh (for coal- or oil-fired TPPs, the typical emission factor
ranges from 0.8 to 1.0 kg CO₂/kWh, this example considers coal specifically) [26];
– embodied energy (investment energy): 1000 kWh/kW of installed capacity (the energy required for
manufacturing and installing 1 kW of PVPP capacity ranges between 800 and 1200 kWh/kW. For
monocrystalline panels, which are currently the standard, the value of 1000 kWh/kW is adopted.).
4.2. TCO and LCOE Calculation
A. Calculation of TCO
1. Discounted sum of OpEx:
( ) ( )
( )
N
OpEx OpE
25
x
1 1 r 1 1 0.07
PV C 3.36 $39.16 million
r 0.07
− −
− + − +
= = = .
2. Discounted sum of equipment replacement costs:
• 10th year:
( )
( )replace10 10
11.2
PV $5.68 milllion
1 0.07
= =
+
;
• 20th year:
( )
( )replace10 20
11.2
PV $2.89 milllion
1 0.07
= =
+
;
3. ( )$224 million $5.68 million $2.89 million $271.78 million $272 millionTCO = + + = .
B. Calculation of LCOE:
1. Discounted sum of generated energy:
Annual Generation 333 /yearE kWh year= .
Total Discounted Energy Output Over 25 Years: ≈ 11,65 GWh, therefore:
( )9
333 11.65 3.89 10PVtotalE kWh= = .
2. ( )
6
9
272 10
0.068=$0.07 kWh
3.89 10
LCOE
=
.
4.3. Calculation of Cash Flows, NPV, IRR, and Payback Period
Revenue Assumptions:
– annual revenue from electricity sales:
( )year energyCF E С 333 0.08 $26.68 million / year= = = ,
where energyС is the price of electricity sales.
– annual net cash flow (excluding replacements):
Системні дослідження в енергетиці. 2025. 3(83) 119
a tye r ReplC aceme F CC nt tF os= − ,
where tReplacement Cost is the costs for equipment replacement in year t.
( )yearCF $26.68 million $3.36 million $23.32 million= − = .
In years 10 and 20, an additional negative cash flow burden is added to the net cash flow yearCF due to
replacement costs:
( )10 year 20 yearCF CF $23.32 million $11.2 million $12.12 million= = − = .
А. Calculation of NPV:
( )$271.88 million $8.58 million $224 million $39.30 millionNPV = − − .
Since the NPV is positive, this suggests the potential profitability of implementing the PVPP project.
B. Calculation of IRR:
The IRR is the discount rate (r) at which NPV = 0:
( )
25
1 25
224 0
1
t
t
CF
NPV
IRR
=
= − =
+
.
Using the given assumptions:
• At r = 7 %: NPV ≈ «+» $39 million
• At r = 9 %: NPV ≈ «-» $1,73 million.
• Using interpolation between 7 % and 9 %: IRR ≈ 8.9 %.
This indicates that an investor could achieve an 8.9% annual return on this project. If the expected rate
of return is higher than 8.9 %, the project may become less attractive compared to other investment options.
Thus, IRR = 8.9 % serves as a benchmark for evaluating the financial feasibility of the investment.
C. Determination of Payback Period:
• Undiscounted: Cumulative net cash flow ≈ 9 years $23.32 million = $209.88 million + 10th year
($12,12 million) gives us ≈ $222 million, which is a little less than $224 million. This indicates that over 10
years, the cumulative net cash flows reached approximately $222 million, which is almost equal to the initial
investment. Since the accumulation of net cash flows reaches or exceeds the initial investment between years
10 and 11, the undiscounted PP is estimated to be approximately 10−11 years.
• Discounted accounts for the time value of money. This means that cash flows at the beginning of the
project have a higher present value than those received later. According to the calculations, the cumulative
discounted revenue surpasses the initial investment between years 17 and 18. Therefore, the discounted PP is
approximately 17−18 years, meaning that the project recovers its investment within this timeframe,
considering the time value of money.
4.4. Calculation of CAC
Annual avoided CO₂ emissions:
( )6 6
2 333 10 kWh/year 0,9 kg/kWh 300 10 300 000 ton/yearCO = = .
Total avoided CO₂ emissions over 25 years:
( )2 300 000 ton/year 25 years = 7.5 million tonTotalCO = .
Cost of CO₂ Reduction:
( )
6
26
272 10
= =$36.24 ton CO
7.5 10
CAC
.
Using calculations, the cost of reducing 1 ton of CO₂ is approximately $36.
While $36/ton CO₂ appears to be a moderate cost, it considers not only the direct installation and
maintenance expenses of a PVPP but also the long-term reduction of greenhouse gas emissions. This cost is
competitive compared to other CO₂ reduction technologies, such as carbon capture and storage or green
hydrogen, which have significantly higher costs.
Системні дослідження в енергетиці. 2025. 3(83) 120
For long-term investments, this approach may be economically viable, as the benefits of emissions
reduction and stable energy costs outweigh the initial setup expenses.
4.5. Calculation of EROI
Assuming the investment energy for a PVPP is 1000 kWh/kW of installed capacity:
Energy invested in construction:
( ) 224000 kW 1000 kWh 224 million kWhtotal investE = = ;
Total energy produced over 25 years:
( ) 333.536 million kW/year 25 8338 million kWtotal prodE = = ;
8338
37.2
224
EROI = = .
The obtained results confirm the economic and environmental feasibility of integrating a 224 MW PVPP
for the partial replacement of the Darnytsia CHPP. The TCO of the project is estimated at $272 million, which
aligns with the typical capital expenditure levels for power plants of this scale. Furthermore, the LCOE is
$0.07/kWh, ensuring competitiveness compared to conventional fossil-fuel-based power generation.
An NPV of «+» $39 million confirms the financial viability of the project, while an IRR of 8.9 %
indicates an acceptable return considering a 7 % discount rate. The PP is estimated at 10−11 years
(undiscounted) and 17−18 years (discounted, considering the cost of capital), which aligns with typical
benchmarks for renewable energy projects.
From an environmental perspective, the implementation of the PVPP enables a significant reduction in
emissions, achieving an annual decrease of 300,000 tons of CO₂. The average CAC is $36 per ton of CO₂,
which is highly competitive within the global trend toward carbon regulation and pricing. An additional
confirmation of the project`s efficiency is the EROI of 37.2 during daylight hours, which is substantially higher
than the typical range for CHPP generation (10−15). This highlights the high energy efficiency of PV
technologies compared to fossil-fuel-based alternatives.
Thus, integrating PVPPs into the operation of TPPs can be an economically justified step, leading to a
significant reduction in fossil fuel consumption, optimization of operational costs, and lower greenhouse gas
emissions. With additional support mechanisms such as low-interest financing and feed-in tariffs, this project
could become even more attractive for investors, further accelerating the transition to a low-carbon energy
system.
5. Scenarios for Integrating Photovoltaic Power Plants into Thermal Power Plant Operations
In addition to daytime partial replacement, which serves as the baseline scenario (S1), five additional
scenarios for integrating PVPP into TPP operations have been developed. These scenarios aim to partially
replace fossil fuels and reduce dependence on conventional energy sources:
– Scenario 1 (S1, Baseline) – partial daytime replacement: a 224 MW PVPP generates approximately
333 million kWh per year, replacing the daytime electricity generation of the TPP, while the TPP supplies the
remaining energy at night;
– Scenario 2 (S2) – hybrid system with battery storage: a 224 MW PVPP is integrated with an energy
storage system, allowing excess energy to be stored and used during transition periods (morning/evening) and
peak demand hours;
– Scenario 3 (S3) – integration with modernization and SmartGrid: a full-scale modernization of the TPP
is implemented, including PVPP integration and SmartGrid deployment, enabling automated switching
between energy sources based on demand;
– Scenario 4 (S4) – integration via long-term power purchase agreements (PPA): PPA is established
between the PVPP provider and the TPP, ensuring stable daytime electricity supply from PVPP and allowing
the TPP to reduce its daytime operation;
– Scenario 5 (S5) – decentralized integration via MicroGrids: small-scale PVPP units are deployed on-
site at the TPP or in its vicinity, forming local MicroGrids to optimize energy consumption and reduce
transmission losses;
Системні дослідження в енергетиці. 2025. 3(83) 121
– Scenario 6 (S6) – PVPP integration with advanced AI/ML-based management: Artificial Intelligence
(AI) and Machine Learning (ML)-based control systems are implemented to optimize PVPP and TPP
operations, enabling automatic adjustments based on energy demand, weather forecasts, and market
conditions.
Table 1 describes the scenarios for integrating PVPP into TPP operations to achieve an optimal balance
of economic and environmental performance. These scenarios can assist in selecting the most suitable solution
based on investment capacity, infrastructure readiness, and strategic priorities for emission reduction and
economic feasibility.
Table 1. Scenarios for integrating PVPP into TPP operation
Scenario
Replaced Electricity
(million kWh/year)
Environmental Indicators Advantages
S1 333
- Emission reduction ≈ of 300
thousand tons of CO₂/year;
- CAC ≈ $36.24/ ton;
- EROI ≈ 37.17.
- simple implementation utilizing the
existing TPP infrastructure, allowing
immediate fuel cost reductions during
daytime.
S2 400
- Emission reduction ≈ of 360
thousand tons of CO₂/year;
- CAC ≈ $36.13/ ton;
- EROI ≈ 37.31.
- ensures uninterrupted power supply and
flexibility in responding to variable weather
conditions;
- optimizes renewable energy utilization for
peak demand periods.
S3 360
- Emission reduction ≈ of 324
thousand tons of CO₂/year;
- CAC ≈ $36.24/ ton;
- EROI ≈ 37.19.
- full adaptability to market fluctuations;
- utilization of modern IT solutions for
energy production and distribution
management.
S4 333
- Emission reduction ≈ of 300
thousand tons of CO₂/year;
- CAC ≈ $36.27/ ton;
- EROI ≈ 37.17.
- financial stability and risk minimization;
- encourages investment in renewable
energy;
- easier integration due to clear contract
terms.
S5 240
- Emission reduction ≈ of 216
thousand tons of CO₂/year;
- CAC ≈ $36.18/ ton;
- EROI ≈ 37.27.
- scalability and flexibility;
- integration with local smart energy
initiatives;
- enhances energy system autonomy and
resilience.
S6 440
- Emission reduction ≈ of 396
thousand tons of CO₂/year;
- CAC ≈ $36.16/ ton;
- EROI ≈ 37.29.
- system flexibility and adaptability;
- fast response to changing conditions;
- integration with advanced IT solutions for
energy management;
- potential for further system optimization.
Table 2 provides a comparative analysis of investment, operational costs, financial viability, and PPs
for different PVPP integration scenarios.
Table 2. Summary of economic indicators for PVPP integration scenarios in TPP operation
Scenario
PVPP
Ca-
pacity
(MW)
CapEx
(million
$)
OpEx
(mil-
lion
$/year)
Replace-
ment
Costs
(million $)
Dis-
counted
OpEx
(million
$)
TCO
(mil-
lion $)
LCOE
($/kWh
)
Annual
Reve-
nue
(mil-
lion $)
NPV
(mil-
lion $)
IRR
(%)
Undis-
counte
d PP
(years)
S1 224 224 3.36 11.2 39.16 272
≈ 0.07
26.68 +39.30 8.9 10-11
S2 268 268 4.02 13.4 46.88 325.14 27.98 +48 10 9.6
S3 242 242 3.63 12.1 42.3 293.57 28.8 +42 9-9.5 9.6
S4 224 224 3.36 11.2 39.16 272 26.68 +39.30 8.9 10-11
S5 161 161 2.42 8.05 28.2 195.38 19.2 +28 8-8.5 8-8.5
S6 295 295 4.43 14.75 51.67 358.0 35.2 +52 10-11 9.6
Fig. 7 presents an analysis of six scenarios for integrating PVPP into TPP operations. The diagram
illustrates key economic and technical indicators for each scenario, including PVPP capacity, CapEx, OpEx,
Системні дослідження в енергетиці. 2025. 3(83) 122
equipment replacement costs, discounted OpEx (PVOpEx), TCO, annual revenue, NPV, and the volume of
replaced electricity. LCOE, CAC, EROI, and the PP are not displayed in the diagram, as they are approximately
the same across all scenarios and are not critical for visual analysis.
Fig. 7. Comparison of Economic and Technical Indicators for PVPP Integration Scenarios in TPP Operation
The results show that S6 provides the highest level of electricity replacement and the highest economic
efficiency (the largest NPV), while S1 is the simplest to implement but has a lower level of financial efficiency.
S2 and S3, which involve the use of battery systems and smart grids, demonstrate a compromise balance
between investment and economic feasibility.
All scenarios demonstrate similar baseline indicators, as confirmed by the data presented in Fig. 7:
− LCOE remains at approximately $0.07/kWh, indicating stable economic efficiency across all
scenarios;
− CAC is approximately $36/ton CO₂, reflecting the same impact on emission reduction among the
scenarios;
− EROI is approximately 37, indicating a high level of energy return for all options;
− PP remains around 9.5−10 years, demonstrating similar payback periods for the scenarios without
considering discounting;
− NPV ranges from «+» $28 million (S5) to «+» $52 million (S6), as clearly shown in Fig. 7, with S6
having the highest NPV and S5 the lowest;
− IRR increases from approximately 8−8.5 % (S5) to 10−11 % (S6), consistent with the rise in NP.
As shown in Fig. 7, the volume of replaced electricity and NPV correlate with each other – S6 achieves
the highest level of electricity replacement and the maximum economic indicators, while S5 demonstrates the
lowest values. This confirms that scenarios with a higher level of PVPP integration provide better financial
efficiency, despite higher initial costs (CapEx).
These results indicate that, regardless of the selected scenario (from local decentralization to integration
with AI/ML solutions), PVPP contribute to the optimization of operational costs and the improvement of
energy efficiency in the system, maintaining competitiveness with an LCOE of approximately $0.07/kWh
while ensuring positive financial outcomes (NPV, IRR).
Системні дослідження в енергетиці. 2025. 3(83) 123
All scenarios involve partial replacement of TPP electricity production with solar energy, leading to a
reduction in CO₂ emissions ranging from 216,000 to 396,000 tons per year and a decrease in operational costs
from $14.4 million to $26.4 million per year.
The baseline scenario (S1) – partial daytime replacement – is the simplest and quickest to implement,
as it involves TPP operation only at night. This approach reduces fuel use, decreases OpEx, and cuts CO₂
emissions by 300,000 tons per year. However, this scenario has limited efficiency, as it does not address the
issue of peak load demand during the evening and morning hours.
The hybrid system with battery storage (S2) allows for excess solar energy to be stored during the
day and used during the evening and night. This helps replace up to 50 % of TPP generation and reduces CO₂
emissions by 360,000 tons/year, making it one of the most effective environmentally.
SmartGrid-based intelligent management (S3) enables dynamic switching between PVPP and TPP
based on weather conditions and consumer demand. This approach helps reduce CO₂ emissions by 324,000
tons/year and operational costs by up to $21.6 million/year through optimization of TPP operation modes.
Long-term Power Purchase Agreements (PPA) (S4) provide a financially stable solution, ensuring
predictable CO₂ emissions reductions of 300,000 tons per year and offering consistent economic benefits.
When considering local solutions, decentralized integration via MicroGrids (S5) optimizes energy
production and consumption at the local level, allowing for up to 30 % replacement of TPP generation,
reducing CO₂ emissions by 216,000 tons/year, and enhancing regional autonomy. However, this approach has
limited scalability.
A promising option is the use of artificial intelligence (AI/ML) (S6), as it achieves the maximum
reduction in emissions (396,000 tons CO₂/year) and cost savings of $26.4 million/year. By accurately
forecasting PVPP generation and adaptively managing TPP operations, this scenario provides the highest level
of financial efficiency, with the largest NPV and IRR.
The analysis results indicate that scenarios with higher levels of PVPP integration (S2, S3, S6) provide
the greatest financial and environmental efficiency, but require higher capital expenditures. Simpler options
(S1, S5) are less costly but yield lower economic returns.
Table 3 highlights the extent of fossil fuel replacement across various scenarios and their impact on
reducing fossil fuel dependence in TPP operations.
Table 3. Impact of Scenarios on Fossil Fuel Replacement in TPP Operation
Scenario
Replacement from
Baseline (%)
Reduction in Fossil Fuel Dependence
S1 41,6
- Complete replacement of daytime production;
- TPP operates only at night, promoting optimal use of the TPP in stable modes.
S2 50
- Energy storage allows covering peak periods and morning/evening transitions, providing an
additional reduction in fossil fuel use.
S3 45
- Automatic operation regulation maximizes PVPP utilization when available, ensuring optimal
resource use and reducing excessive fuel consumption.
S4 41,6
- Guaranteed PVPP capacity under PPA conditions reduces dependence on fossil fuel market
fluctuations, as daytime PVPP generation becomes predictable and stable;
- Stability of contract terms ensures predictable replacement, positively influencing operational
cost planning and TPP operation.
S5 30
- Local PPS generation reduces transmission losses, optimizes local consumption, and increases
the autonomy of MicroGrids.
S6 55
- AI/ML solutions allow maximizing available PVPP use by automatically adjusting TPP
operation, minimizing fossil fuel use in low-efficiency modes.
The analysis results of the scenarios for reducing the use of fossil fuels in TPP operations show a
significant potential for fossil fuel replacement. The proposed options allow for a reduction in the consumption
of traditional energy resources by 30−55 %, which directly impacts the reduction of CO₂ emissions and the
decrease in dependence on fossil fuels.
The highest level of replacement (55 %) is achieved through the integration of artificial intelligence
(AI/ML) in the TPP management system. This approach allows for dynamic regulation of the plants` operation
and minimizes its use in inefficient modes, providing maximum economic and environmental benefits.
Системні дослідження в енергетиці. 2025. 3(83) 124
Hybrid systems with battery storage also demonstrate high efficiency, achieving up to 50 % replacement
of fossil fuels. The ability to store excess solar energy and use it during peak periods allows for flexible
balancing of the energy system and a reduction in fuel consumption.
The implementation of the SmartGrid management scenario ensures a 45 % replacement by maximizing
the use of PVPP when available and adapting TPP operations to changing demand.
S1 (daytime replacement) and S4 (PPA) provide an equivalent level of fossil fuel replacement
(~41.6 %), but they are implemented through different mechanisms:
− in S1, the TPP operates only at night, allowing for stabilization of its operations and reduced emissions;
− in S4, predictable replacement is ensured through PPA contracts, which reduce dependence on the fuel
market.
Local solutions (S5), such as MicroGrids, have the lowest replacement level (30 %), but they contribute
to increased energy autonomy for regions and a reduction in electricity transmission losses.
Thus, all the scenarios considered help reduce fossil fuel use, and the choice of the optimal option
depends on available investment and the level of technological readiness.
In the short term, the simplest solutions are daytime replacement and PPA, as they do not require
significant changes to the current energy system but allow for quick positive economic and environmental
impacts. For maximum long-term benefits, hybrid systems with battery storage and AI management should
be implemented, as they can provide the best emission reductions and the greatest cost savings.
Although all the proposed scenarios allow for partial fossil fuel replacement and reduced dependence
on traditional generation, their implementation is accompanied by several technological, financial, and
regulatory constraints that may affect their efficiency and feasibility:
1. Partial Daytime Replacement:
– inability to cover evening and night peak loads, creating risks of system instability;
– dependence on weather conditions and the seasonality of solar generation, which may reduce efficiency
in the winter period;
– does not address the issue of balancing the energy system, as the TPP continues to operate at night
without flexible regulation capabilities.
2. Hybrid System with Battery Storage:
– high cost of battery systems, increasing overall capital expenditures;
– limited lifespan of batteries and the need for periodic replacement;
– efficiency depends on the modernity of energy storage technologies, which still have high costs.
3. Integration of PVPPs with Modernization and Smart Grid:
– need for the development of a large-scale digital infrastructure and management systems, requiring
significant investments;
– high initial cost of implementing automated solutions;
– complex regulatory integration, as it requires adaptation to existing energy standards and new grid
management rules.
4. Integration of PVPPs Based on Long-Term PPA:
– contract rigidity – PPAs are typically concluded for decades, which may limit system flexibility;
– need for long-term reliable consumers who are willing to purchase electricity at a fixed price;
– does not address the power balancing problem, as it lacks energy storage mechanisms for nighttime
periods.
5. Decentralized Integration of PVPPs via MicroGrids:
– need for the construction of additional distribution infrastructure;
– requires changes in the regulation of power grid operations, which may complicate scalability;
– high initial costs and the need for coordination between local consumers.
6. Integration of PVPPs with High-Efficiency AI/ML-Management:
– high cost of developing and implementing artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning (ML)
algorithms;
Системні дослідження в енергетиці. 2025. 3(83) 125
– requires the collection and analysis of large data volumes, demanding time and computational resources;
– dependence on stable internet connections and powerful server computing for real-time AI system
operation.
While all scenarios contribute to fossil fuel replacement and CO₂ emission reduction, their main
limitations are related to high initial investments, technological challenges, and the need to modernize the
existing energy system. The easiest to implement is daytime replacement and PPA, while the most efficient
but costly are hybrid systems with battery storage and AI management.
The choice of the optimal scenario depends on specific conditions such as investment capacity,
infrastructure capabilities, regulatory environment, and strategic priorities regarding emission reduction and
economic feasibility.
6. Assessment of Area for Installing Photovoltaic Power Plants and Challenges of Integration
into Thermal Power Plants
As outlined above, PVPP integrating into the operations of TPPs is a promising step towards reducing
CO₂ emissions, improving energy efficiency, and decreasing reliance on fossil energy resources. However, the
implementation of this solution faces certain limitations, particularly the insufficient area for placing new
PVPP capacities. One of the main challenges is the restriction on the use of available land on TPP sites, as
these areas are already occupied by generating equipment and infrastructure. However, there is an opportunity
to place PV panels on ash dumps and other unused land areas, which are currently not used for other purposes.
Using such territories avoids the need for additional land purchases and helps preserve natural resources for
other needs. Darnytsia CHPP has significant areas of ash dumps that can be effectively used for installing
photovoltaic panels. This not only helps reduce dependence on fossil fuels but also improves the environmental
situation in the region by reducing air and soil pollution from heavy metals that are deposited in the soil through
TPP waste.
According to estimates, static panels require about 4−5 hectares of land per 1 MW of PVPP capacity.
For 224 MW of such plants, 896−1120 hectares of land are needed. However, thanks to the use of tracking
systems and new PV panel materials, the required area for installation decreases.
Tracking systems, which allow panels to follow the sun, increase efficiency by 25−35 % compared to
traditional stationary installations. For single-axis trackers, the area required per 1 MW decreases to 3−4
hectares, while for dual-axis trackers, it decreases to 2−3 hectares, significantly reducing the area required for
the installation. Therefore, for a 224 MW PPS using dual-axis trackers, only 440−670 hectares of land are
needed, allowing for efficient use of limited areas, such as ash dumps, without the need for additional land
purchases.
Modern PV panel technologies are constantly improving, which reduces the space required to generate
large amounts of energy. For example, bifacial panels can generate energy not only from the side facing the
sun but also from the side that reflects sunlight from the ground. These technological advancements
significantly reduce space requirements and allow more efficient use of limited territory, which is an important
aspect for projects such as PVPP integration at TPPs.
Another important factor to consider when integrating PVPP into TPPs is the operation modes of TPPs,
which often run in peak modes. Solar energy is variable, and its production does not always coincide with the
peak needs of TPPs. Therefore, even with the use of energy storage systems, the ability to provide the required
amount of energy during peak load hours may be limited. One solution to this issue is the use of hybrid systems,
which combine PVPP with various types of cogeneration plants, including gas turbines, as well as other
alternative energy sources, such as biogas turbines, small-scale coal cogeneration units, or modified boilers.
This combination ensures stable energy generation during hours when solar energy is insufficient, ensuring
reliable electricity supply to consumers. By using cogeneration plants, which generate both electricity and
heat, the use of available resources can be optimized, and CO₂ emissions can be reduced compared to
traditional TPPs. This approach not only reduces dependence on fossil fuels but also lowers fuel costs and
improves the overall efficiency of the energy system. The choice of cogeneration plants depends on specific
Системні дослідження в енергетиці. 2025. 3(83) 126
conditions and available fuel types: biogas turbines may be useful in rural areas with large amounts of organic
waste, while small cogeneration units operating on pellets or biomass are promising for replacing traditional
fuel in small and medium-sized enterprises. Thus, hybrid systems that combine the use of PVPP and
cogeneration plants allow for significant reductions in greenhouse gas emissions, while maintaining the
stability of energy supply and providing flexibility in responding to changing solar energy generation
conditions.
7. Conclusions
The integration of photovoltaic power plants into the operations of thermal power plants significantly
reduces dependence on fossil fuels, optimizes operational costs, and improves the energy efficiency of the
system. The calculations for different scenarios show that partial replacement of electricity generation at
thermal power plants with solar power can reduce fossil fuel consumption by 30−55 %, which consequently
reduces CO₂ emissions by 216,000 to 396,000 tons per year.
Thanks to fuel cost reduction and optimized operation modes at thermal power plants, the operational
cost savings range from $14.4 million to $26.4 million per year, improving the financial performance of the
projects. The analysis of economic efficiency indicators indicates that the LCOE remains competitive
(≈$0.07/kWh), and the Net Present Value is positive for all scenarios, confirming the investment feasibility of
implementing solar generation. Additionally, the Energy Return on Investment = 37 highlights the high
efficiency of photovoltaic technologies, while the average Cost of Avoided Carbon ≈ of $36/ton CO₂ makes
this approach competitive in terms of environmental effectiveness.
The proposed photovoltaic power plant integration scenarios vary in technological complexity and
economic feasibility. The simplest to implement is daytime replacement and integration through long-term
PPAs, which allow for quick fossil fuel reduction without significant changes to the energy system. However,
they do not address evening and night peak loads, which requires additional technological solutions.
More effective but complex to implement are hybrid systems with batteries and AI/ML-based
management solutions, which enable achieving the maximum level of replacement (50−55 %) and optimizing
the operation of thermal power plants, minimizing their operation in inefficient modes. The implementation of
these solutions requires significant investments in energy storage and intelligent management systems,
increasing capital expenditures, but providing the best environmental and economic outcomes.
Nonetheless, the practical realization of such integration faces several key barriers: high capital costs,
especially for hybrid and AI-based systems; technical limitations related to land availability and infrastructure
modifications at TPP sites; regulatory and legislative challenges; limited flexibility in PPA contracts; and the
need for advanced digital infrastructure to enable smart grid and AI solutions. Moreover, the intermittent nature
of solar generation and limited battery lifespans may affect system stability during evening and night peak
periods.
Thus, regardless of the selected scenario, the integration of photovoltaic power plants into thermal power
plant operations is a strategically important step for reducing fossil fuel use, lowering operational costs, and
improving environmental performance. In the short term, daytime replacement and PPAs are the most feasible
options, while for maximum long-term effects, hybrid systems with batteries and AI management should be
considered the most effective solutions. This will contribute to not only reducing dependence on traditional
energy resources but also creating a more resilient, economically viable, and environmentally safe energy
system that addresses the modern challenges in the energy sector.
Author Contributions. The author contributed to the conceptualization, methodology, formal analysis,
writing, and final approval of the manuscript.
Funding. The research was conducted within the framework of the fundamental scientific project
«Development of a system of mathematical models for long-term forecasting of the consumption of major
types of fuel and energy resources in the country`s economy, taking into account existing environmental
constraints» (2022-2026), State Registration No. PK0122U000178.
Системні дослідження в енергетиці. 2025. 3(83) 127
References
1. Supapo, K. R., Lozano, L., Tabañag, I. D., & Querikiol, E. (2021). A geospatial approach to energy planning in aid
of just energy transition in small island communities in the Philippines. Applied Sciences, 11(24), 11955.
https://doi.org/10.3390/app112411955
2. Maliarenko, O., Horskyi, V., Ivanenko, N., Eutukhova, T., & Matushkin, D. (2025). Comprehensive assessment of
measures to reduce atmospheric pollutant emissions. System Research in Energy, 1(81), 100−110 [in Ukrainian].
https://doi.org/10.15407/srenergy2025.01.100
3. Maliarenko, O., Eutukhova, T., Ivanenko, N., Horskyi, V., & Kobernik, V. (2024). Comparison of the fuel
consumption structure and pollutant emissions for determining their reduction directions. System Research in
Energy, 2а(78), 19−20. Retrieved January 24, 2025, from https://systemre.org/index.php/journal/article/view/843
[in Ukrainian].
4. Maliarenko, O., Maistrenko, N., & Eutukhova, T. (2024). Factors influencing the forecast of energy consumption
of the country in the conditions of war and the amount of reduction of greenhouse gas emissions. System Research
in Energy, 4(80), 65−76. https://doi.org/10.15407/srenergy2024.04.065
5. Ukrmetallurgprom. Analytical Data. Retrieved March 12, 2025, from https://www.ukrmetprom.org/analitichni-dani
[in Ukrainian].
6. Millivirta, L., & Girens, R. (2021, September). The Impact of Emissions from Ukrainian Coal Power Plants on
Public Health. CREA. Retrieved January 24, 2025, from https://ecoaction.org.ua/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/Coal-
Health-Impacts-in-Ukraine_UA.pdf [in Ukrainian].
7. The Statistical Yearbook of Ukraine 2021. State Statistics Service of Ukraine. Retrieved January 24, 2025, from
https://ukrstat.gov.ua/druk/publicat/kat_u/2022/zb/11/Yearbook_21_e.pdf.
8. Azroyan, G.N., Orfanova, M.M., Dumenko, S.S., & Kryklyvyy, Y.A. (2011). Research on the processes of vertical
migration of heavy metal ions in the ash and slag dumps of the Burshtyn TPP and their deposition on carbonates.
Ecological Safety and Balanced Use of Resources, 2, 30−36. Retrieved January 24, 2025, from
https://esbur.com.ua/en/journals/2-4-2011 [in Ukrainian].
9. Іatsyshyn, A.V., Matvieieva, I.V., Kovach, V.O., Artemchuk, V.O., & Kameneva, I.P. (2018). Features of the impact
of ash dumps from thermal power enterprises on the environment. Problems of Emergency Situations, 28(2), 57–68.
Retrieved from http://nbuv.gov.ua/UJRN/Pns_2018_28(2)__7 [in Ukrainian].
10. Bilyavskyi, M. (2021). Ukraine and Global Decarbonization Politics. Retrieved from
https://razumkov.org.ua/uploads/article/2021_Ukraine%20and%20the%20Global%20Policy%20of%20Decarbonis
ation.pdf [in Ukrainian].
11. Matkivskyi, S.V. (2021). Technologies for capturing carbon dioxide and prospects of its utilization in depleted oil
and gas fields. Oil and Gas Power Engineering, 2(36), 31–41 [in Ukrainian]. https://doi.org/10.31471/1993-9868-
2021-2(36)-31-41
12. Viazovyk, V., Pochynok, V., & Shynkarenko, D. (2021). Classification of carbon dioxide utilization technologies
in the conditions of a closed cycle economy. Bulletin of Cherkasy State Technological University, 26(2), 82–107 [in
Ukrainian]. https://doi.org/10.24025/2306-4412.2.2021.227052
13. Fu, D., & Davis, M. E. (2023). Toward the feasible direct air capture of carbon dioxide with molecular sieves by
water management. Cell Reports Physical Science, 4(5). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.xcrp.2023.101389
14. Kong, F., Rim, G., Song, M. G., Rosu, C., Priyadarshini, P., Lively, R. P., Realff, M. J., Jones, Ch. W. Research
Needs Targeting Direct Air Capture of Carbon Dioxide: Material & Process Performance Characteristics Under
Realistic Environmental Conditions. Retrieved January 24, 2025, from http://surl.li/hemeo
15. Matkivskyi, S., & Kondrat, O. (2022). Generalization of promising methods of carbon dioxide transportation to
increase hydrocarbon recovery of oil and gas fields. Prospecting and Development of Oil and Gas Fields, 22(2), 7–
16 [in Ukrainian]. https://doi.org/10.31471/1993-9973-2022-2(83)-7-16
16. Gür, T. M. (2022). Carbon Dioxide Emissions, Capture, Storage and Utilization: Review of Materials, Processes
and Technologies. Progress in Energy and Combustion Science, 89. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pecs.2021.100965
17. Alami, A. H., Abu Hawili, A., Tawalbeh, M., Hasan, R., Al Mahmoud, L., Chibib, S., Mahmood, A., Aokal, K., &
Rattanapanya, P. (2020). Materials and logistics for carbon dioxide capture, storage and utilization. Science of The
Total Environment, 717, 137221. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.137221
18. Mineral carbonation and industrial uses of carbon dioxide. Retrieved January 24, 2025, from http://surl.li/henli
19. Itam, Z., Zawawi, H., Sivaganese, Y., Beddu, S., & Mohd Kamal, N. L. (2020). Carbon dioxide sequestration in
concrete and its effects on concrete compressive strength. Preprints.org, 2020080147.
https://doi.org/10.20944/preprints202008.0147.v1
20. World Nuclear Association. Energy and the environment: 'Clean coal' technologies, carbon capture & sequestration.
Retrieved January 24, 2025, from https://world-nuclear.org/information-library/energy-and-the-environment/clean-
coal-technologies#related-information
21. Darnytsia CHPP-4. Euro-Reconstruction LLC. Retrieved January 24, 2025, from https://tec4.kiev.ua/about/activity
[in Ukrainian].
22. Energy2store. (2024). Service life and degradation of solar panels. [in Ukrainian].
https://doi.org/10.3390/app112411955
https://doi.org/10.15407/srenergy2025.01.100
https://systemre.org/index.php/journal/article/view/843
https://doi.org/10.15407/srenergy2024.04.065
https://www.ukrmetprom.org/analitichni-dani
https://ecoaction.org.ua/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/Coal-Health-Impacts-in-Ukraine_UA.pdf
https://ecoaction.org.ua/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/Coal-Health-Impacts-in-Ukraine_UA.pdf
https://ukrstat.gov.ua/druk/publicat/kat_u/2022/zb/11/Yearbook_21_e.pdf
https://esbur.com.ua/en/journals/2-4-2011
http://nbuv.gov.ua/UJRN/Pns_2018_28(2)__7
https://razumkov.org.ua/uploads/article/2021_Ukraine%20and%20the%20Global%20Policy%20of%20Decarbonisation.pdf
https://razumkov.org.ua/uploads/article/2021_Ukraine%20and%20the%20Global%20Policy%20of%20Decarbonisation.pdf
https://doi.org/10.31471/1993-9868-2021-2(36)-31-41
https://doi.org/10.31471/1993-9868-2021-2(36)-31-41
https://doi.org/10.24025/2306-4412.2.2021.227052
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.xcrp.2023.101389
http://surl.li/hemeo
https://doi.org/10.31471/1993-9973-2022-2(83)-7-16
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pecs.2021.100965
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.137221
http://surl.li/henli
https://doi.org/10.20944/preprints202008.0147.v1
https://world-nuclear.org/information-library/energy-and-the-environment/clean-coal-technologies%23related-information
https://world-nuclear.org/information-library/energy-and-the-environment/clean-coal-technologies%23related-information
https://tec4.kiev.ua/about/activity
Системні дослідження в енергетиці. 2025. 3(83) 128
23. Stanytsina, V., Artemchuk, V., Bogoslavska, O., Zaporozhets, A., Kalinichenko, A., Stebila, J., Havrysh, V., &
Suszanowicz, D. (2022). Fossil fuel and biofuel boilers in Ukraine: Trends of changes in levelized cost of heat.
Energies, 15(19), 7215. https://doi.org/10.3390/en15197215
24. Finance.ua. (2024). Solar and wind power plants: Is it profitable to invest now. Retrieved January 24, 2025, from
https://finance.ua/ua/goodtoknow/soniachni-ta-vitriani-elektrostantsii-chy-vyhidno-zaraz-investuvaty [in
Ukrainian].
25. The Ministry of Energy of Ukraine. (2025). Tariffs and Prices. Retrieved January 24, 2025, from
https://mev.gov.ua/storinka/taryfy-ta-tsiny [in Ukrainian].
26. Unisolar. (2021). Calculation of emission reduction CO₂. Retrieved January 24, 2025, from
https://unisolar.energy/blog/prorahunok-zmenshennya-vikidiv-co2 [in Ukrainian].
ОБҐРУНТУВАННЯ ДОЦІЛЬНОСТІ ВИКОРИСТАННЯ
ФОТОЕЛЕКТРИЧНИХ СТАНЦІЙ ДЛЯ ЗАДАЧ
ДЕКАРБОНІЗАЦІЇ ТЕПЛОВИХ ЕЛЕКТРОСТАНЦІЙ
Дмитро Матушкін, д-р філософії (PhD), https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4431-7862
Інститут загальної енергетики НАН України, вул. Антоновича, 172, Київ, 03150, Україна
e-mail: Matushkin_DS@nas.gov.ua
Анотація. Стаття присвячена дослідженню можливостей використання фотоелектричних
станцій як інструменту часткової декарбонізації теплових електростанцій, які залишаються
основним джерелом викидів забруднюючих речовин і парникових газів. Обґрунтовується
актуальність інтеграції відновлюваних джерел енергії у національні енергосистеми для зменшення
залежності від викопного палива, скорочення викидів CO₂ та досягнення кліматичних цілей.
Аналізується сучасний стан теплових електростанцій, їхня роль у забезпеченні енергетичного
балансу та основні екологічні виклики, пов’язані з їхньою експлуатацією. Методологія дослідження
базується на комплексному аналізі економічної та екологічної ефективності впровадження
фотоелектричних станцій у роботу теплових електростанцій. Для економічної оцінки
розраховуються такі показники, як загальна вартість володіння (TCO), чиста приведена вартість
(NPV), внутрішня норма прибутковості (IRR), строк окупності (PP) та рівень приведених витрат
на електроенергію (LCOE). Екологічний аспект оцінюється через показники вартості уникнення
викидів CO₂ (CAC) та коефіцієнта енергетичної віддачі (EROI). Запропоновано шість сценаріїв
інтеграції фотоелектричних станцій у роботу теплових електростанцій, які відрізняються за
рівнем заміщення викопного палива, економічною ефективністю та рівнем технологічної
складності. Базовий сценарій часткового денного заміщення дозволяє скоротити використання
палива на 41,6 % і зменшити викиди CO₂ на 300 тис. тон щорічно. Впровадження гібридних систем
з акумуляторами або AI-управління дозволяє досягти 50–55 % заміщення, що забезпечує
максимальне скорочення викидів CO₂ (до 396 тис. тон/рік) і операційну економію до $26,4 млн на
рік. Оцінено основні бар’єри для реалізації запропонованих рішень, зокрема технічні складності
інтеграції ФЕС у існуючу інфраструктуру ТЕС, недостатність законодавчої бази та потребу у
значних інвестиціях.
Ключові слова: фотоелектричні станції, декарбонізація, теплові електростанції, відновлювані
джерела енергії, скорочення викидів СО₂, енергетична трансформація.
Надійшла до редколегії: 14.04.2025
https://doi.org/10.3390/en15197215
https://finance.ua/ua/goodtoknow/soniachni-ta-vitriani-elektrostantsii-chy-vyhidno-zaraz-investuvaty
https://mev.gov.ua/storinka/taryfy-ta-tsiny
https://unisolar.energy/blog/prorahunok-zmenshennya-vikidiv-co2
mailto:Matushkin_DS@nas.gov.ua
|
| id | systemreorg-article-910 |
| institution | System Research in Energy |
| keywords_txt_mv | keywords |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2026-07-19T01:23:49Z |
| publishDate | 2025 |
| publisher | General Energy Institute of the National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine |
| record_format | ojs |
| resource_txt_mv | systemreorg/0b/fb20a5bb136c7bdd7eda54e477cbd10b.pdf |
| spelling | systemreorg-article-9102026-07-18T12:57:50Z JUSTIFICATION OF FEASIBILITY OF THE APPLICATION PHOTOVOLTAIC POWER PLANTS FOR THE DECARBONISATION OF THERMAL POWER PLANTS Обґрунтування доцільності використання фотоелектричних станцій для задач декарбонізації теплових електростанцій Matushkin, Dmytro photovoltaic power plants, decarbonization, thermal power plants, renewable energy sources, CO₂ emission reduction, energy transition. фотоелектричні станції, декарбонізація, теплові електростанції, відновлювані джерела енергії, скорочення викидів СО₂, енергетична трансформація. The paper explores the potential of photovoltaic power plants as a tool for partial decarbonisation of thermal power plants, which remain a major source of pollutants and greenhouse gas emissions. The relevance of integrating renewable energy sources into national energy systems is substantiated by reducing dependence on fossil fuels, decreasing CO₂ emissions, and achieving climate goals. The current state of thermal power plants, their role in ensuring energy balance, and the key environmental challenges associated with their operation are analyzed. The research methodology is based on a comprehensive analysis of the economic and environmental efficiency of integrating photovoltaic power plants into thermal power plants. The economic assessment includes key indicators such as Total Cost of Ownership (TCO), Net Present Value (NPV), Internal Rate of Return (IRR), Payback Period (PP), and Levelized Cost of Electricity (LCOE). The environmental aspect is evaluated using the Carbon Abatement Cost (CAC) and Energy Return on Investment (EROI). Six integration scenarios for photovoltaic power plants in thermal power plants are proposed, differing in terms of fossil fuel substitution levels, economic feasibility, and technological complexity. The baseline scenario of partial daytime substitution enables for a 41.6 % reduction in fuel consumption and an annual CO₂ emissions reduction of 300 thousand tons. Implementing hybrid battery storage systems or AI-based management enables achieving a 50−55 % substitution rate, leading to a maximum CO₂ emissions reduction of up to 396 thousand tons per year and operational cost savings of up to $26.4 million annually. The study also identifies key barriers to implementing these solutions, including the technical complexity of integrating photovoltaic power plants into the existing thermal power plant infrastructure, insufficient regulatory frameworks, and the need for significant investment. Стаття присвячена дослідженню можливостей використання фотоелектричних станцій як інструменту часткової декарбонізації теплових електростанцій, які залишаються основним джерелом викидів забруднюючих речовин і парникових газів. Обґрунтовується актуальність інтеграції відновлюваних джерел енергії у національні енергосистеми для зменшення залежності від викопного палива, скорочення викидів CO₂ та досягнення кліматичних цілей. Аналізується сучасний стан теплових електростанцій, їхня роль у забезпеченні енергетичного балансу та основні екологічні виклики, пов’язані з їхньою експлуатацією. Методологія дослідження базується на комплексному аналізі економічної та екологічної ефективності впровадження фотоелектричних станцій у роботу теплових електростанцій. Для економічної оцінки розраховуються такі показники, як загальна вартість володіння (TCO), чиста приведена вартість (NPV), внутрішня норма прибутковості (IRR), строк окупності (PP) та рівень приведених витрат на електроенергію (LCOE). Екологічний аспект оцінюється через показники вартості уникнення викидів CO₂ (CAC) та коефіцієнта енергетичної віддачі (EROI). Запропоновано шість сценаріїв інтеграції фотоелектричних станцій у роботу теплових електростанцій, які відрізняються за рівнем заміщення викопного палива, економічною ефективністю та рівнем технологічної складності. Базовий сценарій часткового денного заміщення дозволяє скоротити використання палива на 41,6 % і зменшити викиди CO₂ на 300 тис. тон щорічно. Впровадження гібридних систем з акумуляторами або AI-управління дозволяє досягти 50–55 % заміщення, що забезпечує максимальне скорочення викидів CO₂ (до 396 тис. тон/рік) і операційну економію до $26,4 млн на рік. Оцінено основні бар’єри для реалізації запропонованих рішень, зокрема технічні складності інтеграції ФЕС у існуючу інфраструктуру ТЕС, недостатність законодавчої бази та потребу у значних інвестиціях. General Energy Institute of the National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine 2025-08-26 Article Article application/pdf https://systemre.org/index.php/journal/article/view/910 10.15407/srenergy2025.03.109 System Research in Energy; No. 3 (83) (2025): System Research in Energy; 109-128 Системні дослідження в енергетиці; № 3 (83) (2025): Системні дослідження в енергетиці; 109-128 2786-7102 2786-7633 en https://systemre.org/index.php/journal/article/view/910/815 Copyright (c) 2025 Dmytro Matushkin https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0 |
| spellingShingle | photovoltaic power plants decarbonization thermal power plants renewable energy sources CO₂ emission reduction energy transition. Matushkin, Dmytro JUSTIFICATION OF FEASIBILITY OF THE APPLICATION PHOTOVOLTAIC POWER PLANTS FOR THE DECARBONISATION OF THERMAL POWER PLANTS |
| title | JUSTIFICATION OF FEASIBILITY OF THE APPLICATION PHOTOVOLTAIC POWER PLANTS FOR THE DECARBONISATION OF THERMAL POWER PLANTS |
| title_alt | Обґрунтування доцільності використання фотоелектричних станцій для задач декарбонізації теплових електростанцій |
| title_full | JUSTIFICATION OF FEASIBILITY OF THE APPLICATION PHOTOVOLTAIC POWER PLANTS FOR THE DECARBONISATION OF THERMAL POWER PLANTS |
| title_fullStr | JUSTIFICATION OF FEASIBILITY OF THE APPLICATION PHOTOVOLTAIC POWER PLANTS FOR THE DECARBONISATION OF THERMAL POWER PLANTS |
| title_full_unstemmed | JUSTIFICATION OF FEASIBILITY OF THE APPLICATION PHOTOVOLTAIC POWER PLANTS FOR THE DECARBONISATION OF THERMAL POWER PLANTS |
| title_short | JUSTIFICATION OF FEASIBILITY OF THE APPLICATION PHOTOVOLTAIC POWER PLANTS FOR THE DECARBONISATION OF THERMAL POWER PLANTS |
| title_sort | justification of feasibility of the application photovoltaic power plants for the decarbonisation of thermal power plants |
| topic | photovoltaic power plants decarbonization thermal power plants renewable energy sources CO₂ emission reduction energy transition. |
| topic_facet | photovoltaic power plants decarbonization thermal power plants renewable energy sources CO₂ emission reduction energy transition. фотоелектричні станції декарбонізація теплові електростанції відновлювані джерела енергії скорочення викидів СО₂ енергетична трансформація. |
| url | https://systemre.org/index.php/journal/article/view/910 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT matushkindmytro justificationoffeasibilityoftheapplicationphotovoltaicpowerplantsforthedecarbonisationofthermalpowerplants AT matushkindmytro obgruntuvannâdocílʹnostívikoristannâfotoelektričnihstancíjdlâzadačdekarbonízacííteplovihelektrostancíj |