Chapter 2: Literature Review
2.7 Barriers to BIPV Adoption
aware of all facts surrounding the product, some assume that the cost of BIPV is high especially with the more aesthetically pleasing products (Koinegg et al., 2013). In other cases, there were reports that others were confused due to information overload (Curtius, 2018).
The challenge for architects was observed as lack of information that is properly documented in product datasheets for architectural design (Prieto et al., 2017). In other cases, some suppliers who were still able to provide architects with product information offered it, however, based on their limited product range (Boesiger & Bacher, 2018).
Uncertainty and mistrust were also identified. These were the potential results of the insufficient knowledge and misinformation. Koinegg et al. (2013) noted this may be the result of limited awareness among actors. This study also noted that negative perceptions of system price and high costs, as well as fears and uncertainty at the start of the project are challenges affiliated with BIPV.
Reviewing the professional competence required for architectural design, it was also reported that there were few certified contractors (Goh et al., 2017). Also noted was that some consultants were limited, because they, themselves, lacked adequate technical knowledge (Boesiger & Bacher, 2018; Goh et al., 2017; Prieto et al., 2017), or knowledge of the economic possibilities of BIPV (Koinegg et al., 2013). In contrast, architects have complained about the lack of suppliers and the difficulty to access technical information on BIPV products (Boesiger & Bacher, 2018). Architects also face the added challenge of dealing with life-cycle costs and other business-oriented investment calculations which planning a BIPV project needs to consider (Curtius, 2018). Studies have also noted that potential clients also lack technical knowledge and this could be considered a barrier (Boesiger & Bacher, 2018).
2.7.2 What barriers are associated with the design of the BIPV system?
Five major barriers related to the design or the design process were identified.
These include: the lack of aesthetically pleasing products and design tools, challenges with coordinating the design team and certain complexities in the application of the BIPV system.
One study reported that there is a strong bias against overpowering and dominating technological PV appearances (Kosorić et al., 2018). In addition, the architectural integration of the technology is limited by a lack of suitable products (Lu et al., 2019; Prieto et al., 2017). Conversely, Boesiger and Bacher (2018) reported that the priority in selecting a BIPV system by some homeowners is not aesthetics but system efficiency. The study also added that some home owners were reluctant to sacrifice part of the efficiency of the BIPV modules for aesthetic reasons. Other authors, however, asserted that aesthetics is important as their findings showed that some potential adopters declined to install BIPV because it had a negative visual appeal and impact on the building‘s general appearance (Kosorić et al., 2018; Prieto et al., 2017).
Technicalities and complexities in BIPV installation were observed as a challenge to full adoption (Curtius, 2018; Prieto et al., 2017). In practical terms, it was reported that removing existing roofs made of conventional materials for the sake of installing BIPV was both uneconomical and unsustainable. Consequently, Curtius, (2018) suggested that BIPV be limited to either new constructions or renovation projects. He also noted that the multi-functionality of BIPV compels consideration from an early design stage to carter for the insulation and impermeability of the technology.
Although another study inferred that this may simplify integration issues at later stages
(Prieto et al., 2017), this study went further by suggesting that adoption complicated the conventional design process.
Koinegg et al. (2013) reports that there is a conflict between aesthetics and maximum energy, and the lack of energy generation considerations in pre-design stages are added factors which complicate the adoption of BIPV. In line with the present concern relating to the time of integration, Boyd and Larsen (2017) argued that attempts to force BIPV in later design stages may result in negative impact on power generation due to unforeseen design conflict and compromise.
Prieto et al. (2017) reported that the availability and durability of BIPV systems, while Goh et al. (2017) mentioned that its technological reliability is also a barrier The lack of specific software and tools used in the design and sizing of the BIPV system was noted as another barrier (Ebert & Kapsis, 2018; Prieto et al., 2017). Conflict with city heritage and aesthetics was observed by residents of historical cities (Strazzera & Statzu, 2017).
2.7.3 Are there any economic issues which hinder BIPV adoption?
Barriers such as low financial returns, lack of economic support, high cost considerations, long payback period, and inaccurate life-cycle cost calculations were identified as some of the economically related BIPV barriers.
It was reported that the profitability of BIPV systems was considered low by some owners who felt it made no substantial impact on the building value (Boesiger &
Bacher, 2018). Several studies noted that BIPV systems are considered as an expensive technology and this was considered a major barrier (Curtius, 2018; Ebert & Kapsis, 2018; Kosorić et al., 2018). This barrier was noted as having two dimensions of fact and
perception (Koinegg et al., 2013) as other studies agree that the material (Goh et al., 2017) and investment costs are high (Curtius, 2018; Ebert & Kapsis, 2018). In other studies, it was noted that the economic feasibility was a concern in adoption (Prieto et al., 2017).
One study suggested that inflation rates and high interest rates, as well as price fluctuation of materials would lead to a higher cost (Goh et al., 2017). As a result of the price, investors are discouraged to adopt BIPV (Boesiger & Bacher, 2018).
Various references confirm that BIPV faces competition within the building, and energy markets. Competitive offers from the existing energy options (Prieto et al., 2017) as well as the lower electricity tariff (Lu et al., 2019) due to subsidized electricity (Goh et al., 2017) was identified as a challenge. Goh et al. (2017) further adds that the conventional electricity is not only cheap but sometimes free of taxes. Secondly, Lu et al (2019)reported that at the project proposal level, when BIPV projects are compared with lower priced tenders, they fall short. They argued that, similarly to conventional building materials, developers weigh these comparisons, BIPV stands at a disadvantage, which also discourages potential clients from adopting it. With this higher cost margin in play, the BIPV acceptance rate was reported as low among clients (Chang et al., 2019).
The long payback period was considered to be a major concern which, in turn, limits the diffusion of BIPV (Lu et al., 2019; Prieto et al., 2017). One study by Strazzera and Statzu (2017) found out that older people are uninterested such technologies which compel a change of energy behavior. In another study, Curtius (2018) reported that the inaccuracy in the estimation of life-cycle costs for BIPV is also a limiting factor. From a business angle, Ritzen et al. (2016) observed there is a lack of sufficient models to guide the BIPV market.
2.7.4 Are there issues which define the gap between the PV and BIPV industries?
General considerations of the association, or the lack of it, between the PV and building industries, were highlighted as a specific issue which rippled outwards and inwards to affect BIPV adoption. Within the building industry, architects and project managers are faced with greater coordination challenges with the additional processes, and consultants needed to integrate PV in the building design (Boesiger & Bacher, 2018). On the other hand, external to the building industry, its relationship with PV industry was observed to be poor, and Koinegg et al. (2013) reported that the gap between these two industries is a barrier to BIPV adoption.
Kosorić et al. (2018) and Koinegg et al. (2013) also reported that there is a lack of understanding between these two branches of the same industry. For instance, it was observed that while architects are more inclined towards discrete PV integration in buildings, PV specialists favor dominance of the solar PV modules, (Kosorić et al., 2018). Boesiger and Bacher (2018) suggested this industrial gap is a consequence of communication challenges. They explained that home owners believe they know more about PV than architects do, but admit that architects have more BIPV knowledge. The study further revealed that architects, on the other hand, believe that, though they have a low knowledge about both PV and BIPV, they know more than their clients.
On another note, Boyd and Larsen (2017) noted that default difficulties in proposal negotiations delays BIPV approval which may impact the targeted generation potential of the installation due to changes in seasons and reduced hours of daylight.
Other challenges relate to different regulations and standards which impact PV installers
and producers (Koinegg et al., 2013; Ritzen et al., 2016), and a lack of necessary drive towards innovation in the building industry (Koinegg et al., 2013).
2.7.5 Are there any other barriers which impact BIPV adoption?
The list of other barriers revealed multiple issues which reflect the impact of the weather, the place of policy in the approval process, and the general absence of governmental support. In other cases, the general lack of interest was also observed as a potential limiting factor.
Boesiger and Bacher (2018) argue that when owners and architects are not pressured by policy or politics, there is simply insufficient reason that persuades them to adopt BIPV. Chang et al. (2019) reported that based on low approval rates, local authorities seem to disprove BIPV, and this could hinder the possibility of having future projects. The study also reported the lack of precise standards and codes for BIPV, while also noting that this does not give guidance for planning. Curtius (2018) also agrees that when BIPV-related building codes and standards are not established, diffusion is invariably hindered.
In the absence of policy guidelines to predefine which projects are approved or which codes to adhere to, Strazzera and Statzu (2017) reports that condominium dwellers who were interested in installing solar PV, complained of not obtaining an approval. However, Curtius (2018) explained that in the approval and vetting process, Municipal building commissions aim to maintain or preserve the local character of the urbanscape. As a result, BIPV façade proposals, for example, are met with very stringent constraints.
The absence, inadequacy and changing character of government incentives were noted as limiting factors to the diffusion of BIPV. It was also reported that frequent policy changes or fluctuating agreements create stress in the administrative procedure for BIPV adoption (Boesiger & Bacher, 2018). Low government support combined with unwilling developers (Goh et al., 2017; Prieto et al., 2017), as well as an overall lack of market establishment were noted as interrelated challenges (Ebert & Kapsis, 2018).
The lack of interest is a broad topic connection other issues, but may also stand as a significant barrier as mentioned by several studies who observed indifference and disapproval, particularly in the façade (Kosorić et al., 2018). City attachment or heritage protectiveness may also cause the public to have a lack of interest for fear that the BIPV installation may change the existing aesthetic of the locality (Curtius, 2018; Strazzera &
Statzu, 2017). From the point of view of architects, this disinclination was reported as a consequence of incompatibility with conventional architectural traditions (Curtius, 2018). The findings of Boesiger and Bacher (2018), however, suggest that there is difficulty in appealing and engaging architects through PV/BIPV exhibitions to address their reservations.
Chang et al. (2019) reported that some residents express concern that the usable sunlight for BIPV systems is uncertain. This was a statement made by a study in a tropical region with frequent rains and cloudy days.