Number of participants
Chapter 4: Analysis and Findings Barriers to Adoption
4.2 Thematic Analysis: Barrier Themes Identified
4.2.4 Economic
4.2.4.1 High Cost Considerations
The debate on the cost of BIPV has already been raised under the Misinformation and Skepticism sub-themes in the narrative on Knowledge and Awareness barriers. The fact is that several comments were made in support of this concern which requires revisiting. Key aspects of the initial, installation and
10 12
28
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
Long ROI Subsized energy alternatives High cost considerations
TOTAL Non-Technical Technical
maintenance cost were discussed also well as interrelated concerns which highlight the reasoning of participants and the impact of these cost considerations. The information in this section was extracted from the comments of twenty-eight participants, eighteen technical and ten non-technical.
a) Technical Participants‘ Opinions
Five architects, five architects with research background, three PV specialists, and five other consultants commented on this barrier. The first point to note comes from an architect‘s perspective, “clients are afraid to try it because it costs a lot” (R03AE).
Other participants affirm that both the initial cost (R11ARE), the cost of installing the system (R34OCE) are high, while maintenance, operation and auto-cleaning are very expensive (R27OCE; R35OCE).
“So there are these costs which go into the operations of the thing itself, it‟s not just fixing the panel and saying, "I have a generating system and it‟s making revenues, reducing my bills," it doesn‟t work that way because still, you have to put in a lot of maintenance, you have a lot of operation, a lot of consideration on the, what do you call it? Batteries lifetime. Batteries consume a lot of cost in the component of photovoltaic…60% goes towards battery and storage.” – R27OCE
Various products like BIPV louvers and BIPV windows were said to be more expensive than traditional glass (R09ARE; R26OCE), as expressed by two respondents, “I mean, if we are talking about louvers on the south façade, yeah, why not. If you‟ve got money to spend on louvers, first of all, because that takes money, how much money have you got to spend?” – R09ARE
“I can tell you exactly why…the cost, one is cost definitely, because I‟m sure a window with an integrated solar panel is going to be fairly expensive compared to just a glass window.” – R26OCE
Also, more cost is added by size customization as this requires more manpower, heavier equipment and the unexpected material breakages (R01AE). Adding to this, it
was mentioned that the cost of the batteries and storage adds 60% to the total cost (R27OCE). Assuming this to be true, a mathematical assessment would mean that the battery-storage cost is 1.5 times the cost of the whole system if the latter is only 40% of the total. One result of these cost considerations, which are alien to the existing conventional technology, is low demand for PV and a high price from the supplier as explained by the following participant (R24PVU),
“There are some clients looking for these smart ideas and the clients…but the problem is the prices from the suppliers because still the demand is not high. The demand is too low for this, so the prices will be a bit pricey.” – R24PVU
Taking the narrative beyond mere speculation, one professional claimed that a feasibility study report shows the BIPV cost is actually very high (R35OCE), although another professional contradicted this, stating that it is only 10-20% more expensive than a conventional build.
“Look at the idea of the cost of BIPV. It is a misconception. I did my personal research and it is just about 10-20% extra on the cost.” – R19PVE
Yet another practicing architect, emphasized that the building industry is very price-sensitive and thus BIPV is only good for personal, non-commercial, or company headquarter buildings where prestige and customization may be ideological interests. He called this an intent for “a very bespoke kind of boutique building” (R05AE).
In addition to the foregoing account of participant perspectives, it was asserted that BIPV design requires a specialist and because smaller firms cannot pay to hire one permanently, they opt for a third-party, which increases the project cost as explained by an interested stakeholder (R11ARE).
“While small firms, most of them are not interested because of the time that will be wasted and they require a specialist in this. It's a waste of time and money for them from their point of view.” – R11ARE
In conclusion, BIPV is described as a high-tech option which increases the project cost and the rental value placed by the investor leaving the client with the burden to pay for it (R10ARE).
b) Non-Technical Participants‘ Opinions
Comments on this barrier were mentioned in interviews with two participants from the Client-UAE Citizen group; and five from Client-Expat, two from the Policy Maker and Implementers, and one from the Developer group respectively. All non- technical comments relating to this barrier agree that there are high-cost considerations as previously observed. The panels, initial capital investment and frontline cost was said to be high as well as costly replacement of damaged panels (R36CU; R41CU; R68D).
“They're new technology but when we hear about solar and stuff and it's reducing the cost but the equipment that you should buy is very costly. The panels itself are really costly.” – R41CU
One developer explained that this is because “the market is still young and undeveloped” and also stressed that there is some uncertainty in the cost of BIPV across the project timeline (R68D), saying that.
“The so-called BIPVs are relatively new, design, they might have some idea. Say 80% of idea I have about the cost, when I actually construct it I have idea about 40%.
The operations, to get the cost study or the case study might take maybe 20 years or 25 years, which is a big time. You don't have anything. You don't have an example, so I don't even know whether my cost will be within this limit or it can just shoot out like this. I don't know what's going to happen, so as long as I don't have case studies or a cost analysis report, I'm a bit scared.” – R68D
Several clients said they believe that the technology is expensive and not affordable. Few reactions are shown below (R48CE; R59CE; R63CE),
“There is very nice solar panel, but they're expensive.” – R48CE
“Not everybody can afford it.” – R59CE
“I think it‟s the cost. The cost of the technology is expensive, and the comparative service or product, which is electricity, is relatively cheap.” – R63CE
Another compared the installation cost with conventional power sources, and technology and suggested it was relatively higher (R47CE),
“They try to say “look, you pay overtime in terms of…”, but that means also relative to other technologies, old technologies, the cost will be a little bit higher, so people may not be that interested.” – R47CE
Besides agreeing that cleaning and maintenance were extra cost considerations, further contemplation was made to the fact of its difficulty and the stringent requirement to carry it out every two to three months (R54CE; R63CE). For one, the manual cleaning or rope climbing for story-buildings is risky and thus, has high cost (R54CE). These cost issues, it was argued, weaken the justifications in favor of an investment in BIPV (R63CE)
“…and we have to pay to clean it because this weather, even though we have sun, when you have a lot of dust the performance is reduced…So that is maintenance. So when I look at all of it, it‟s quite difficult to honestly justify the investment that is required.” – R63CE
Beginning with the comment that the client‘s budget is a primary determining factor, one participant, with a previous design background reviewed how these fore- mentioned cost considerations for BIPV or solar PV could play out. He said,
“…always, the owners (clients), they don't think about adding this (BIPV) in any building...because there is a big budget issue, a problem that everyone looking about…the first thing (that) will be removed from the design, if the owner wants to cut the budget, it's the solar panel” (R64PMI).
One interviewee from the Developer group stressed further the point by stating that even in the bid to achieve a Pearl 2 rating on the Pearl Building Rating System (PBRS), there are cheaper options than adoption BIPV or solar PV (R68D). Considering
these opinions, this developer would probably not opt for BIPV even if the project was planned to meet a sustainability or green status. But he however added an interesting twist, “…The cost is not an issue if I have a good product that will save my money, but I don't know that I will save my money and the cost is very high, I will not do it.” This comment raises a new issue relating the lack of knowledge about cost saving benefits of BIPV to high cost considerations. Connections like these, across all themes and sub- themes were observed during the analysis phase and are further scrutinized in the discussion chapter.