Impact of Dust Accumulation On Photovoltaic Panels A Review Paper

International Journal of Sustainable Engineering
ISSN: (Print) (Online) Journal homepage: www.tandfonline.com/journals/tsue20
Impact of dust accumulation on photovoltaic

panels: a review paper
Haneen Abuzaid, Mahmoud Awad & Abdulrahim Shamayleh
To cite this article: Haneen Abuzaid, Mahmoud Awad & Abdulrahim Shamayleh (2022)
Impact of dust accumulation on photovoltaic panels: a review paper, International Journal of
Sustainable Engineering, 15:1, 264-285, DOI: 10.1080/19397038.2022.2140222
To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/19397038.2022.2140222
© 2022 The Author(s). Published by Informa

UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis
Group.
Published online: 06 Nov 2022.
Submit your article to this journal
Article views: 3461
View related articles
View Crossmark data
Citing articles: 1 View citing articles
Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

https://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=tsue20
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SUSTAINABLE ENGINEERING
2022, VOL. 15, NO. 1, 264–285
https://doi.org/10.1080/19397038.2022.2140222
Impact of dust accumulation on photovoltaic panels: a review paper

Haneen Abuzaid , Mahmoud Awad and Abdulrahim Shamayleh
Department of Industrial Engineering, American University of Sharjah, Sharjah, UAE
ABSTRACT ARTICLE HISTORY

Photovoltaic systems (PV) have been extensively used worldwide as a reliable and effective renewable Received 13 Apr 2022
energy resource due to their environmental and economic merits. However, PV systems are prone to Revised 19 Sep 2022
several environmental and weather conditions that impact their performance. Amongst these conditions Accepted 19 Oct 2022
is dust accumulation, which has a significant adversative impact on the solar cells’ performance, KEYWORDS
especially in hot and arid regions. This study provides a comprehensive review of 278 articles focused Dust accumulation; PV panel;
on the impact of dust on PV panels’ performance along with other associated environmental factors, such solar energy; review paper
as temperature, humidity, and wind speed. The review highlights the importance of modelling dust
accumulation along with other ecological factors due to their interactive nature, and the differences
between cleaning techniques and schedules effectiveness. Moreover, the study provides a review of
statistical and artificial intelligence models used to predict PV performance and its prediction accuracies
in terms of data size and complexity. Finally, the study draws attention to several research gaps that
warrant further investigation. Among these gaps is the need for proper dynamic optimisation models for
cleaning schedules and a more advanced machine and deep learning models to predict dust accumula
tion while considering environmental and ageing factors.
I. Introduction Kazem 2016). There are two main solar panel types:
Global population and economic growth have significantly Photovoltaic (PV), and Concentrated Solar Power (CSP).
increased the demand on electricity. According to (IEA The PV panel converts direct sunlight into electricity, while
2011), electricity consumption rose from 10,116 TWh to CSP converts sunlight to heat, which is then used to gen
23,105 TWh over the last twenty years and is expected to erate electricity (Solar_Feed 2019). Hernández-Moro and
increase by more than 50% by 2030 (IEA 2011), this exponen Martínez-Duart conducted an analytical comparison
tial increase in demand adds burden to the existing conven between PV and CSP using the calculated levelized cost
tional methods of generating electricity, which are neither of electricity (LCOE) and the future evolution of the LCOE
reliable nor environmentally friendly with potential complete between 2010 and 2050 (Hernández-Moro and Martínez-
depletion (Al-Maamary, Kazem, and Chaichan 2017). As Duart 2013). They recommended using PV technology on
a result, the world has shifted the focus to clean and renewable Earth areas with middle to high latitudes, while CSP tech
energy resources in order to partially cover the electricity nology in arid areas with low latitudes. The optimal solar
consumption and limit the dependency on depleted energy irradiation is concentrated in the solar belt region, includ
resources (Prakash and Bhat 2009). In particular, wind and ing North Africa and the Middle East, which are mostly
solar electricity production are amongst the most utilised desert areas (Mazumder et al. 2014). But the climate chal
resources due to their effectiveness and simplicity compared lenge in this region is the high levels of dust, pollution, and
with others (Tyagi et al. 2013). ambient temperature which are adversely affecting the per
Moreover, the remarkable reduction in the associated cost, formance and operation cost of PV systems (Kazem et al.
as well as the ambitious policies for utilising renewable energy 2020; Namdari et al. 2018).
resources, has accelerated the installed capacity of solar and Literature is rich in studies investigating the impact of
wind projects worldwide (Kazem 2011). It is expected that design parameters, such as type of PV panel and tilt angle,
wind and solar total contribution from renewable energy and environmental factors, such as ambient temperature, solar
resources in generating electricity will reach 31% in 2030 radiation, wind speed, dust, and relative humidity on PV
(Ellabban, Abu-Rub, and Blaabjerg 2014). performance (Sharma and Chandel 2013; Ameur et al. 2020).
Despite solar energy popularity due to being abundant, These factors are correlated and jointly impact the operational
clean, inconsumable, easy to install and maintain, and safe characteristics of the PV system, such as the current and
(Chu and Meisen 2011; Dincer 2000; Sarver, Al-Qaraghuli, voltage which are the two main components of power.
and Kazmerski 2013; Comerio et al. 2021; Mekhilef, Saidur, The main purpose of this paper is to review the recent
and Safari 2011; Kalogirou 2013), it is vulnerable to differ literature regarding the joint impact of dust accumulation
ent non-controllable weather conditions (Chaichan and along with other environmental factors on PV performance
CONTACT Haneen Abuzaid [email protected] Department of Industrial Engineering, American University of Sharjah, Sharjah, UAE
© 2022 The Author(s). Published by Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group.
This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use,
distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SUSTAINABLE ENGINEERING 265
and dust accumulation prediction models, to identify potential These recommendations have motivated the authors to
research gaps that warrant further research. identify the research problem, which is mainly about reviewing
Amongst all related topics to PV systems performance, this and studying the impact of dust accumulation along with other
review sheds the light mainly on the impact of dust accumula influencing environmental factors on PV systems perfor
tion on the performance of PV panels as an influential factor. mance. Also, a set of research questions have been stated to
The review also analyses the impact of other meteorological, initiate the review, namely, what is the impact of dust accu
design, and operational factors on the performance of PV mulation on the PV panel performance? what is the impact of
panels as well as their contribution to promoting dust accu different environmental factors on the performance of PV
mulation. It also reviews the cleaning methods during the panels? and what are the available PV panel energy prediction
lifetime of PV systems operation; which would lead to models? The last question includes methods used for develop
enhanced optimisation models in terms of frequency and ing models and variables included in the model.
scheduling of cleaning. Finally, this review incorporates The second stage is conducting the review, where recent
a section for predictive models of PV systems’ efficiency that studies are reviewed, based on the following keywords dust
have been proposed recently. The purpose of this investigation accumulation impact on PV; environmental impacts; weather
is to critique the gaps and the limitations of the reviewed conditions; soiling impact on PV; PV; PV performance; PV
research which would serve as seeds for warranted future cleaning; forecasting techniques; predicting techniques; artifi
research. cial intelligence techniques; machine learning; and deep learn
Several review studies have discussed dust accumulation ing in peer-reviewed journals and research engines such as
challenge from different perspectives and for different pur google scholar, IEEE, Scopus, and Science Direct. The inclu
poses. For example, Sarver et al. have reviewed research sion criteria cover relevant, clear, recent, and high-quality
focused on the role of the PV panel surface type (transmissive studies to answer the proposed research questions.
and reflective) to mitigate soiling effect on the performance of Other aspects such as the pure technical studies that were
PV panels (Sarver, Al-Qaraghuli, and Kazmerski 2013). focused on cleaning procedures and metallurgical processes to
Another stream of review papers focused on the significant maximise the efficiency of PV panels were outside the scope of
impact of cleaning on the technical and economic aspects of this study, yet they were mentioned briefly. The evaluation and
PV systems (Kazem et al. 2020; Jaswal and Sinha 2021; He, screening of papers was mainly performed over several stages:
Zhou, and Li 2011). Once again, the focus of these articles on initial screening based on the title and keywords, then screen
the impact of chemicals and cleaning methods and not sche ing based on the relevance of the abstract, and finally, through
duling of cleaning cycles. The uniqueness of this paper is that it a thorough reading of the research paper.
focuses on metallurgical and design parameters impact on The review covers the last 10 years only to assure recency of
different dust accumulation mechanisms. research. However, few key leading studies conducted before
This paper is organised as follows: section II outlines the the coverage period were included due to its importance. The
proposed review methodology, section III explains the signifi keywords search resulted initially in 18,841 articles. The
cance of studying dust accumulation and its impact on PV screening process resulted in a total of 278 papers used for
panels performance, section IV discussed the impact of dust this review.
particles and depositions on the performance of PV panels, The third stage is disseminating the results including
section V clarifies the performance parameters of PV systems a comprehensive critique for the reviewed research papers and
and investigates the impact of several factors on the perfor extract research gaps and recommendations for future work.
mance of PV systems, section VI represents the preventive The next sections provide a summary of the findings that will
methods for dust accumulation during the design and devel be used to attempt to answer the three research questions. The
opment stage of PV panels, section VII summarises the clean first part highlights the percentage of losses in performance
ing methods and techniques, section VIII investigates the parameters of different PV technologies due to soiling and
models used for forecasting the PV output power based on dust accumulation in different countries. The second part inves
different factors, section IX recaps the extracted research gaps tigates the performance of PV systems, the parameters that are
from the reviewed literature, and the paper concludes with considered to measure the performance including the opera
section X highlights recommendations for future research. tional and environmental. The third part provides a review of
environmental forecasting models including artificial intelli
gence techniques and their accuracy. A critical review is pre
II. Methodology
sented after each section to highlight the potential challenges
The review methodology is in accordance with Tranfield et al.’s and opportunities that are worthy of future investigations.
guidelines for conducting a systematic review (Tranfield,
Denyer, and Smart 2003) and depicted in Figure 1 The first
III. Impact of dust accumulation on pv performance
stage is planning the review, it starts with conducting semi-
structured interviews with four subject matter experts (SME). The degradation in the performance due to soiling or dust
The first SME is a solar energy researcher and several patents accumulation affects the feasibility of PV systems drastically.
holder while the second, third, and fourth are practitioners Several studies have quantified the losses due to soiling or dust
working for solar system manufacturing and installation com accumulation. Ilse et al. suggested that the financial losses due
panies. All three experts confirmed the need to tackle the dust to dust accumulation were forecasted to be between 4% and
accumulation issue and expressed interest in the review. 7% in 2023 (Song, Liu, and Yang 2021; Ilse et al. 2019b), which
266 H. ABUZAID ET AL.
Figure 1. Methodology.
signifies the need to understand and investigate performance Table 1 summarises the quantified soiling losses in
losses due to dust accumulation. several studies, while Figure 3 provides a graphical
The adverse impact of dust accumulation has been recog summary of losses by panel type in terms of duration.
nised and shifted the focus towards conducting cleaning activ Based on the results, the following observations can be
ities to eliminate this environmental factor (Chiteka, Arora, made:
and Sridhara 2020). Figure 2 illustrates the conducted
researches per year between 1999 and 2022 respectively using ● There is a significant difference in the reported losses
Scopus (Scopus 2021). It is noticeable that there is an increas based on the duration of the study, the location of the
ing interest in this field of research due to the associated experiment, the PV technology used in the study, and the
performance and economic impacts. type of experiment.
Table 1. Quantified losses (in %) due to soiling or dust accumulation.
Duration
Type Country Ref. Perf. ~1 m 3m ~100 d 4m 5m 6m 1y 16 m 21 m 2y 18y NA
c-Si KSA (Adinoyi and Said 2013, Nimmo and Said P1 20–50
1981) E 40
c-Si Australia (Tanesab et al. 2018,Tanesab et al. 2015, P 4.5 16–29
Yap, Baig, and Halawa 2014) E 22
c-Si Indonesia (Tanesab et al. 2018) P 8
c-Si Chile (Fuentealba et al. 2015,Ferrada et al. P NA
TF & c-Si 2015,Urrejola et al. 2016) E NA 0.13–0.56
c-Si India (Bergin et al. 2017, Bhasker and Arya E 35
2015, Rao et al. 2014) E 17–25
Isc 4–52
c-Si Jordan (Essalaimeh, Al-Salaymeh, and Abdullat P 90
2013, Saluos 2015) E 31–35
c-Si Pakistan (Bashir et al. 2014, Ullah et al. 2020) P 16–20 10–40
c-Si NA (Comerio et al. 2021, Sulaiman et al. E 85
2014, Zaihidee et al. 2016, Rouway 15–35
et al. 2020, Jiang, Lu, and Sun 2011) 26
P 54 40
c-Si Senegal (Ndiaye et al. 2013) P 18–80
CSP San Diego (Mejia, Kleissl, and Bosch 2014) E 0.21
TF & c-Si Thailand (Ketjoy and Konyu 2014) E 5.79–7.28
TF & c-Si Qatar (Guo et al. 2015, Touati, Al-Hitmi, and E 10 12–24
Bouchech 2012)
TF Egypt (ElDin et al. 2013) E 9.86
TF USA (Caron and Littmann 2012) E 11.5
c-Si Belgium (Appels et al. 2013) E 4
c-Si UAE (Al-Sabounchi, Yalyali, and Al-Thani 2013, E 27
Hachicha, Al-Sawafta, and Said 2019) P 12.7
c-Si Iraq (Al-Ammri, Ghazi, and Mustafa 2013, P 26
Saidan et al. 2016) E 18.74
c-Si Spain (Zorrilla-Casanova et al. 2011) E >20
c-Si Malaysia (Sulaiman et al. 2011) E 50
c-Si Oman (Touati, Al-Hitmi, and Bouchech 2012) P 38.1
c-Si Poland (Klugmann-Radziemska 2015) E 25.5
267
Figure 2. Annual publications in the impact of dust accumulation on PV performance. Source: ‘Analyse search results’ by Scopus using keywords including (PV
Performance, Dust Accumulation, and Soiling Losses) (Scopus 2021).
Figure 3. Soiling losses for different Pv Technologies Over Time.
● The majority of research was conducted for a period less different experimental settings (indoor, outdoor, or
than a year (Comerio et al. 2021; Adinoyi and Said 2013; simulation, soiling type), and different PV technologies.
Nimmo and Said 1981; Bergin et al. 2017; Essalaimeh, For example, Ullah et al. suggested 10% loss for low
Al-Salaymeh, and Abdullat 2013; Bashir et al. 2014; soiling and 40% for heavy soiling (Ullah et al. 2020).
Mejia, Kleissl, and Bosch 2014; Ketjoy and Konyu ● Data suggest conflicting results when comparing the per
2014; Guo et al. 2015; ElDin et al. 2013; Caron and formance losses for monocrystalline panels and polycrys
Littmann 2012; Appels et al. 2013; Al-Sabounchi, talline panels. Some studies such as the one conducted in
Yalyali, and Al-Thani 2013; Hachicha, Al-Sawafta, and Pakistan for 3 months (Bashir et al. 2014), and the one in
Said 2019; Al-Ammri, Ghazi, and Mustafa 2013; Saidan Senegal (Ndiaye et al. 2013), suggest that mono has
et al. 2016; Al Siyabi et al. 2021). The findings from these higher losses than polycrystalline. However, a study con
studies suggest that dust accumulation has a strong ducted in Thailand over a 5 month period showed oppo
impact on performance that may reach 40% in some site results (Ketjoy and Konyu 2014). Similarly, it
cases. However, these studies did not consider all suggests that the losses in the thin film are higher than
weather changes during different seasons over a crystalline panels (both monocrystalline and polycrystal
whole year. More accurate and generalised results can line) for a 5 months period of study (Ketjoy and Konyu
be obtained over a longer period of time that cover all 2014). The opposite results were suggested (Touati, Al-
variations of weather conditions. Hitmi, and Bouchech 2012), which was conducted for
● Some studies have drawn conclusions regarding the per 100 days. Such conflict in findings may raise the need for
formance losses due to dust accumulation with no clear a well-designed comparison environment for different
specification of the period of study (Bhasker and Arya technology types under similar conditions with valida
2015; Rao et al. 2014; Saluos 2015; Sulaiman et al. 2014; tion experiments to have more conclusive results. Hence,
Zaihidee et al. 2016; Jiang, Lu, and Sun 2011; Rouway more conclusive studies with the objective of comparing
et al. 2020; Sulaiman et al. 2011); which may result in different technologies performance under the same con
misleading conclusions. ditions are warranted. Additionally, these different
● Losses vary even within the same country. Such differ results for the reported soiling losses for different PV
ences may be attributed to different time periods, technologies are illustrated in Figure 3, where it can be
noticed that for the same duration of study and the same operational characteristics including Voc, Isc, and Power as
PV technology, soiling losses can differ based on the a function of dust depositions (Saluos 2015). The same inves
location and the impact of other environmental, design, tigation showed that the power losses may reach up to 90%
and structural factors, this can be clearly observed for the based on the characteristic of dust. Likewise, Sulaiman et al.
crystalline panels over a period of 1, 1.25, 3.3 and examined several kinds of depositions (dust, water, sand, and
6 months. Also, for different technologies, the reported moss) and reported a performance loss of 85% due to the
soiling losses would not necessarily increase if the dura exposure of different dirt depositions (Sulaiman et al. 2014).
tion of exposure to dust increases. This result is valid for Understanding the impact of dust depositions on PV panels
both mono and poly crystalline panels over a period of 3 and how to mitigate them requires special attention especially
and 5 months and might be justified by the impact of in the design and development stages of PV panels, yet it
other influencing factors. would be an opportunity to study the feasibility and applic
● The indoor experiments presented in (Saidan et al. ability of applying anti-reflective and self-cleaning methods on
2016; Bhasker and Arya 2015; Saluos 2015; Sulaiman the currently installed PV systems, also, it would lead to the
et al. 2014) showed different soiling losses. The pur application of most effective cleaning methods based on the
pose of these studies was to evaluate the effect of dominant dust depositions. This would contribute to enhan
different dust particles or sizes and predict the cing the economic and operational status of PV systems; the
required cleaning cycles. However, the indoor studies cleaning schedules would be adjusted, the required mainte
lacked the actual and different combination of physi nance would be optimised, and the overall yield would be
cal and chemical characteristics of dust and its sto improved.
chastic nature over different times of the year.
Majority of these experimental studies uses ‘one factor v. Impact of environmental factors on the
at a time’ testing strategy which does not reflect the performance of pv systems
interaction effect between different environmental and
design factors. There is a need to conduct further The performance and efficiency of PV systems depend on the
studies to correlate indoor testing and external envir stochastic outdoor environmental factors (Singh, Sulaiman,
onment. A standard indoor testing method that is and Singh 2013; Gholami, Saboonchi, and Alemrajabi 2017;
agreed upon would be ideal to make comparisons Al-Shahri et al. 2021). The prolonged exposure of PV panels to
between different studies more applicable. the outdoor conditions increases their degradation rate
(Corkish et al. 2013; Kumar and Kumar 2017). Table 2 sum
marises relevant survey studies conducted. Based on the sum
mary, the following points were highlighted:
IV. Impact of Dust Particles and Depositions on the
performance of pv systems
● Very few studies have comprehensively and simulta
Characteristics of dust particles and depositions have neously considered all environmental factors which
a significant impact on the performance of PV panels. In this include ambient temperature (T), solar irradiance (Si),
regard, Kazem et al. have provided a comprehensive review of humidity (H), wind speed (Ws), and dust accumulation
the dust characteristics of six dust pollutants and cleaning (D) (Al Siyabi et al. 2021; Kazem and Chaichan 2016).
methodologies impact on the technical and economic aspects Several studies have confirmed the significant impact of
of cleaning (Kalogirou 2013). Likewise, dust particle mechan Ws and H for some locations (Al Siyabi et al. 2021;
isms and characteristics including deposition and rebound Zorrilla-Casanova et al. 2011; Yoo 2011; Sonsuz et al.
were reviewed to understand the behaviour of soiling and 2020; Beattie et al. 2012; Csavina et al. 2014; Goossens
propose design mitigation methods for PV panels (Song, Liu, et al. 2019; Elminir et al. 2006; Mekhilef, Saidur, and
and Yang 2021; Figgis et al. 2017; Zhao et al. 2021; Jamil et al. Kamalisarvestani 2012), yet both factors were not
2017). included in the majority of studies. More comprehensive
Additionally, Menoufi proposed a performance indicator that studies focused on modelling losses as a function of all of
is calculated for each location considering the dust deposition these environmental factors for specific designs are
rate and the average dust density (Menoufi 2017). The proposed warranted.
indicator is called photovoltaic soiling index (PVSI), and it is ● More than 50% of the reviewed studies overlooked the
suggested to be listed in the datasheet of PV panels. However, impact of the design factors: tilt angle (At) and azimuth
this index is still not applied in mass production plants. angle (Az); which have a significant impact on the effi
Particulate matters (PM) are known as the major pollutants ciency of PV panels. At and Az control the amount of
in industrial areas due to vehicles and chimneys emissions and irradiance absorbed by the panel and the orientation of
it contributes to the negative impact on the performance of PV panels with respect to the sun which affects the angle of
panels either by the direct accumulation on PV panels, or by incidence (AOI). Therefore, it is important to consider
the indirect effect through settling in the atmosphere prohibit them as well when assessing the performance of the PV
ing the effective absorption of solar irradiance by PV panels system.
(Kazem and Chaichan 2019; Boyle, Flinchpaugh, and ● Amongst all performance measures, power is the most
Hannigan 2016; Li, Mauzerall, and Bergin 2020; Benghanem widely used measure due to ease of measurement at the
et al. 2018). Moreover, Saluos investigated PV panels panel or inverter scale. Power depends on the Isc and Voc
Table 2. Reviewed studies on the performance of PV panels under different environmental and design conditions.2
Impact of factors on PV performance Experimental Type
Environmental factors Design factors Performance Measures Indoor, Outddor, Simulation
Ref. T Si Hr Ws D At Az E Ey PR P In Out S Period
(Ameur et al. 2020) X X X X X X 1 week
(Yoo 2011) X X X X X X 1 year
(Demain, Journée, and Bertrand 2013) X X X X X 8 months
(Jin et al. 2017) X X X X X X 1 year
(Li 2013) X X X X X X NA
(Mansour et al. 2021) X X X X X 1 year
(Cañete, Carretero, and Sidrach-de-Cardona 2014) X X X X X X 1 year
(Eke and Demircan 2013) X X X X 1 year
(Marion, Deceglie, and Silverman 2014) X X X X X X 1 year
(Micheli et al. 2014) X X X X X X 1 year
(Bergin et al. 2017) X X X X X X 6 months
(Tanesab et al. 2015) X X X 18 years
(Sulaiman et al. 2011) X X X NA
(Fuentealba et al. 2015) X X X X X X 21 months
(Hachicha, Al-Sawafta, and Said 2019) X X X X X 5 months
(Comerio et al. 2021) X X X X Days
(Sulaiman et al. 2011) X X X X NA
(Kazem and Chaichan 2016) X X X X X X X NA
(Al Siyabi et al. 2021) X X X X X X X X X X 5 weeks
(Guo et al. 2015) X X X X X X 6 months
(Sonsuz et al. 2020) X X X X X 210 days
(Rao et al. 2014) X X X X X NA
(Saidan et al. 2016) X X X X X 1 day- 1 month
(Tanesab et al. 2018) X X X X 1 year
(Jiang, Lu, and Sun 2011) X X X X NA
which are always available on the monitoring system or reduces by 0.248% for each one degree Celsius increase (Al
the inverters’ display. Nevertheless, the readings for the Siyabi et al. 2019). Artificial exposure to high temperatures has
power do not give a full indication regarding the current resulted in a power reduction that reached 20.22% for crystal
compared to the expected performance. Instead, perfor line panels (Kazem and Chaichan 2016). The increased tem
mance ratio (PR), which represents the ratio of the actual perature results in a slight increase in Isc and a significant
power to the expected or theoretical power, is a more decrease in Voc and accordingly a reduction in the output
realistic performance metric. power (Majid et al. 2014; Chander et al. 2015; Nair, Jose, and
● Although it is recommended to validate simulation or Ravindran 2016). Several studies confirmed reduction in PV
indoor experiments with validation experiments, valida performance in different locations such as Saudi Arabia
tion results were not provided in most of the studies. Few (Adinoyi and Said 2013; Mansour, Khan, and Alsulaiman
studies conducted more than one type of experiment for 2021), Italy (Micheli et al. 2014), Spain (Cañete, Carretero,
evaluating the performance or for validation purposes and Sidrach-de-Cardona 2014), and US (Marion, Deceglie,
(Hachicha, Al-Sawafta, and Said 2019; Al Siyabi et al. and Silverman 2014). In terms of dust presence, higher ambi
2021; Rao et al. 2014; Yoo 2011; Mahdi et al. 2017; ent temperature has a direct negative impact on panels and an
Mani and Pillai 2010; Manokar et al. 2018). increase in the soiling losses (Al-Sabounchi, Yalyali, and Al-
Thani 2013; Fuentealba et al. 2015).
More details on the impact of environmental factors on the
performance of PV panels are provided in the next
Impact of solar irradiance
subsections.
Similarly, the performance of PV systems is highly dependent
on the amount of irradiance hitting the front side of the PV
Impact of ambient temperature
panel (Ameur et al. 2020; Kazem and Chaichan 2016; Micheli
To reduce the impact of high temperature, photovoltaic/ther et al. 2014; Marion, Deceglie, and Silverman 2014; Sharma and
mal (PV/T) systems were introduced (Al-Waeli et al. 2017b, Chandel 2013; Eke and Demircan 2013). PV panels are at their
2017a). These systems use phase-changing materials with best operating status when the irradiance is at its maximum
nanofluids to decrease the temperature of PV panels and use and the ambient temperature is at its minimum (Mohanty and
stored heat for other applications (Al-Waeli et al. 2018). Kale 2021). This refers to the ability of more photons to be
However, implementing such technology requires major absorbed by the PV panel and move the electrons to generate
panel design changes. current. The increase in Isc is noticeably higher than the
Ambient temperature has a higher negative impact on the increase in Voc and the overall output power will increase
thin film panels’ (TFP) efficiency compared to crystalline accordingly.
panels (CRP) (Touati, Al-Hitmi, and Bouchech 2012). Al Several studies suggested that irradiance is the most influ
Siyabi et al. suggested that the efficiency of crystalline cells ential factor compared to others (Cañete, Carretero, and
Sidrach-de-Cardona 2014; Kaldellis and Kokala 2010). This is suggested that output power increases with wind speed up to
supported by a study conducted in Korea for building inte a certain speed (Manokar et al. 2018). Another study suggested
grated photovoltaic project (BIPV) (Yoo 2011), where the that output power increases with the increase in irradiance and
results showed that higher output power measurements are decreases with the increase in ambient temperature, humidity,
associated with higher solar irradiance levels. Yet, dust and dirt and wind speed (Garg 2017). Such models highlight the inter
can cause a remarkable reduction in the efficiency of PV panels action effects that exist among the environmental factors and
up to 15% for BIPV (Kaldellis and Kokala 2010). To the the need for including all of them to get an accurate prediction
authors’ best knowledge, there are few studies attempted at of the power.
measuring losses due to dust as a function of irradiance.
Modelling dust losses as a function of irradiance can improve
Impact of dust accumulation
cleaning effectiveness.
Dust is one of the important factors that are affecting the
efficiency, performance, and profitability of PV systems
Impact of humidity
(Kazem et al. 2020; Bergin et al. 2017; Smestad et al. 2020).
Humidity also has a negative impact on the performance of PV Soiling losses are attributed to soil, dirt, dust, vehicle and
panels. When humidity increases, moisture will turn dust into power plant smoke, fog, particulate matters, ocean spray, and
mud (Al Siyabi et al. 2021) and accelerate adhesion of dust any other material that covers the PV panel and increases sun
layer to PV panels’ surfaces (Zorrilla-Casanova et al. 2011; light scatter and decreases absorption (Guo et al. 2015;
Beattie et al. 2012), which require special and frequent cleaning Conceição et al. 2019; Kazem, Chaichan, and Kazem 2014;
(Adinoyi and Said 2013; Mahdi et al. 2017; Kazem and Kinney 2018; Li et al. 2018), resulting in PV performance losses
Chaichan 2019). Cleaning becomes more challenging in desert (Kazem and Chaichan 2016; Mahdi et al. 2017; Muñoz-García,
areas due to water scarcity (Al-Sabounchi, Yalyali, and Al- Fouris, and Pilat 2021).
Thani 2013). Kazem and Chaichan studied the impact of Dust losses have been widely investigated (Al Siyabi et al.
humidity on PV panels experimentally and claimed that 2021) and were proven to be higher than the losses due to
humidity could reduce PV power output by 32.24% (Kazem ambient temperature or relative humidity (Touati, Al-Hitmi,
and Chaichan 2016). Touati et al. compared TFP and CRP and and Bouchech 2012). However, PV panels dust accumulation
found that the effect of humidity is higher on the former causes increase in panels’ temperature which will lead to
(Touati, Al-Hitmi, and Bouchech 2012). Furthermore, if a drop in the output power (Li 2013; Wilson et al. 2016).
humidity penetrates the PV cell through the edges, it would Dust particles may accumulate on PV panels due to natural
cause corrosion (Kempe 2005), which results in a reduction in causes or anthropogenic activities (Kaldellis and Kapsali 2011;
the adhesion between the cell and the frame, and consequently Bodenheimer, Lensky, and Dayan 2019), such as vehicles,
additional deterioration due to increased current leakage construction, sandstorm, pollution, airborne particles, bird
(Munoz et al. 2011). dropping, etc. (Sharma and Chandel 2016; Park et al. 2011;
Rieger et al. 2017; Kazmerski et al. 2016). In this regard, Ghazi
et al. realised that high populated regions in the Middle East
Impact of Wind Speed
and North Africa have higher levels of dust accumulation
Wind speed and its direction contribute significantly to the compared to other regions in the world (Ghazi, Sayigh, and
efficiency of PV systems (Csavina et al. 2014), and amount of Ip 2014; Maghami et al. 2016).
dust accumulation (Goossens et al. 2019; Elminir et al. 2006). There are several factors that affect the accumulation of
Low wind speed tends to stimulate dust accumulation dust on PV panels (Sonsuz et al. 2020; Mani and Pillai 2010),
(Mekhilef, Saidur, and Kamalisarvestani 2012), while high such as the local environment (Hosseini, Kermani, and
wind speed would dispel dust accumulation and positively Arabhosseini 2019; Rashki, Kaskaoutis, and Sepehr 2018),
contribute to the natural cleaning of PV panels (Mani and dust properties (Sulaiman et al. 2011; Zhao et al. 2021;
Pillai 2010). The success of natural cleaning depends on the Klugmann-Radziemska 2015; Ahmed, Kazem, and Sopian
orientation of the installed panels, wind direction and speed, 2013; Darwish et al. 2015; Tanesab et al. 2019; Benatiallah
and the source and type of dust (Mekhilef, Saidur, and et al. 2012; Molki 2010; Kumar and Chaurasia 2014; Darwish
Kamalisarvestani 2012; Hee et al. 2012). et al. 2018; El-Shobokshy and Hussein 1993; Kaldellis, Fragos,
An additional positive effect of wind speed is the cooling and Kapsali 2011; Javed et al. 2017; Micheli and Muller 2017;
effect it has on the PV panel which increases the absorbed Ilse et al. 2018; Sun et al. 2018), PV panels surface type and use
irradiance due to blowing the accumulated dust away (Kazem of anti-soiling glass or coating (Jiang, Lu, and Sun 2011;
and Chaichan 2016; Sonsuz et al. 2020), and decreasing the Goossens 2018; Piliougine et al. 2013; Ilse et al. 2019a; Said
humidity (Sonsuz et al. 2020). A predictive model for output and Walwil 2014), and tilt angle (Hachicha, Al-Sawafta, and
power based on recorded data for wind speed and panel’s Said 2019; Sharma et al. 2013). The local environment includes
temperature for 1 year was developed using an artificial neural location, human activities, climate conditions and type of
network (ANN) for a PV plant in India (Mohanty and Kale vegetation while dust properties include size, weight, density,
2021), while holding irradiance constant. Similarly, another and particles morphology. Dust losses are usually measured by
model was developed to study the effect of wind speed on comparing the output power of a clean panel and a dusty panel
output power while holding irradiance and ambient tempera under the same installation and environmental conditions.
ture constant (Manokar et al. 2018). The latter model A soiling ratio parameter (PR) of the maximum output
power Pmax or the short circuit current Isc of soiled or dusted countries, a case study in Belgium has shown that the impact of
panel to a clean one is a common metric (Tanesab et al. 2015; soiling losses were 3% and 4% during a rainfall 5-week outdoor
Micheli et al. 2017; Vázquez and Rey-Stolle 2008; Gholami experiment using the optimal tilt angle (Appels et al. 2013).
et al. 2018; Nepal et al. 2018). The loss in the efficiency of TFP reached 9.86% for a 30-days
Dust losses are highly affected by high ambient temperatures outdoor experiment in Egypt, where it was confirmed that Isc
(Al-Sabounchi, Yalyali, and Al-Thani 2013). In arid and semi and power are mainly affected by dust accumulation.
arid regions, the reduction in output power due to dust accu Many controlled indoor experiments have been conducted
mulation can reach up to 50% (Mallineni et al. 2014). to study the effect of dust accumulation on PV panel perfor
Researchers reported different losses for different locations, mance without considering other weather conditions (Jiang,
durations, and combinations with other environmental factors. Lu, and Sun 2011; Al Shehri et al. 2017). For example,
For example, Charabi and Gastli reported a soiling ratio up to Sulaiman et al. conducted an indoor experiment by exposing
81% due to the integrated impact of high ambient temperature PV panels to artificial dust particles and a constant source of
and dust accumulation in Oman (Charabi and Gastli 2013). light and reported an efficiency loss of 50% (Sulaiman et al.
Similarly, Al Siyabi et al. reported that a soiling loss of 7.5% 2011). Similar studies conducted using natural dust reported
and 12.5% can result in a monthly generation reduction of an efficiency loss of 35% per month (Bhasker and Arya 2015),
5.6% and 10.8% respectively of a 2MWp car park in Oman (Al while using an artificial one showed a significant efficiency
Siyabi et al. 2021). Comparable hot weather conditions are decrease using mud and talcum as mud (Rahman et al. 2012).
dominant in Baghdad-Iraq, where it was noticed that the out In the UAE, Hachicha et al. has conducted an indoor and
put power of the crystalline solar panels was decreased by more outdoor experiment using dust collected on the roof of
than 60% for 3 months due to dust accumulation (Al-Ammri, a building. Results suggest a linear relationship between the
Ghazi, and Mustafa 2013). In Saudi Arabia, Adinoyi and Said density of dust and the normalised power with a slope of
have shown that the reduction in power due to dust accumula −1.7% per g/m2 (Hachicha, Al-Sawafta, and Said 2019).
tion on crystalline panels was 50% for a period of 6 months A similar outdoor experiment showed a loss of 12.7% in
(Adinoyi and Said 2013). Also, the uniformity of dust distribu power during the period of study in Kuwait (5 months) with
tion on PV panels increases the losses in performance due to a similar linear relationship by where the power was dropped
dust accumulation (Bergin et al. 2017; Michelsm et al. 2015). by 34% for each g/m2 (Al-Hasan and Ghoneim 2005). Several
The performance of two PV technologies (TFP and CRP) other studies confirmed the linear relationship between dust
was compared under the effect of dust accumulation and density and transmittance losses (Piedra, Llanza, and
ambient temperature for 21 months in Chile (Fuentealba Moosmüller 2018; Pedersen, Strauss, and Selj 2016; Boyle,
et al. 2015). It was found that the PR is reduced by 3.7–4.2% Flinchpaugh, and Hannigan 2015).
for TFP with the decrease in temperature while it is reduced by Additionally, Muñoz-García et al. performed an indoor
4.4–4.8% with the increase in temperature. For CRP, the experiment to analyse the impact of dust accumulation by
impact is more apparent where the PR is reduced by 1.8– stimulating the weather of desert and the optical transmittance
2.4% when the temperature decreases and 3.7–6.2% when the losses. Results showed power losses ranging from 4.73% to
temperature increases. Another study in Chile was conducted 6.90% and a dependency on the dust density (g/m2) and the
in a heavily polluted area for 2 years. condition in which it was accumulated (Muñoz-García, Fouris,
Urrejola et al. reported a degradation in the performance of and Pilat 2021).
polycrystalline panels of 1.29%, monocrystalline panels of In addition to performance losses, dust accumulation may
1.74%, and thin film of 2.77% (Urrejola et al. 2016). These cause other damages to PV panels. Examples are surface
results contradict the findings of another study in Qatar damage due to sand erosion and permeability reduction
(Touati, Al-Hitmi, and Bouchech 2012), and California which will contribute to additional deterioration in the perfor
(Nimmo and Said 1981), where TFP had better efficiency mance of PV panels (Tagawa 2012).
than CRP when exposed to dust in desert areas. A similar Numerous researchers have compared different PV types to
study was conducted in Chile and showed the same conclusion evaluate their performance and feasibility. For instance,
when the energy yield and PR of different crystalline silicon Ameur et al. compared polycrystalline-Si, monocrystalline-Si,
panels were compared during summer and winter (Ferrada and amorphous-Si under real weather conditions for a period
et al. 2015). Bashir et al. has compared the performance of of 5 years in Morocco (Ameur et al. 2020). The results showed
different CRP (mono and poly) for 3 months during winter that polycrystalline-Si has better performance measures as well
where the loss in power was higher in monocrystalline panels as lower LCOE value (0.10 USC/kWh) when compared to
(Bashir et al. 2014). monocrystalline-Si and amorphous-Si. Similarly, Akhmad
Mejia et al. monitored the efficiency of CSP station during et al. suggested that thin film PV technology performs better
a dry period in summer and reported a drop of 0.21% per day than crystalline PV silicon in the tropical regions based on an
(Mejia, Kleissl, and Bosch 2014). The same study suggested outdoor study conducted for 2 years (Akhmad et al. 1997).
that the drop in efficiency can be restored by a rainfall event. Likewise, Sasitharanuwat et al. compared the efficiency of
Several studies showed that dust accumulation impacts output thin film, polycrystalline, and hybrid solar panels for 6 months
power and current of different types of CRP while the voltage of operation in Thailand and concluded that the efficiency of
is not impacted since dust impacts the amount of irradiation thin film panels is the highest (Sasitharanuwat et al. 2007).
that is absorbed by the panel (Rao et al. 2014; Ndiaye et al. Thin film panels have lower temperature coefficients than
2013; Al-Hasan and Ghoneim 2005). Unlike Middle Eastern crystalline silicon panels (Kumar and Kumar 2017), but thin
film has lower conversion efficiency and higher area utilisation et al. 2014; Jin et al. 2017). The tilt angle has a vital role in
than crystalline silicon. Generally, crystalline silicon PV panels maximising the solar irradiance that reaches the PV panel (Eke
have the highest conversion efficiency and low cost among and Demircan 2013; Conceição et al. 2019; Lu and Hajimirza
other technologies (Kumar and Kumar 2017). In addition, 2017; Xu et al. 2017).
the abundance of silicon worldwide and the economical pro Yadav and Chandel conducted a comprehensive review to
cesses to produce crystalline silicon panels give them greater study several optimisation techniques to determine the opti
advantages over other types (Kumar and Kumar 2017). Many mal tilt angle (Yadav and Chandel 2013). Moreover, a case
authors have studied the development and applications of study for maximising the output power based on optimising
different PV technologies (Sharma et al. 2013; Akikur et al. the tilt angle along with ambient temperature in five different
2013; Parida, Iniyan, and Goic 2011; Park et al. 2014; Omar cities in Saudi Arabia was presented in (Mansour, Khan, and
Nour-eddine et al. 2020; Ustun et al. 2019; Chantana et al. Alsulaiman 2021). Similarly, an experimental study was con
2020; Mahammed et al. 2017; Wu et al. 2017; Alonso-Abella ducted by Ullah et al. to determine the optimal tilt angle for PV
et al. 2014; Quansah et al. 2017; Dirnberger, Müller, and Reise panels in Pakistan using radiation data from Energy Sector
2015; Bajpai and Dash 2012; Siddiqui et al. 2016; Devabhaktuni Management Assistance Programme (ESMAP) and National
et al. 2013; Ludin et al. 2014; Sundaram, Benson, and Mallick Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) (Ullah et al. 2020). The
2016; Belluardo et al. 2015). same study suggested energy losses of 13.5% and 26.2% for
vertical and horizontal installation, respectively. In general, as
the tilt angle increases, the dust accumulation on PV panels
VI. Preventive methods for dust accumulation decreases due to gravitational effect on dust particles
(Mekhilef, Saidur, and Kamalisarvestani 2012).
Preventive methods include the use of special anti-soiling Moreover, tilt angle affects the angle of incidence (AOI)
coating materials of the PV surface (Sarver, Al-Qaraghuli, which impacts performance losses (Marion, Deceglie, and
and Kazmerski 2013; Jamil et al. 2017; Sayyah, Horenstein, Silverman 2014; Zhang et al. 2016). Based on these studies,
and Mazumder 2014; Son et al. 2012). A significant increase in the tilt angle and orientation of PV panels are site-dependent
the density of short circuit current by 3.1% was achieved and their optimal values are determined for each site specifi
through applying a self-cleaning cover made of microcone- cally (Sharma and Chandel 2013).
textured fluorinated ethylene propylene (FEP) on the front In addition, the structural design of PV panels can affect the
surface of PV panels (Roslizar et al. 2020). The additional accumulation of dust and the potential degradation in perfor
cover has self-cleaning properties and can decrease the irradi mance, it was found that frameless PV panels experience uni
ance reflection losses. Another technique was presented to form distribution of dust, while the distribution of dust in the
characterise the evolution of the coating layer chemistry framed ones is nonuniform due to the increased accumulation
using small-angle X-ray scattering (SAXS), X-ray photoelec at the bottom of the panel where the frame prohibits the flow
tron spectroscopy (XPS), and X-ray absorption spectroscopy of dust particle due to gravity (Javed et al. 2017; Sadat et al.
(XAS) which showed its effectiveness for the anti-soiling- 2021; Gostein et al. 2013). The frequent nonuniform distribu
coating material for PV panels (Moffitt et al. 2019). tion of dust leads to hotspots in PV panels which has a severe
In the context of angle of incidence (AOI), the increase in negative impact on the performance (AlDowsari et al. 2014).
AOI will increase the reflectance of irradiance and reduce PV
panel efficiency (Rajasekar, Boppana, and TamizhMani 2015).
Therefore, anti-reflective coating for PV panels is considered
VII. Cleaning
more resilient towards the effect of AOI (John 2015). Likewise,
a recent review paper has shown that MgF2, SiO2, TiO2, ZrO2, PV panels cleaning is a reactive method to enhance the per
and Si3N4 are the most used materials for anti-reflective coatings formance of PV panels, it is considered as a significant main
for the glass of PV panels, while manufacturing superhydropho tenance cost (Jones et al. 2016), which should be performed
bic surface for the glass layer of PV panels features the most when it is economically feasible (Faifer, Lazzaroni, and Toscani
effective method in self-cleaning (Sarkın, Ekren, and Sağlam 2014; Cristaldi et al. 2012). PV plants usually have pre-
2020; Wu et al. 2022). scheduled cleaning cycles based on the forecasted soiling losses
Furthermore, installation settings, such as tilt angle and in their locations. Cleaning the PV panels can be manual, or
orientation, control the amount of solar irradiance falling on automatic (full or semi).
the PV panel (Elminir et al. 2006; Demain, Journée, and Cleaning can be wet or dry based on many conditions such as
Bertrand 2013; El-Sebaii et al. 2010). The azimuth angle repre the severity of the accumulated dust and the type of dust.
sents the orientation, which is the angle of east-west orienta Manual cleaning is usually recommended for small-scale PV
tion in degrees. The zero value of the azimuth angle is when systems (Maghami et al. 2016; Sayyah, Horenstein, and
the PV panels stand facing the equator in Earth’s southern and Mazumder 2014) and is labour-intensive and costly if the
northern hemispheres. Panels, in general, should face the water is scarce or unavailable at site (Kazem et al. 2020; Bergin
south for the northern hemisphere and the north for the et al. 2017). It is also recommended to use a good quality brush
southern hemisphere, while the tilt angle depends on the when conducting manual cleaning to avoid any adverse impact
daily, monthly and yearly path of the sun (John 2015; Yadav of the surface of PV panels (Al Shehri et al. 2016).
and Chandel 2013). This implies the need to optimise it for Automatic cleaning is recommended for medium-large
each site to increase the performance of solar panels (Micheli scale PV systems as they are faster and more efficient (Sarver,
Al-Qaraghuli, and Kazmerski 2013; Al Siyabi et al. 2021; VIII. Output power forecasting/predicting models
Maghami et al. 2016). The automatic cleaning techniques
Forecasting operational or environmental factors for PV sys
include robots, drones, automatic brushes, etc. (Al-Housani,
tems using artificial intelligent techniques is another area of
Bicer, and Koç 2019). Although automatic cleaning may
research that drew the attention of many researchers in the last
reduce the water and manual operating costs, excessive use
few decades. Figure 4 depicts a summary of machine learning
may affect the lifespan of PV panels and add additional cost
(ML) and deep learning (DL) techniques used for forecasting
component for replacing the defected panels (Supe et al. 2020).
while Table 3 provides a summary of prediction models studies
Other recent cleaning methods include:
surveyed.
Figure 4 Alt Text: A pie chart that demonstrates the per
● Air flow from conditioning units (Assi et al. 2012).
centage of using forecasting techniques to forecast solar per
● natural rain: a cheap and effective method with the chal
formance and environmental indicators, neural network
lenge of controlling amount (Tanesab et al. 2016).
(45%), regression (24%), support vector machine (14%), deci
Moreover, the tilt angle of PV panels should be greater
sion tree (8%), extreme learning machine (4%), and rainfor
than zero (García et al. 2011); otherwise, a layer of clay or
est (4%).
mud will be formed on the PV panels (Kazem et al. 2020).
Neural network techniques were employed in predicting
● Mechanical cleaning: using robots or engines to operate
performance and environmental factors in PV systems. ANN
cleaning brushes with an option to be attached to water
is the most applied technique and resulted in the best accurate
tank (Anderson et al. 2010).
predictive models compared to other neural network tools
● Electro-dynamic display (Mazumder et al. 2017): an
with the exception of one study conducted in KSA where
expensive and fast method that can remove up to 90%
multilayer perceptron (MLP) resulted in best predicting accu
of the dust within 2 min (Kazem et al. 2020). However, it
racy compared to DT, KNN, and SVM.
depends on converting the dust to a dynamic state by
Regression tools were also used to forecast the performance
using a high voltage source to generate electricity and
and environmental factors in PV systems. The most frequently
charge the accumulated dust which by itself consumes
used was linear regression (LR). However, other prediction
energy. This method is more useful in arid regions
techniques such as non-linear regression (NLR) (Omar Nour-
(Mazumder et al. 2011).
eddine et al. 2021; Louzazni et al. 2020), support vector
machine (SVM) (Bandong et al. 2019), extreme learning
The selection of a cleaning method depends on cost, loca
machine (ELM) (Al-Kouz et al. 2019), artificial neural network
tion, system size, design features, and meteorological data
(ANN) (Javed, Guo, and Figgis 2017), multilayer perceptron
(Kazem et al. 2020). Several studies have been conducted to
(Pulipaka, Mani, and Kumar 2016), and decision trees (DT)
monitor the soiling phenomenon on PV panels in order to
have outperformed LR (Touati et al. 2017). Furthermore, an
plan for the cleaning activities. For instance, Google Earth
NLR model resulted in higher prediction accuracy than ANN
Engine (GEE) is one of the methods that provides a cost-
for the power based on ambient temperature and irradiance as
efficient and near real time monitoring for PV soiling losses
inputs (Louzazni et al. 2020). Similarly, random forest (RF)
(Supe et al. 2020). The majority of these methods have a fixed
outperformed logistic regression (Log) in one study with the
schedule even though environmental factors such as dust and
objective of forecasting soiling losses as a function of tempera
rain are highly stochastic. Investigating a more flexible method
ture and solar irradiance (Heinrich et al. 2020). Gaussian
with dynamic scheduling driven by accurate prediction models
Process regression (GP) was used twice: first for predicting
is promising.
power as a function of temperature, irradiance, and wind speed
and showed better performance than DT (Hossain et al. 2017).
In contrast, the second study showed that the performance of
DT in predicting soiling losses was better than GP considering
temperature, irradiance, and dust accumulation as inputs
(Shaaban et al. 2020). Such conflicting results may be due to
the type, sample size, amount, and complexity of data and
model characteristics.
In some cases, additional sophisticated methods were
applied using metaheuristic techniques to increase the predic
tion accuracy such as Artificial Bee Colony Support Vector
Machine (ABC-SVM) for power prediction using irradiance,
temperature, humidity, and wind speed as inputs, when com
pared to the original SMV technique (Mo et al. 2018), and
Particle Swarm Optimisation and Extreme Learning Machine
(PSO-ELM) for irradiance prediction using irradiance, tem
perature, and humidity, when compared to DT, SVM, ELM,
and GRNN (Feng et al. 2020).
Figure 4. Techniques used for forecasting solar performance and environmental The nature and size of input and output data influence the
indicators. selection of the prediction technique. For example, regression
Table 3. Reviewed prediction studies analysis.
Considered/ Measured Factors
Design Weather/ Environmental Operational
Ref. Output Type AT AA D Irr T H Pr Cc Ws Cm R PM A P PT V I Cl F Experimental Type
(Ziane et al. 2021) P poly-Si X X X X X X Out
(Graditi, Ferlito, and Adinolfi 2016) P poly-Si & a-Si X X X X X Out
(Ahmad, Mourshed, and Rezgui 2018) P NA X X X X X X Out
(Bouchouicha et al. 2020) P poly-Si X X X X X X Out
(Omar Nour-eddine et al. 2021) P poly, mono, a-Si X X X X Out
(Louzazni et al. 2020) P mono-Si X X X Out
(Rana, Koprinska, and Agelidis 2016) P NA X X X X X X Out
(Touati et al. 2017) P mono-Si X X X X X X X X X Out
(Mellit, Massi Pavan, and Lughi 2014) P poly-Si X X X Out
(Shapsough, Dhaouadi, and Zualkernan 2019) P mono-Si X X X X X X Out
(Pulipaka, Mani, and Kumar 2016) P NA X X X X X In
(Pulipaka and Kumar 2016) P NA X X X X X X In
(Mani, Pulipaka, and Kumar 2016) P NA X X X X In
(Oprea and Bâra 2020) P mono-Si X X X X X X X X Out, S
(Sun, Venugopal, and Brandt 2019) P poly-Si X X Out
(Lee et al. 2018) P NA X X X X X X Out
(Lee, Lee, and Kim 2017) P NA X X X X X X Out
(Cervone et al. 2017) P NA X X X X X Out
(Alessandrini et al. 2015) P NA X X X Out, S
(Wolff et al. 2016) P NA X X X X Out
(Shi et al. 2012) P NA X X X Out
(Hossain et al. 2017) P poly, mono, TF X X X X X Out
(De Giorgi, Congedo, and Malvoni 2014) P mono-Si X X X Out
(Almonacid et al. 2014) P c-Si X X X Out
(Mellit, Sağlam, and Kalogirou 2013) P mono-Si X X X X Out
(İzgi et al. 2012) P mono-Si X X X Out
(Son et al. 2018) P a-Si X X X X X X Out
(Al-Dahidi et al. 2018) P NA X X X X X X Out
(Al-Kouz et al. 2019) P poly-Si X X X X Out
(Arshad et al. 2020) P mono-Si X Out
(Buwei et al. 2018) P NA X X S
(Sun, Venugopal, and Brandt 2018) P NA X X Out
(Mo et al. 2018) P NA X X X X X S
(Maity, Alam, and Pati 2020) P poly-Si X X In
(Wen-Tao, Shuai, and Xin-Hui 2017) P NA X X X X X X Out, S
(Lie 2019) P poly, mono & a-Si X X X X Out
(Katoch et al. 2018) Cm mono-Si X X X X X X X X Out, S
(Shaaban et al. 2020) D poly-Si X X X X Out
(Alfadda, Rahman, and Pipattanasomporn 2018) Irr NA X X X X X X Out
(Javed, Guo, and Figgis 2017) D poly-Si X X X X X Out
(Chow, Lee, and Li 2012) E mono-Si X X X X Out
(Heinrich et al. 2020) D poly-Si X X X X X Out
(Chakchak and Sabit Cetin 2021) Irr NA X X X X X X Out, S
(Fadhel et al. 2019) SF poly-Si X X X X Out, S
(Feng et al. 2020) Irr mono-Si X X X X Out, S
(Ramli, Twaha, and Al-Turki 2015) Irr NA X X Out
(Zitouni et al. 2021) D Thin F X X X X Out
(Laarabi et al. 2019) D poly-Si X X X X X X Out
(Kapucu and Cubukcu 2021) F poly-Si X X X X X X X Out

(Dassler et al. 2019) Ey Si Bifacial X X X X X X X X Out
(Chiteka, Arora, and Sridhara 2020) D mono-Si X X X X X X X X Out
(Simal Pérez, Alonso-Montesinos, and Batlles 2021) D poly-Si X X X X X X X X X Out
275
(Shuvho et al. 2019) AT, Irr mono-Si X X X X Out

(Fan et al. 2020) PT poly-Si X X X X Out
(Bandong et al. 2019) PR NA X X X X Out
models, SVM, DT, and ELM techniques were used when input ● Depending on input data correlation and presence of noise,
data is numerical, while deep learning models where applied data pre-processing might be necessary. Some studies uti
when inputs are images or videos such as the cloud movement lised some commonly known pre-processing tools such as
and shading factors. Moreover, some techniques require large feature selection (FS) and principal component analysis
data sets such as ANN and prone of overfitting. (PCA) (Fadhel et al. 2019; Ziane et al. 2021; Touati et al.
Based on the reviewed articles, the following points were 2017). Compared to the number of models used in surveyed
observed: literature, pre-processing was not used enough.
● Despite the work that has been done to date, more advanced
● Several PV technologies were used in these studies machine learning and deep learning models can be utilised
including monocrystalline (MCP), polycrystalline and combined in a hybrid form of predictive models to
(PCP), bifacial, or thin film (TFP) (amorphous silicon). predict dust accumulation and other performance indicators
Some of the studies have considered more than one type while considering environmental, design, operational, and
of panel for comparison purposes (Omar Nour-eddine ageing factors. The usage of live videos or photos over time
et al. 2021; Hossain et al. 2017; Lie 2019; Graditi, Ferlito, can be very effective in predicting dust accumulation and
and Adinolfi 2016). power losses.
● Across all the operational and performance factors, power
has been the most commonly predicted measure; this may In addition to direct PV performance models, various studies
be due to its importance and/or the ease of measuring it were conducted to forecast the weather and environmental vari
through the monitoring devices. Nevertheless, other per ables that influence the performance of PV systems without
formance indicators were forecasted by few studies such as including a PV system but relying on historical meteorological
the energy yield (Dassler et al. 2019), PV panel’s tempera factors. For example, the solar irradiance was investigated and
ture (Fan et al. 2020), operational fault (Kapucu and predicted by several studies using artificial intelligence techniques
Cubukcu 2021), and efficiency (Chow, Lee, and Li 2012). such as Kernel Ridge Regression (KRR) (Moreno, Gilabert, and
This observation would raise the need to predict more than Martínez 2011), DT (Arora, Gambhir, and Kaur 2020), and
one performance indicator for the same setup to accurately a combination of different deep learning techniques including
assess performance and compare the accuracy in predic MLP, CNN, and RNN for solar irradiance prediction n Korea
tion amongst them as well as include other important (Muhammad et al. 2019).
factors such as performance ratio. Keeping in mind that It should be noted that most of the models have frequently
efficiency is related to all the equipment used including considered few input factors such as ambient temperature and
panels, inverters, and cables while performance ratio is solar irradiance, yet it is known that the prediction accuracy is
a more reliable measure related to the change in the enhanced by adding more influential input factors, which is
meteorological data compared to the predicted ones for recommended to consider for future research to have
the same location. a comprehensive set of meteorological, operational, and design
● Despite its effectiveness and flexibility in prediction, factors.
machine learning tools usage were limited to solar irra Also, comparing the accuracy of different predictive models
diance (Feng et al. 2020; Shuvho et al. 2019; Ramli, should take into consideration the characteristics of the
Twaha, and Al-Turki 2015; Chakchak and Sabit Cetin included inputs, the sample size, the duration of study, and
2021; Alfadda, Rahman, and Pipattanasomporn 2018), the robust application of preprocessing techniques prior to real
shading fault (Fadhel et al. 2019), and clouds movement modelling. By following such structured and standardised
(Katoch et al. 2018). Other performance indicators such approach, conflicting comparative results can be avoided.
as power, energy, current or environmental factors such
as ambient temperature, wind speed or direction, or
IX. Research gaps
humidity did not fully utilise the power of ML and DL.
● The majority of studies used ambient temperature and Based on reviewing the related research papers, several
solar irradiance as inputs to predict performance indica research gaps have been clearly identified, starting with the
tors. Although these two factors are the most influential reported quantified performance losses due to soiling in PV
one, other factors should be investigated. panels, there is considerable difference in the losses for the
● Other operational factors were rarely considered as same period of study, which would be caused by the influence
inputs in the prediction models despite their important of other factors in promoting the dust accumulation on PV
impact on the overall efficiency and performance such as panels, or the lack of control in cleaning cycles. Therefore, to
scheduled cleaning cycles (Buwei et al. 2018), and opera enhance the quantification process of soiling losses, all the
tional fault (Katoch et al. 2018). influential factors including location, weather conditions,
● To the best of the authors’ knowledge, PV age or perfor design parameters, cleaning, etc. should be included.
mance degradation factor was not considered as an input Additionally, it was noticed that when comparing different PV
in the analysis of the predicting models. There are several technologies such as crystalline panels (mono or poly crystalline),
studies conducted on PV projects that were installed thin film, and CSP, the soiling losses are not similar in different
a long time before the experiment has taken place. Such locations or periods of study, which would open the door for more
cases would miss an important input that justifies part of structured comparative research taking into consideration all the
the performance losses. factors that affect soiling and monitor them for different PV
technology under same circumstances; this would provide an and discussed. Statistical and artificial intelligence models
enhanced outcome that would benefit PV contractors and employed to predict the performance of PV panels or environ
designers in the selection process for PV panels for specific mental factors were investigated. The review revealed many
locations. aspects that were frequently investigated along with other
Also, a common observation in the reviewed literature is the aspects that are worthy of further investigation.
relatively short periods of study. Since the PV systems are exposed The performance of PV panels is expressed by several
to all dominant weather conditions wherever they are installed, metrics which depend mainly on the short circuit current
considering at least 1 year of collected data for all the meteorolo (Isc) and open circuit voltage (Voc) for the panel or string of
gical data would set a solid base for reliable models and outcomes, panels. Such performance metrics are affected by multiple
where the results would be generalisable for the beneficiary entities design and environmental factors including tilt angle, azimuth
including contractors, suppliers, designers, and operation and angle, ambient temperature, solar irradiance, humidity, wind
maintenance; as the resulting model covers all the seasonal speed and direction, and dust accumulation. The review sug
changes that take place during the year and the extreme weather gests a strong correlation between these factors that leads to
conditions that affect PV systems. Moreover, controlled environ a practical justification for performance losses when they are
ments such as laboratory would serve the purpose of studying considered simultaneously. However, very few studies investi
certain factors, yet, they have a limited control of the combined gated PV performance while including all of these factors.
effect of several noncontrollable factors like wind speed, dust Flexibility of machine and deep learning models can overcome
accumulation, intensity of solar irradiance, humidity, etc. the complexity of predicting PV performance as a function of
Therefore, outdoor experiments and real time-series input data all input variables.
would result in more accurate models and more reliable There are a significant number of studies that disregarded
outcomes. the importance of including all the seasonal changes in envir
Nevertheless, the review has shown a good deal of research onmental and weather conditions over one or several years of
studies that focused of certain influential factors which are solar study. Many studies covered only a short period of the year
irradiance and dust accumulation, yet several research studies which limits its external validity.
have confirmed the significant contribution of other factors to Additionally, the review highlighted discrepancies between
dust accumulation in PV panels, as well as the severe impact on studies investigating same PV panels technologies. These dis
the performance of PV panels due to this combined effect. Few crepancies can be attributed to the period of study, inclusion of
research studies have been conducted to study all these factors all significant factors, or testing procedures in the case of
simultaneously and for a scientifically sufficient period. These controlled indoor experiments. This opens the door for stan
factors would include weather conditions, design parameters, dardising testing procedures and emphasises the need to use
installation settings, and location characteristics. panels specific metrics such as ratio.
Although there is a good deal of research regarding the clean Cleaning is a significant activity in PV projects as it affects
ing methods and materials for PV panels, pre-scheduled cleaning both their performance and feasibility. Cleaning techniques
cycles are still dominant for medium to large-scale PV projects. were extensively investigated in literature with different levels
There is a significant need for an accurate schedule for clearing of details and focus. The majority of PV cleaning is done based
cycles that is driven by robust predictive models, where all the on pre-scheduled frequencies. Therefore, there is a need to
influencing factors are considered as inputs in the models for at develop an optimised cleaning schedules and techniques based
least 1 year. Accurate scheduling for the cleaning would enhance on the specific characteristics of different PV projects. There is
the economical and performance indicators for PV systems. also a room for more studies focused on comparing different
In addition, the reviewed predictive models for the perfor cleaning methods from an economic standpoint such as ben
mance of PV panels were focused on few performance indicators efit-to-cost ratio or payback period.
which are mainly the output power or the efficiency. These factors Finally, several preventive methods have been discussed and
are of high importance, yet they differ across PV systems based on applied in the development stage on PV panels including the
the type of panels or other supporting equipment such as inver application of anti-reflective coating and self-cleaning coating,
ters. It would be more reliable to use the performance ratio as while the research is open regarding the effective coating materials
a performance indicator, it takes into consideration the impact of for different installation settings and locations. In addition, other
meteorological factors and location characteristics, also, it is the measures such as installation tilt angle and azimuth angle have an
most used indicator by PV consultants for assessing the perfor impact on power generation as well as the initial cost of the
mance of PV systems. Likewise, to enhance the accuracy of the system. Therefore, adopting them should be accompanied by
predictive models, all the influencing factors should be considered, a techno-economic analysis to assure comprehensive assessment.
also, different type of data including but not limited to real-time
images and videos for dust accumulation, clouds movement, fogs,
etc. which requires multiple models to process such data. Notes
1. P:power, E: Energy
2. Same study showed 30–40% losses indoor and 4–5% outdoor
X. Conclusion and future research

Recent literature focused on dust and other environmental Disclosure statement
factors’ impact on the performance of PV systems is reviewed No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).
Notes on contributors Al-Housani, M., Y. Bicer, and M. Koç. 2019. “Experimental Investigations
on PV Cleaning of Large-scale Solar Power Plants in Desert Climates:
Haneen Abuzaid is a Ph.D. student in the industrial engineering depart Comparison of Cleaning Techniques for Drone Retrofitting.” Energy
ment at the University of Sharjah. Have a previous experience with PV Conversion and Management 185: 800–815. doi:10.1016/j.enconman.
systems design and operation, and interested in optimizing the perfor 2019.01.058.
mance and efficiency of PV systems by tackling the problems and obsta Al-Kouz, W., S. Al-Dahidi, B. Hammad, and M. Al-Abed. 2019. “Modeling
cles that negatively affect the performance of such systems. and Analysis Framework for Investigating the Impact of Dust and
Mahmoud Awad has more than fifteen years of industrial experience. Temperature on PV Systems’ Performance and Optimum Cleaning
Prior to academia, he worked at Ford Motor Company, Case New Frequency.” Applied Science 9 (7): 1397. doi:10.3390/app9071397.
Holland (CNH), and Schlumberger Technology in different technical Al-Maamary, H. M. S., H. A. Kazem, and M. T. Chaichan. 2017. “The
and management capacities. He also worked as an assistant professor Impact of Oil Price Fluctuations on Common Renewable Energies in
and chair of the Industrial Engineering Department at AlHosn GCC Countries.” Renewable Sustainable Energy Review 75: 989–1007.
University in Abu Dhabi. His research interests include Design for Six doi:10.1016/j.rser.2016.11.079.
Sigma (DFSS), reliability allocation, Prognostic Health Management Almonacid, F., P. J. Pérez-Higueras, E. F. Fernández, and L. Hontoria.
(PHM), and Centered-based Maintenance (RCM). 2014. “A Methodology Based on Dynamic Artificial Neural Network
for Short-term Forecasting of the Power Output of A PV Generator.”
Abdulrahim Shamayleh's research interests are operation research in Energy Conversion and Management 85: 389–398. doi:10.1016/j.encon
healthcare, scheduling, supply chain management, and facilities planning man.2014.05.090.
and design. He is a Certified Supply Chain Professional and instructor Alonso-Abella, M., F. Chenlo, G. Nofuentes, and M. Torres-Ramírez.
from the American Association for Operations Management (APICS). 2014. “Analysis of Spectral Effects on the Energy Yield of Different
PV (Photovoltaic) Technologies: The Case of Four Specific Sites.”
Energy 67: 435–443. doi:10.1016/j.energy.2014.01.024.
ORCID Al-Sabounchi, A. M., S. A. Yalyali, and H. A. Al-Thani. 2013. “Design and
Performance Evaluation of a Photovoltaic Grid-connected System in
Haneen Abuzaid http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1537-0875 Hot Weather Conditions.” Renewable Energy 53: 71–78. doi:10.1016/j.
Mahmoud Awad http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2999-9084 renene.2012.10.039.
Abdulrahim Shamayleh http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0214-7052 Al-Shahri, O. A., M. S. H. Lipu, A. Q. Al-Shetwi, R. A. Begum, N. F. O. Al-
Muhsen, E. Soujeri, et al. 2021. “Solar Photovoltaic Energy
Optimization Methods, Challenges and Issues: A Comprehensive
References Review.” Journal Cleaner Production 284:456–468. doi:10.1016/j.jcle
pro.2020.125465.
Adinoyi, M. J., and S. A. M. Said. 2013. “Effect of Dust Accumulation on Al Shehri, A., B. Parrott, P. Carrasco, H. Al Saiari, and I. Taie. 2016.
the Power Outputs of Solar Photovoltaic Modules.” Renewable Energy “Impact of Dust Deposition and Brush-based Dry Cleaning on Glass
60: 633–636. doi:10.1016/j.renene.2013.06.014. Transmittance for PV Modules Applications.” Solar Energy 135:
Ahmad, M. W., M. Mourshed, and Y. Rezgui. 2018. “Tree-based 317–324. doi:10.1016/j.solener.2016.06.005.
Ensemble Methods for Predicting PV Power Generation and Their Al Shehri, A., B. Parrott, P. Carrasco, H. Al Saiari, and I. Taie. 2017.
Comparison with Support Vector Regression.” Energy 164: 465–474. “Accelerated Testbed for Studying the Wear, Optical and Electrical
doi:10.1016/j.energy.2018.08.207. Characteristics of Dry Cleaned PV Solar Panels.” Solar Energy 146:
Ahmed, Z., H. A. Kazem, and K. Sopian. 2013. “Effect of Dust on 8–19. doi:10.1016/j.solener.2017.02.014.
Photovoltaic Performance: Review and Research Status.” Latest Al Siyabi, I., A. Al Mayasi, A. Al Shukaili, and S. Khanna. 2021. “Effect of
Trends Renewable Energy Environment Informatics 193–199. Soiling on Solar Photovoltaic Performance under Desert Climatic
Akhmad, K., A. Kitamura, F. Yamamoto, H. Okamoto, H. Takakura, and Conditions.” Energies 14 (3): 659. https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/14/
Y. Hamakawa. 1997. “Outdoor Performance of Amorphous Silicon 3/659
and Polycrystalline Silicon PV Modules.” Solar Energy Materials Al Siyabi, I., S. Khanna, S. Sundaram, and T. Mallick. 2019. “Experimental
Solar Cells 46 (3): 209–218. doi:10.1016/S0927-0248(97)00003-2. and Numerical Thermal Analysis of Multi-layered Microchannel Heat
Akikur, R. K., R. Saidur, H. W. Ping, and K. R. Ullah. 2013. “Comparative Sink for Concentrating Photovoltaic Application.” Energies 12 (1): 122.
Study of Stand-alone and Hybrid Solar Energy Systems Suitable for doi:10.3390/en12010122.
Off-grid Rural Electrification: A Review.” Renewable Sustainable Al-Waeli, A. H. A., M. T. Chaichan, H. A. Kazem, and K. Sopian. 2017a.
Energy Review 27: 738–752. doi:10.1016/j.rser.2013.06.043. “Comparative Study to Use nano-(Al2O3, CuO, and SiC) with Water
Al-Ammri, A. S., A. Ghazi, and F. Mustafa, “Dust Effects on the to Enhance Photovoltaic Thermal PV/T Collectors.” Energy
Performance of PV Street Light in Baghdad City,” 2013in 2013 Conversion and Management 148: 963–973. doi:10.1016/j.enconman.
International Renewable and Sustainable Energy Conference (IRSEC), 2017.06.072.
Quarzazate, Morocco, pp. 18–22, doi: 10.1109/IRSEC.2013.6529687. Al-Waeli, A. H. A., M. T. Chaichan, H. A. Kazem, K. Sopian, A. Ibrahim,
Al-Dahidi, S., O. Ayadi, J. Adeeb, M. Alrbai, and B. R. Qawasmeh. 2018. S. Mat, M. H. Ruslan, et al. 2018. “Comparison Study of Indoor/outdoor
“Extreme Learning Machines for Solar Photovoltaic Power Experiments of a Photovoltaic Thermal PV/T System Containing SiC
Predictions.” Energies 11 (10): 2725. doi:10.3390/en11102725. Nanofluid as a Coolant”. Energy 151: 33–44. 10.1016/j.energy.2018.03.040.
AlDowsari, A., R. Bkayrat, H. AlZain, and T. Shahin, “Best Practices for Al-Waeli, A. H. A., K. Sopian, M. T. Chaichan, H. A. Kazem, H. A. Hasan,
Mitigating Soiling Risk on PV Power Plants,” 2014in 2014 Saudi and A. N. Al-Shamani. 2017b. “An Experimental Investigation of SiC
Arabia Smart Grid Conference (SASG), Jeddah, Saudi Arabia, pp. 1–6. Nanofluid as a Base-fluid for a Photovoltaic Thermal PV/T System.”
Alessandrini, S., L. Delle Monache, S. Sperati, and G. Cervone. 2015. “An Energy Conversion and Management 142: 547–558. doi:10.1016/j.
Analog Ensemble for Short-term Probabilistic Solar Power Forecast.” enconman.2017.03.076.
Applied Energy 157: 95–110. doi:10.1016/j.apenergy.2015.08.011. Ameur, A., A. Berrada, K. Loudiyi, and M. Aggour. 2020. “Forecast Modeling
Alfadda, A., S. Rahman, and M. Pipattanasomporn. 2018. “Solar and Performance Assessment of Solar PV Systems.” Journal Cleaner
Irradiance Forecast Using Aerosols Measurements: A Data Driven Production 267: 122167. doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.122167.
Approach.” Solar Energy 170: 924–939. doi:10.1016/j.solener.2018.05. Anderson, M., et al. 2010. “Robotic Device for Cleaning Photovoltaic
089. Panel Arrays.” In Mobile Robotics: Solutions and Challenges, 367–377.
Al-Hasan, A. Y., and A. A. Ghoneim. 2005. “A New Correlation between Istanbul, Turkey: World Scientific.
Photovoltaic Panel’s Efficiency and Amount of Sand Dust Appels, R., B. Lefevre, B. Herteleer, H. Goverde, A. Beerten, R. Paesen,
Accumulated on Their Surface.” International Journal Sustain. K. De Medts, et al. 2013. “Effect of Soiling on Photovoltaic Modules”.
Energy 24 (4): 187–197. doi:10.1080/14786450500291834. Solar Energy 96: 283–291. 10.1016/j.solener.2013.07.017.
Arora, I., J. Gambhir, and T. Kaur, “Solar Irradiance Forecasting Using Data Fusion,” 2018in 2018 International Conference on Power System
Decision Tree and Ensemble Models,” 2020 in 2020 Second Technology (POWERCON), Guangzhou, China, pp. 4573–4577.
International Conference on Inventive Research in Computing Cañete, C., J. Carretero, and M. Sidrach-de-cardona. 2014. “Energy
Applications (ICIRCA), Coimbatore, India, pp. 675–681. Performance of Different Photovoltaic Module Technologies under
Arshad, M. A., S. Shapsough, I. Zualkernan, R. Dhaouadi, and Outdoor Conditions.” Energy 65: 295–302. doi:10.1016/j.energy.2013.
M. Takrouri, “A Minimal Neural Network Model to Predict Power 12.013.
Loss Due to Soiling in Stable Environments,” 2020in 2020 Caron, J. R., and B. Littmann. 2012. “Direct Monitoring of Energy Lost
International Conference on Electronics, Information, and Due to Soiling on First Solar Modules in California.” IEEE Journal
Communication (ICEIC), Barcelona, Spain, pp. 1–5. Photovoltaics 3 (1): 336–340. doi:10.1109/JPHOTOV.2012.2216859.
Assi, A., A. Hassan, M. Al-Shamisi, and H. Hejase, “Removal of Air Blown Cervone, G., L. Clemente-Harding, S. Alessandrini, and L. Delle
Dust from Photovoltaic Arrays Using Forced Air Flow of Return Air Monache. 2017. “Short-term Photovoltaic Power Forecasting Using
from Air Conditioning Systems,” 2012in 2012 International Conference Artificial Neural Networks and an Analog Ensemble.” Renewable
on Renewable Energies for Developing Countries (REDEC), Beirut, Energy 108: 274–286. doi:10.1016/j.renene.2017.02.052.
Lebanon, pp. 1–5. Chaichan, M. T., and H. A. Kazem. 2016. “Experimental Analysis of Solar
Bajpai, P., and V. Dash. 2012. “Hybrid Renewable Energy Systems for Intensity on Photovoltaic in Hot and Humid Weather Conditions.”
Power Generation in Stand-alone Applications: A Review.” Renewable International Journal Science Engineering Research 7 (3): 91–96.
Sustainable Energy Review 16 (5): 2926–2939. doi:10.1016/j.rser.2012. Chakchak, J., and N. Sabit Cetin. 2021. “Investigating the Impact of
02.009. Weather Parameters Selection on the Prediction of Solar Radiation
Bandong, S., E. Leksono, A. Purwarianti, and E. Joelianto, “Performance under Different Genera of Cloud Cover: A Case-study in A Subtropical
Ratio Estimation and Prediction of Solar Power Plants Using Machine Location.” Measurement 176: 109159. doi:10.1016/j.measurement.
Learning to Improve Energy Reliability,” 2019in 2019 6th International 2021.109159.
Conference on Instrumentation, Control, and Automation (ICA), Chander, S., A. Purohit, A. Sharma, S. P. Nehra, and M. S. Dhaka. 2015.
Bandung, Indonesia, pp. 36–41. “Impact of Temperature on Performance of Series and Parallel
Bashir, M. A., H. M. Ali, S. Khalil, M. Ali, and A. M. Siddiqui. 2014. Connected Mono-crystalline Silicon Solar Cells.” Energy Reports 1:
“Comparison of Performance Measurements of Photovoltaic Modules 175–180. doi:10.1016/j.egyr.2015.09.001.
during Winter Months in Taxila, Pakistan.” International Journal Chantana, J., Y. Imai, Y. Kawano, Y. Hishikawa, K. Nishioka, and
Photoenergy 2014: 1–8. doi:10.1155/2014/898414. T. Minemoto. 2020. “Impact of Average Photon Energy on Spectral
Beattie, N. S., R. S. Moir, C. Chacko, G. Buffoni, S. H. Roberts, and Gain and Loss of Various-type PV Technologies at Different
N. M. Pearsall. 2012. “Understanding the Effects of Sand and Dust Locations.” Renewable Energy 145: 1317–1324. doi:10.1016/j.renene.
Accumulation on Photovoltaic Modules.” Renewable Energy 48: 2019.06.139.
448–452. doi:10.1016/j.renene.2012.06.007. Charabi, Y., and A. Gastli. 2013. “Integration of Temperature and Dust
Belluardo, G., P. Ingenhoven, W. Sparber, J. Wagner, P. Weihs, and Effects in Siting Large PV Power Plant in Hot Arid Area.” Renewable
D. Moser. 2015. “Novel Method for the Improvement in the Energy 57: 635–644. doi:10.1016/j.renene.2013.02.031.
Evaluation of Outdoor Performance Loss Rate in Different PV Chiteka, K., R. Arora, and S. N. Sridhara. 2020. “A Method to Predict
Technologies and Comparison with Two Other Methods.” Solar Solar Photovoltaic Soiling Using Artificial Neural Networks and
Energy 117: 139–152. doi:10.1016/j.solener.2015.04.030. Multiple Linear Regression Models.” Energy System 11 (4): 981–1002.
Benatiallah, A., A. M. Ali, F. Abidi, D. Benatiallah, A. Harrouz, and doi:10.1007/s12667-019-00348-w.
I. Mansouri. 2012. “Experimental Study of Dust Effect in Chow, S. K. H., E. W. M. Lee, and D. H. W. Li. 2012. “Short-term
Multi-crystal PV Solar Module.” International Journal Multi- Prediction of Photovoltaic Energy Generation by Intelligent
Disciplinary Science Engineering 3 (3): 1–4. Approach.” Energy and Buildings 55: 660–667. doi:10.1016/j.enbuild.
Benghanem, M., A. Almohammedi, M. T. Khan, and A. Al-Masraqi. 2018. 2012.08.011.
“Effect of Dust Accumulation on the Performance of Photovoltaic Panels Chu, Y., and P. Meisen. 2011. “Review and Comparison of Different Solar
in Desert Countries: A Case Study for Madinah, Saudi Arabia.” Energy Technologies.” Global Energy Networks Institution (GENI), San
International Journal Power Electronic Drive System 9 (3): 1356. Diego, CA.
Bergin, M. H., C. Ghoroi, D. Dixit, J. J. Schauer, and D. T. Shindell. 2017. Comerio, A., T. T. Scarpart, R. C. K. Krause, M. R. Fernandes, and
“Large Reductions in Solar Energy Production Due to Dust and P. R. Muniz. 2021. “Performance of Photovoltaic Generators under
Particulate Air Pollution.” Environmental Science Technology Letters Superficial Dust Deposition on Their Modules Derived from
4 (8): 339–344. doi:10.1021/acs.estlett.7b00197. Anthropogenic Activities.” Acta Science Technology 43: e50101–
Bhasker, V., and R. Arya. 2015. “Effects of Natural Dust on the e50101. doi:10.4025/actascitechnol.v43i1.50101.
Performance of Solar PV Panel in India.” Journal Energy, Conceição, R., H. G. Silva, L. Fialho, F. M. Lopes, and M. Collares-Pereira.
Environmental Carbon Credit 5 (2): 1–6. 2019. “PV System Design with the Effect of Soiling on the Optimum
Bodenheimer, S., I. M. Lensky, and U. Dayan. 2019. “Characterization of Tilt Angle.” Renewable Energy 133: 787–796. doi:10.1016/j.renene.
Eastern Mediterranean Dust Storms by Area of Origin; North Africa 2018.10.080.
Vs. Arabian Peninsula.” Atmospheric Environment 198: 158–165. Corkish, R., M. A. Green, M. E. Watt, and S. R. Wenham. 2013. Applied
doi:10.1016/j.atmosenv.2018.10.034. Photovoltaics. London: Routledge.
Bouchouicha, K., N. Bailek, A. Razagui, E.-S. Mohamed, M. Bellaoui, and Cristaldi, L., et al., “Economical Evaluation of PV System Losses Due to
N. E. I. Bachari. 2020. “Comparison of Artificial Intelligence and the Dust and Pollution,” 2012in 2012 IEEE International
Empirical Models for Energy Production Estimation of 20 MWp Instrumentation and Measurement Technology Conference
Solar Photovoltaic Plant at the Saharan Medium of Algeria.” Proceedings, Graz, Austria, pp. 614–618, doi: 10.1109/I2MTC.2012.
International Journal Energy Sector Management. 6229521.
Boyle, L., H. Flinchpaugh, and M. P. Hannigan. 2015. “Natural Soiling of Csavina, J., J. Field, O. Félix, A. Y. Corral-Avitia, A. E. Sáez, and
Photovoltaic Cover Plates and the Impact on Transmission.” E. A. Betterton. 2014. “Effect of Wind Speed and Relative Humidity
Renewable Energy 77: 166–173. doi:10.1016/j.renene.2014.12.006. on Atmospheric Dust Concentrations in Semi-arid Climates.” Science
Boyle, L., H. Flinchpaugh, and M. Hannigan. 2016. “Assessment of PM Total Environmental 487: 82–90. doi:10.1016/j.scitotenv.2014.03.138.
Dry Deposition on Solar Energy Harvesting Systems: Measurement– Darwish, Z. A., H. A. Kazem, K. Sopian, M. A. Alghoul, and H. Alawadhi.
model Comparison.” Aerosol Science Technology 50 (4): 380–391. 2018. “Experimental Investigation of Dust Pollutants and the Impact of
doi:10.1080/02786826.2016.1153797. Environmental Parameters on PV Performance: An Experimental
Buwei, W., C. Jianfeng, W. Bo, and F. Shuanglei, “A Solar Power Study.” Environmental Device Sustainable 20 (1): 155–174. doi:10.
Prediction Using Support Vector Machines Based on Multi-source 1007/s10668-016-9875-7.
Darwish, Z. A., H. A. Kazem, K. Sopian, M. A. Al-Goul, and H. Alawadhi. Feng, Y., W. Hao, H. Li, N. Cui, D. Gong, and L. Gao. 2020. “Machine
2015. “Effect of Dust Pollutant Type on Photovoltaic Performance.” Learning Models to Quantify and Map Daily Global Solar Radiation
Renewable Sustainable Energy Review 41: 735–744. doi:10.1016/j.rser. and Photovoltaic Power.” Renewable Sustainable Energy Review 118:
2014.08.068. 109393. doi:10.1016/j.rser.2019.109393.
Dassler, D., S. Malik, S. B. Kuppanna, B. Jaeckel, and M. Ebert, Ferrada, P., F. Araya, A. Marzo, and E. Fuentealba. 2015. “Performance
“Innovative Approach for Yield Evaluation of PV Systems Utilizing Analysis of Photovoltaic Systems of Two Different Technologies in
Machine Learning Methods,” 2019in 2019 IEEE 46th Photovoltaic a Coastal Desert Climate Zone of Chile.” Solar Energy 114: 356–363.
Specialists Conference (PVSC), Chicago, Illinois, pp. 1242–1248. doi:10.1016/j.solener.2015.02.009.
De Giorgi, M. G., P. M. Congedo, and M. Malvoni. 2014. “Photovoltaic Figgis, B., A. Ennaoui, S. Ahzi, and Y. Rémond. 2017. “Review of PV
Power Forecasting Using Statistical Methods: Impact of Weather Soiling Particle Mechanics in Desert Environments.” Renewable
Data.” IET Science Measurement Technology 8 (3): 90–97. doi:10. Sustainable Energy Review 76: 872–881. doi:10.1016/j.rser.2017.03.100.
1049/iet-smt.2013.0135. Fuentealba, E., P. Ferrada, F. Araya, A. Marzo, C. Parrado, and C. Portillo.
Demain, C., M. Journée, and C. Bertrand. 2013. “Evaluation of Different 2015. “Photovoltaic Performance and LCoE Comparison at the Coastal
Models to Estimate the Global Solar Radiation on Inclined Surfaces.” Zone of the Atacama Desert, Chile.” Energy Conversion and
Renewable Energy 50: 710–721. doi:10.1016/j.renene.2012.07.031. Management 95: 181–186. doi:10.1016/j.enconman.2015.02.036.
Devabhaktuni, V., M. Alam, S. Shekara Sreenadh Reddy Depuru, García, M., L. Marroyo, E. Lorenzo, and M. Pérez. 2011. “Soiling and
R. C. Green, D. Nims, and C. Near. 2013. “Solar Energy: Trends and Other Optical Losses in Solar-tracking PV Plants in Navarra.” Progress
Enabling Technologies.” Renewable Sustainable Energy Review 19: in Photovoltaics: Research and Applications 19 (2): 211–217. doi:10.
555–564. doi:10.1016/j.rser.2012.11.024. 1002/pip.1004.
Dincer, I. 2000. “Renewable Energy and Sustainable Development: Garg, V. 2017. “Effect of Environmental Parameters on Solar PV
A Crucial Review.” Renewable Sustainable Energy Review 4 (2): Performance with MPPT Techniques on Induction Motor Driven
157–175. doi:10.1016/S1364-0321(99)00011-8. Water Pumping System.” International Journal Advanced Research
Dirnberger, D., B. Müller, and C. Reise. 2015. “On the Uncertainty of Ideas Innovation Technology 3: 996–1007.
Energetic Impact on the Yield of Different PV Technologies Due to Ghazi, S., A. Sayigh, and K. Ip. 2014. “Dust Effect on Flat surfaces–A
Varying Spectral Irradiance.” Solar Energy 111: 82–96. doi:10.1016/j. Review Paper.” Renewable Sustainable Energy Review 33: 742–751.
solener.2014.10.033. doi:10.1016/j.rser.2014.02.016.
Eke, R., and H. Demircan. 2013. “Performance Analysis of a Multi Gholami, A., I. Khazaee, S. Eslami, M. Zandi, and E. Akrami. 2018.
Crystalline Si Photovoltaic Module under Mugla Climatic Conditions “Experimental Investigation of Dust Deposition Effects on
in Turkey.” Energy Conversion and Management 65: 580–586. doi:10. Photo-voltaic Output Performance.” Solar Energy 159: 346–352.
1016/j.enconman.2012.09.007. doi:10.1016/j.solener.2017.11.010.
ElDin, A. M. S., A. K. Abel-Rahman, A. H. H. Ali, and S. Ookawara, Gholami, A., A. Saboonchi, and A. A. Alemrajabi. 2017. “Experimental
“Effect of Dust Deposition on Performance of Thin Film Photovoltaic Study of Factors Affecting Dust Accumulation and Their Effects on the
Module in Harsh Humid Climate,” 2013in 2013 International Transmission Coefficient of Glass for Solar Applications.” Renewable
Conference on Renewable Energy Research and Applications Energy 112: 466–473. doi:10.1016/j.renene.2017.05.050.
(ICRERA), Madrid, Spain, pp. 674–679. Goossens, D. 2018. “Wind Tunnel Protocol to Study the Effects of
Ellabban, O., H. Abu-Rub, and F. Blaabjerg. 2014. “Renewable Energy Anti-soiling and Anti-reflective Coatings on Deposition, Removal,
Resources: Current Status, Future Prospects and Their Enabling and Accumulation of Dust on Photovoltaic Surfaces and
Technology.” Renewable Sustainable Energy Review 39: 748–764. Consequences for Optical Transmittance.” Solar Energy 163:
doi:10.1016/j.rser.2014.07.113. 131–139. doi:10.1016/j.solener.2018.01.088.
Elminir, H. K., A. E. Ghitas, R. H. Hamid, F. El-Hussainy, M. M. Beheary, Goossens, D., R. Lundholm, H. Goverde, and J. Govaerts. 2019. “Effect of
and K. M. Abdel-Moneim. 2006. “Effect of Dust on the Transparent Soiling on Wind-induced Cooling of Photovoltaic Modules and
Cover of Solar Collectors.” Energy Conversion and Management Consequences for Electrical Performance.” Sustainable Energy
47 (18–19): 3192–3203. doi:10.1016/j.enconman.2006.02.014. Technology Assessments 34: 116–125. doi:10.1016/j.seta.2019.05.007.
El-Sebaii, A. A., F. S. Al-Hazmi, A. A. Al-Ghamdi, and S. J. Yaghmour. Gostein, M., B. Littmann, J. R. Caron, and L. Dunn, “Comparing PV
2010. “Global, Direct and Diffuse Solar Radiation on Horizontal and Power Plant Soiling Measurements Extracted from PV Module
Tilted Surfaces in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia.” Applied Energy 87 (2): Irradiance and Power Measurements,”2013 in 2013 IEEE 39th
568–576. doi:10.1016/j.apenergy.2009.06.032. Photovoltaic Specialists Conference (PVSC), Tampa, Florida, pp.
El-Shobokshy, M. S., and F. M. Hussein. 1993. “Effect of Dust with 3004–3009.
Different Physical Properties on the Performance of Photovoltaic Graditi, G., S. Ferlito, and G. Adinolfi. 2016. “Comparison of Photovoltaic
Cells.” Solar Energy 51 (6): 505–511. doi:10.1016/0038-092X(93) Plant Power Production Prediction Methods Using a Large Measured
90135-B. Dataset.” Renewable Energy 90: 513–519. doi:10.1016/j.renene.2016.01.
Essalaimeh, S., A. Al-Salaymeh, and Y. Abdullat. 2013. “Electrical 027.
Production for Domestic and Industrial Applications Using Hybrid Guo, B., W. Javed, B. W. Figgis, and T. Mirza, 2015. “Effect of Dust and
PV-wind System.” Energy Conversion and Management 65: 736–743. Weather Conditions on Photovoltaic Performance in Doha, Qatar,” in
doi:10.1016/j.enconman.2012.01.044. 2015 First Workshop on Smart Grid and Renewable Energy (SGRE),
Fadhel, S., C. Delpha, D. Diallo, I. Bahri, A. Migan, M. Trabelsi, Doha, Qatar, pp. 1–6.
M. F. Mimouni, et al. 2019. “PV Shading Fault Detection and Hachicha, A. A., I. Al-Sawafta, and Z. Said. 2019. “Impact of Dust on the
Classification Based on I-V Curve Using Principal Component Performance of Solar Photovoltaic (PV) Systems under United Arab
Analysis: Application to Isolated PV System.” Solar Energy 179:1–10. Emirates Weather Conditions.” Renewable Energy 141: 287–297.
doi:10.1016/j.solener.2018.12.048. doi:10.1016/j.renene.2019.04.004.
Faifer, M., M. Lazzaroni, and S. Toscani, “Dust Effects on the PV Plant Hee, J. Y., L. V. Kumar, A. J. Danner, H. Yang, and C. S. Bhatia. 2012.
Efficiency: A New Monitoring Strategy,” 2014in Proceedings of the 20th “The Effect of Dust on Transmission and Self-cleaning Property of
IMEKO TC4 International Symposium and 18th International Solar Panels.” Energy Procedia 15: 421–427. doi:10.1016/j.egypro.2012.
Workshop on ADC Modelling and Testing, Benevento, Benevento, 02.051.
Italy, pp. 580–585. Heinrich, M., et al. 2020. “Detection of Cleaning Interventions on
Fan, S., S. Cao, Y. Zhang, and Z. W. Geem. 2020. “Temperature Prediction Photovoltaic Modules with Machine Learning.” Applied Energy
of Photovoltaic Panels Based on Support Vector Machine with 263:114642. doi:10.1016/j.apenergy.2020.114642.
Pigeon-Inspired Optimization.” Complexity 2020: 1–12. doi:10.1155/ Hernández-Moro, J., and J. M. Martínez-Duart. 2013. “Analytical Model
2020/9278162. for Solar PV and CSP Electricity Costs: Present LCOE Values and
Their Future Evolution.” Renewable Sustainable Energy Review 20: Kaldellis, J. K., and A. Kokala. 2010. “Quantifying the Decrease of the
119–132. doi:10.1016/j.rser.2012.11.082. Photovoltaic Panels’ Energy Yield Due to Phenomena of Natural Air
He, G., C. Zhou, and Z. Li. 2011. “Review of Self-Cleaning Method for Pollution Disposal.” Energy 35 (12): 4862–4869. doi:10.1016/j.energy.
Solar Cell Array.” Procedia Engineering 16: 640–645. doi:10.1016/j. 2010.09.002.
proeng.2011.08.1135. Kalogirou, S. A. 2013. Solar Energy Engineering: Processes and Systems.
Hossain, M., S. Mekhilef, M. Danesh, L. Olatomiwa, and S. Shamshirband. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Academic Press.
2017. “Application of Extreme Learning Machine for Short Term Kapucu, C., and M. Cubukcu. 2021. “A Supervised Ensemble Learning
Output Power Forecasting of Three Grid-connected PV Systems.” Method for Fault Diagnosis in Photovoltaic Strings.” Energy 227:
Journal Cleaner Production 167: 395–405. doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2017. 120463. doi:10.1016/j.energy.2021.120463.
08.081. Katoch, S., et al., “Shading Prediction, Fault Detection, and Consensus
Hosseini, S. A., A. M. Kermani, and A. Arabhosseini. 2019. “Experimental Estimation for Solar Array Control C3 - Proceedings - 2018 IEEE
Study of the Dew Formation Effect on the Performance of Photovoltaic Industrial Cyber-Physical Systems, ICPS. Saint Petersburg, Russia,
Modules.” Renewable Energy 130: 352–359. doi:10.1016/j.renene.2018. 2018”, pp. 217–222, doi: 10.1109/ICPHYS.2018.8387662.
06.063. Kazem, H. A. 2011. “Renewable Energy in Oman: Status and Future
IEA, 2011. “International Energy Agency, World Energy Outlook 2011.” Prospects.” Renewable Sustainable Energy Review 15 (8): 3465–3469.
[Online]. Available: https://www.iea.org/. doi:10.1016/j.rser.2011.05.015.
Ilse, K. K., B. W. Figgis, V. Naumann, C. Hagendorf, and J. Bagdahn. Kazem, H. A., and M. T. Chaichan. 2016. “Effect of Environmental
2018. “Fundamentals of Soiling Processes on Photovoltaic Modules.” Variables on Photovoltaic Performance-based on Experimental
Renewable Sustainable Energy Review 98: 239–254. doi:10.1016/j.rser. Studies.” International Journal Civil, Mechanical Energy Science 2 (4):
2018.09.015. 1–8.
Ilse, K., M. Z. Khan, N. Voicu, V. Naumann, C. Hagendorf, and Kazem, H. A., and M. T. Chaichan. 2019. “The Effect of Dust
J. Bagdahn. 2019a. “Advanced Performance Testing of Anti-soiling Accumulation and Cleaning Methods on PV Panels’ Outcomes Based
coatings–Part I: Sequential Laboratory Test Methodology Covering on an Experimental Study of Six Locations in Northern Oman.” Solar
the Physics of Natural Soiling Processes.” Solar Energy Materials Energy 187: 30–38. doi:10.1016/j.solener.2019.05.036.
Solar Cells 202: 110048. doi:10.1016/j.solmat.2019.110048. Kazem, H. A., M. T. Chaichan, A. H. A. Al-Waeli, and K. Sopian. 2020.
Ilse, K., L. Micheli, B. W. Figgis, K. Lange, D. Daßler, H. Hanifi, “A Review of Dust Accumulation and Cleaning Methods for Solar
F. Wolfertstetter, et al. 2019b. “Techno-economic Assessment of Photovoltaic Systems.” Journal Cleaner Production 276: 123187.
Soiling Losses and Mitigation Strategies for Solar Power Generation.” doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.123187.
Joule 3 (10): 2303–2321. DOI:10.1016/j.joule.2019.08.019. Kazem, A. A., M. T. Chaichan, and H. A. Kazem. 2014. “Dust Effect on
İzgi, E., A. Öztopal, B. Yerli, M. K. Kaymak, and A. D. Şahin. 2012. Photovoltaic Utilization in Iraq.” Renewable Sustainable Energy Review
“Short–mid-term Solar Power Prediction by Using Artificial Neural 37: 734–749. doi:10.1016/j.rser.2014.05.073.
Networks.” Solar Energy 86 (2): 725–733. doi:10.1016/j.solener.2011. Kazmerski, L. L., A. S. A. C. Diniz, C. B. Maia, M. M. Viana, S. C. Costa,
11.013. P. P. Brito, C. D. Campos, et al. 2016. “Fundamental Studies of
Jamil, W. J., H. A. Rahman, S. Shaari, and Z. Salam. 2017. “Performance Adhesion of Dust to PV Module Surfaces: Chemical and Physical
Degradation of Photovoltaic Power System: Review on Mitigation Relationships at the Microscale.” IEEE Journal Photovoltaics 6 (3):
Methods.” Renewable Sustainable Energy Review 67: 876–891. doi:10. 719–729. DOI:10.1109/JPHOTOV.2016.2528409.
1016/j.rser.2016.09.072. Kempe, M. D., “Control of Moisture Ingress into Photovoltaic Modules,”
Jaswal, A., and M. K. Sinha. 2021. “A Review on Solar Panel Cleaning in Conference Record of the Thirty-first IEEE Photovoltaic Specialists
through Chemical Self-cleaning Method.” 835–844. Conference, Lake Buena Vista, FL, USA, 2005, pp. 503–506.
Javed, W., B. Guo, and B. Figgis. 2017. “Modeling of Photovoltaic Soiling Ketjoy, N., and M. Konyu. 2014. “Study of Dust Effect on Photovoltaic
Loss As a Function of Environmental Variables.” Solar Energy 157: Module for Photovoltaic Power Plant.” Energy Procedia 52: 431–437.
397–407. doi:10.1016/j.solener.2017.08.046. doi:10.1016/j.egypro.2014.07.095.
Javed, W., Y. Wubulikasimu, B. Figgis, and B. Guo. 2017. Kinney, P. L. 2018. “Interactions of Climate Change, Air Pollution, and
“Characterization of Dust Accumulated on Photovoltaic Panels in Human Health.” Current Environment Health Reports 5 (1): 179–186.
Doha, Qatar.” Solar Energy 142: 123–135. doi:10.1016/j.solener.2016. doi:10.1007/s40572-018-0188-x.
11.053. Klugmann-Radziemska, E. 2015. “Degradation of Electrical Performance
Jiang, H., L. Lu, and K. Sun. 2011. “Experimental Investigation of the of a Crystalline Photovoltaic Module Due to Dust Deposition in
Impact of Airborne Dust Deposition on the Performance of Solar Northern Poland.” Renewable Energy 78: 418–426. doi:10.1016/j.
Photovoltaic (PV) Modules.” Atmospheric Environment 45 (25): renene.2015.01.018.
4299–4304. doi:10.1016/j.atmosenv.2011.04.084. Kumar, S., and P. B. L. Chaurasia. 2014. “Experimental Study on the Effect
Jin, Z., K. Xu, Y. Zhang, X. Xiao, J. Zhou, and E. Long. 2017. “Installation of Dust Deposition on Solar Photovoltaic Panel in Jaipur (Rajasthan).”
Optimization on the Tilt and Azimuth Angles of the Solar Heating International Journal Science Resources 3 (6): 1690–1693.
Collectors for High Altitude Towns in Western Sichuan.” Procedia Kumar, M., and A. Kumar. 2017. “Performance Assessment and
Engineering 205: 2995–3002. doi:10.1016/j.proeng.2017.10.225. Degradation Analysis of Solar Photovoltaic Technologies: A Review.”
John, J. J. 2015. “Characterization of Soiling Loss on Photovoltaic Renewable Sustainable Energy Review 78: 554–587. doi:10.1016/j.rser.
Modules, and Development of a Novel Cleaning System.” Indian 2017.04.083.
Institution Technology Bombay 146. Laarabi, B., O. May Tzuc, D. Dahlioui, A. Bassam, M. Flota-Bañuelos, and
Jones, R. K., A. Baras, A. A. Saeeri, A. Al Qahtani, A. O. Al Amoudi, Y. Al A. Barhdadi. 2019. “Artificial Neural Network Modeling and
Shaya, M. Alodan, et al. 2016. “Optimized Cleaning Cost and Schedule Sensitivity Analysis for Soiling Effects on Photovoltaic Panels in
Based on Observed Soiling Conditions for Photovoltaic Plants in Morocco.” Superlattices Microstruct 127: 139–150. doi:10.1016/j.spmi.
Central Saudi Arabia.” IEEE Journal photovoltaics 6 (3): 730–738. 2017.12.037.
DOI:10.1109/JPHOTOV.2016.2535308. Lee, W., K. Kim, J. Park, J. Kim, and Y. Kim. 2018. “Forecasting Solar
Kaldellis, J. K., P. Fragos, and M. Kapsali. 2011. “Systematic Experimental Power Using Long-short Term Memory and Convolutional Neural
Study of the Pollution Deposition Impact on the Energy Yield of Networks.” IEEE Access 6: 73068–73080. doi:10.1109/ACCESS.2018.
Photovoltaic Installations.” Renewable Energy 36 (10): 2717–2724. 2883330.
doi:10.1016/j.renene.2011.03.004. Lee, J.-I., I.-W. Lee, and S.-H. Kim, “Multi-site Photovoltaic Power
Kaldellis, J. K., and M. Kapsali. 2011. “Simulating the Dust Effect on the Generation Forecasts Based on Deep-learning Algorithm,” 2017in
Energy Performance of Photovoltaic Generators Based on 2017 International Conference on Information and Communication
Experimental Measurements.” Energy 36 (8): 5154–5161. doi:10.1016/ Technology Convergence (ICTC), Jeju Island, South Korea, pp.
j.energy.2011.06.018. 1118–1120.
Li, D. 2013. “Using GIS and Remote Sensing Techniques for Solar Panel Mazumder, M. K., et al. 2011. “Electrostatic Removal of Particles and Its
Installation Site Selection.” Applications to Self-cleaning Solar Panels and Solar Concentrators.” In
Lie, C. 2019. “Power Prediction of Photovoltaic System Using Neural Developments in Surface Contamination and Cleaning, 149–199.
Network Models.” Elsevier.
Li, X., D. L. Mauzerall, and M. H. Bergin. 2020. “Global Reduction of Solar Mazumder, M., et al. 2014 “Electrodynamic Removal of Dust from Solar
Power Generation Efficiency Due to Aerosols and Panel Soiling.” Mirrors and Its Applications in Concentrated Solar Power (CSP) Plants,”
Nature Sustainability 3 (9): 720–727. doi:10.1038/s41893-020-0553-2. in 2014 IEEE Industry Application Society Annual Meeting, Vancouver,
Li, X., H. Qin, Y. Zhang, W. Yao, Y. Li, and H. Liu. 2018. “Dust Effect on BC, Canada, pp. 1–7.
the Optical-thermal Properties of Absorber Plate in a Transpired Solar Mazumder, M. K., et al. 2017. “Mitigation of Dust Impact on Solar
Air Collector.” Energy Conversion and Management 169: 13–21. doi:10. Collectors by Water-free Cleaning with Transparent Electrodynamic
1016/j.enconman.2018.05.023. Films: Progress and Challenges.” IEEE Journal Photovoltaics 7 (5):
Louzazni, M., H. Mosalam, A. Khouya, and K. Amechnoue. 2020. “A 1342–1353.
Non-linear Auto-regressive Exogenous Method to Forecast the Mejia, F., J. Kleissl, and J. L. Bosch. 2014. “The Effect of Dust on Solar
Photovoltaic Power Output.” Sustainable Energy Technology Photovoltaic Systems.” Energy Procedia 49: 2370–2376. doi:10.1016/j.
Assessments 38: 100670. doi:10.1016/j.seta.2020.100670. egypro.2014.03.251.
Ludin, N. A., A. M. Al-Alwani Mahmoud, A. Bakar Mohamad, Mekhilef, S., R. Saidur, and M. Kamalisarvestani. 2012. “Effect of Dust,
A. A. H. Kadhum, K. Sopian, and N. S. Abdul Karim. 2014. “Review Humidity and Air Velocity on Efficiency of Photovoltaic Cells.”
on the Development of Natural Dye Photosensitizer for Dye-sensitized Renewable Sustainable Energy Review 16 (5): 2920–2925. doi:10.1016/
Solar Cells.” Renewable Sustainable Energy Review 31: 386–396. doi:10. j.rser.2012.02.012.
1016/j.rser.2013.12.001. Mekhilef, S., R. Saidur, and A. Safari. 2011. “A Review on Solar Energy
Lu, J., and S. Hajimirza. 2017. “Optimizing Sun-tracking Angle for Higher Use in Industries.” Renewable Sustainable Energy Review 15 (4):
Irradiance Collection of PV Panels Using a Particle-based Dust 1777–1790. doi:10.1016/j.rser.2010.12.018.
Accumulation Model with Gravity Effect.” Solar Energy 158: 71–82. Mellit, A., A. Massi Pavan, and V. Lughi. 2014. “Short-term Forecasting of
doi:10.1016/j.solener.2017.08.066. Power Production in a Large-scale Photovoltaic Plant.” Solar Energy
Maghami, M. R., H. Hizam, C. Gomes, M. A. Radzi, M. I. Rezadad, and 105: 401–413. doi:10.1016/j.solener.2014.03.018.
S. Hajighorbani. 2016. “Power Loss Due to Soiling on Solar Panel: A Mellit, A., S. Sağlam, and S. A. Kalogirou. 2013. “Artificial Neural
Review.” Renewable Sustainable Energy Review 59: 1307–1316. doi:10. Network-based Model for Estimating the Produced Power of
1016/j.rser.2016.01.044. a Photovoltaic Module.” Renewable Energy 60: 71–78. doi:10.1016/j.
Mahammed, I. H., A. H. Arab, S. Berrah, Y. Bakelli, M. Khennene, renene.2013.04.011.
S. H. Oudjana, A. Fezzani, et al. 2017. “Outdoor Study of Partial Menoufi, K. 2017. “Dust Accumulation on the Surface of Photovoltaic
Shading Effects on Different PV Modules Technologies.” Energy Panels: Introducing the Photovoltaic Soiling Index (PVSI).” Sustain
Procedia 141:81–85. doi:10.1016/j.egypro.2017.11.016. 9 (6). doi:10.3390/su9060963.
Mahdi, A. M. J., K. S. Reza, J. A. Kadhem, A. A. K. Al-Waeli, and K. AH. Micheli, D., S. Alessandrini, R. Radu, and I. Casula. 2014. “Analysis of the
2017. “The Effect of Iraqi Climate Variables on the Performance of Outdoor Performance and Efficiency of Two Grid Connected
Photovoltaic Modules.” world 15: 17. Photovoltaic Systems in Northern Italy.” Energy Conversion and
Maity, R., M. S. Alam, and A. Pati. 2020. “An Approach for Detection of Management 80: 436–445. doi:10.1016/j.enconman.2014.01.053.
Dust on Solar Panels Using CNN from RGB Dust Image to Predict Micheli, L., and M. Muller. 2017. “An Investigation of the Key Parameters
Power Loss.” In Cognitive Computing in Human Cognition, 41–48. for Predicting PV Soiling Losses.” Progress Photovoltaics Resources
Montreal, Canada: Springer. Application 25 (4): 291–307. doi:10.1002/pip.2860.
Majid, Z. A. A., M. H. Ruslan, K. Sopian, M. Y. Othman, and Micheli, L., D. Ruth, M. G. Deceglie, and M. Muller, “Time Series Analysis
M. S. M. Azmi. 2014. “Study on Performance of 80 Watt Floating of Photovoltaic Soiling Station Data,” 2017. [Online]. Available:
Photovoltaic Panel.” Journal Mechanical Engineers Science 7 (1): https://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy17osti/69131.pdf.
1150–1156. doi:10.15282/jmes.7.2014.14.0112. Michelsm, R. N., M. G. Canteri, M. A. de Aguiar, E. Gnoatto, J. A. A. Dos
Mallineni, J., et al., “Soiling Losses of Utility-scale PV Systems in Hot-dry Santos, and M. M. A. de Jesus. 2015. “Yield from Photovoltaic Modules
Desert Climates: Results from Four 4–16 Years Old Power Plants,” under Real Working Situations in West Paraná-Brazil.” Acta Science
2014in 2014 IEEE 40th Photovoltaic Specialist Conference (PVSC), Technology 37 (1): 19–24. doi:10.4025/actascitechnol.v37i1.19191.
Denver, Colorado, pp. 3197–3200. Moffitt, S. L., R. A. Fleming, C. S. Thompson, C. J. Titus, E. Kim, L. Leu,
Mani, M., and R. Pillai. 2010. “Impact of Dust on Solar Photovoltaic (PV) M. F. Toney, et al. 2019. “Advanced X-ray Scattering and Spectroscopy
Performance: Research Status, Challenges and Recommendations.” Characterization of an Antisoiling Coating for Solar Module Glass.”
Renewable Sustainable Energy Review 14 (9): 3124–3131. doi:10.1016/ ACS Application Energy Mater 2 (11): 7870–7878. DOI:10.1021/
j.rser.2010.07.065. acsaem.9b01316.
Mani, F., S. Pulipaka, and R. Kumar. 2016. “Characterization of Power Mohanty, R., and P. G. Kale. 2021. “Influence of Wind Speed on Solar PV
Losses of a Soiled PV Panel in Shekhawati Region of India.” Solar Plant Power Production—Prediction Model Using Decision-Based
Energy 131: 96–106. doi:10.1016/j.solener.2016.02.033. Artificial Neural Network.” 3–16.
Manokar, A. M., D. P. Winston, A. E. Kabeel, S. A. El-Agouz, and I. PV. Molki, A. 2010. “Dust Affects Solar-Cell Efficiency.” Physical Education
2018. “T Solar Still—a Mini-review Integrated PV/T Solar Still—a 45 (5): 456–458. doi:10.1088/0031-9120/45/5/F03.
Mini-review.” Desalination, No. January 0–1. Moreno, A., M. A. Gilabert, and B. Martínez. 2011. “Mapping Daily
Mansour, R. B., M. A. M. Khan, and F. A. Alsulaiman. 2021. “Optimizing Global Solar Irradiation over Spain: A Comparative Study of Selected
the Solar PV Tilt Angle to Maximize the Power Output: A Case Study Approaches.” Solar Energy 85 (9): 2072–2084. doi:10.1016/j.solener.
for Saudi Arabia.” IEEE Access 9: 15914–15928. doi:10.1109/ACCESS. 2011.05.017.
2021.3052933. Mo, H., Y. Zhang, Z. Xian, and H. Wang, “Photovoltaic (PV) Power
Mansour, R. B., M. A. M. Khan, F. A. Alsulaiman, and R. B. Mansour. Prediction Based on ABC-SVM,” 2018in IOP Conference Series:
2021. “Optimizing the Solar PV Tilt Angle to Maximize the Power Earth and Environmental Science, vol. 199, Bristol, England,
Output: A Case Study for Saudi Arabia.” IEEE Access 9: 15914–15928. p. 52031.
doi:10.1109/ACCESS.2021.3052933. Muhammad, A., J. M. Lee, S. W. Hong, S. J. Lee, and E. H. Lee, “Deep
Marion, B., M. G. Deceglie, and T. J. Silverman. 2014. “Analysis of Learning Application in Power System with a Case Study on Solar
Measured Photovoltaic Module Performance for Florida, Oregon, Irradiation Forecasting,” 2019in 2019 International Conference on
and Colorado Locations.” Solar Energy 110: 736–744. doi:10.1016/j. Artificial Intelligence in Information and Communication (ICAIIC),
solener.2014.10.017. Okinawa, Japan, pp. 275–279.
Munoz, M. A., M. C. Alonso-García, N. Vela, and F. Chenlo. 2011. “Early Pulipaka, S., F. Mani, and R. Kumar. 2016. “Modeling of Soiled PV Module
Degradation of Silicon PV Modules and Guaranty Conditions.” Solar with Neural Networks and Regression Using Particle Size Composition.”
Energy 85 (9): 2264–2274. doi:10.1016/j.solener.2011.06.011. Solar Energy 123: 116–126. doi:10.1016/j.solener.2015.11.012.
Muñoz-García, M.-Á., T. Fouris, and E. Pilat. 2021. “Analysis of the Quansah, D. A., M. S. Adaramola, G. K. Appiah, and I. A. Edwin. 2017.
Soiling Effect under Different Conditions on Different Photovoltaic “Performance Analysis of Different Grid-connected Solar Photovoltaic
Glasses and Cells Using an Indoor Soiling Chamber.” Renewable (PV) System Technologies with Combined Capacity of 20 kW Located
Energy 163: 1560–1568. doi:10.1016/j.renene.2020.10.027. in Humid Tropical Climate.” International Journal of Hydrogen Energy
Nair, K. K., J. Jose, and A. Ravindran. 2016. “Analysis of Temperature 42 (7): 4626–4635. doi:10.1016/j.ijhydene.2016.10.119.
Dependent Parameters on Solar Cell Efficiency Using MATLAB.” IJEDR Rahman, M., A. Islam, A. H. M. Zadidul Karim, and A. Haque Ronee.
4: 536–541. 2012. “Effects of Natural Dust on the Performance of PV Panels in
Namdari, S., N. Karimi, A. Sorooshian, G. Mohammadi, and Bangladesh.” International Journal Modern Education Computer
S. Sehatkashani. 2018. “Impacts of Climate and Synoptic Science 4 (10): 26–32. doi:10.5815/ijmecs.2012.10.04.
Fluctuations on Dust Storm Activity over the Middle East.” Rajasekar, V., S. Boppana, and G. TamizhMani, “Angle of Incidence Effect
Atmospheric Environment 173: 265–276. doi:10.1016/j.atmosenv. on Five Soiled Modules from Five Different PV Technologies,” 2015in
2017.11.016. 2015 IEEE 42nd Photovoltaic Specialist Conference (PVSC), New
Ndiaye, A., C. M. F. Kébé, P. A. Ndiaye, A. Charki, A. Kobi, and V. Sambou. Orleans, Louisiana, pp. 1–6.
2013. “Impact of Dust on the Photovoltaic (PV) Modules Characteristics Ramli, M. A. M., S. Twaha, and Y. A. Al-Turki. 2015. “Investigating the
after an Exposition Year in Sahelian Environment: The Case of Senegal.” Performance of Support Vector Machine and Artificial Neural
International Journal of Physiology Science 8 (21): 1166–1173. Networks in Predicting Solar Radiation on a Tilted Surface: Saudi
Nepal, P., M. Korevaar, H. Ziar, O. Isabella, and M. Zeman. 2018. Arabia Case Study.” Energy Conversion and Management 105:
“Accurate Soiling Ratio Determination with Incident Angle Modifier 442–452. doi:10.1016/j.enconman.2015.07.083.
for PV Modules.” IEEE Journal Photovoltaics 9 (1): 295–301. doi:10. Rana, M., I. Koprinska, and V. G. Agelidis. 2016. “Univariate and
1109/JPHOTOV.2018.2882468. Multivariate Methods for Very Short-term Solar Photovoltaic Power
Nimmo, B., and S. A. M. Said. 1981. “Effects of Dust on the Forecasting.” Energy Conversion and Management 121: 380–390.
Performance of Thermal and Photovoltaic Flat Plate Collectors in doi:10.1016/j.enconman.2016.05.025.
Saudi Arabia-Preliminary Results.” Alternatives Energy Sources 1: Rao, A., R. Pillai, M. Mani, and P. Ramamurthy. 2014. “Influence of Dust
145–152. Deposition on Photovoltaic Panel Performance.” Energy Procedia 54:
Omar Nour-eddine, I., B. Lahcen, O. H. Fahd, B. Amin, and O. Aziz. 2020. 690–700. doi:10.1016/j.egypro.2014.07.310.
“Outdoor Performance Analysis of Different PV Technologies under Hot Rashki, A., D. G. Kaskaoutis, and A. Sepehr. 2018. “Statistical Evaluation
Semi-arid Climate.” Energy Reports 6: 36–48. doi:10.1016/j.egyr.2020.08. of the Dust Events at Selected Stations in Southwest Asia: From the
023. Caspian Sea to the Arabian Sea.” Catena 165: 590–603. doi:10.1016/j.
Omar Nour-eddine, I., B. Lahcen, O. Hassani Fahd, B. Amin, and O. Aziz. catena.2018.03.011.
2021. “Power Forecasting of Three Silicon-based PV Technologies Rieger, D., A. Steiner, V. Bachmann, P. Gasch, J. Förstner, K. Deetz,
Using Actual Field Measurements.” Sustainable Energy Technology B. Vogel, et al. 2017. “Impact of the 4 April 2014 Saharan Dust
Assessments 43: 100915. doi:10.1016/j.seta.2020.100915. Outbreak on the Photovoltaic Power Generation in Germany.”
Oprea, S.-V., and A. Bâra. 2020. “Ultra-short-term Forecasting for Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics 17 (21): 13391–13415. DOI:10.
Photovoltaic Power Plants and Real-time Key Performance 5194/acp-17-13391-2017.
Indicators Analysis with Big Data Solutions. Two Case Studies - PV Roslizar, A., S. Dottermusch, R. Schmager, M. Guttmann, G. Gomard,
Agigea and PV Giurgiu Located in Romania.” Computers in Industry H. Hölscher, B. S. Richards, et al. 2020. “Hot-embossed
120: 103230. doi:10.1016/j.compind.2020.103230. Microcone-textured Fluoropolymer as Self-cleaning and
Parida, B., S. Iniyan, and R. Goic. 2011. “A Review of Solar Photovoltaic Anti-reflective Photovoltaic Module Covers”. Solar Energy Materials
Technologies.” Renewable Sustainable Energy Review 15 (3): Solar Cells 214: 110582. 10.1016/j.solmat.2020.110582.
1625–1636. doi:10.1016/j.rser.2010.11.032. Rouway, M., et al., 2020“Mathematical and Numerical Modelling of
Park, N., C. Han, W. Hong, and D. Kim, “The Effect of Encapsulant Soiling Effects of Photovoltaic Solar Panels on Their Electrical
Delamination on Electrical Performance of PV Module,” 2011in 2011 Performance,” in IOP Conference Series: Materials Science and
37th IEEE Photovoltaic Specialists Conference, Seattle, Washington, pp. Engineering, vol. 827, United Kingdom, p. 12064.
1113–1115. Sadat, S. A., J. Faraji, M. Nazififard, and A. Ketabi. 2021. “The Experimental
Park, S. R., A. K. Pandey, V. V. Tyagi, and S. K. Tyagi. 2014. “Energy Analysis of Dust Deposition Effect on Solar Photovoltaic Panels in Iran’s
and Exergy Analysis of Typical Renewable Energy Systems.” Desert Environment.” Sustainable Energy Technology Assessments 47:
Renewable Sustainable Energy Review 30: 105–123. doi:10.1016/j. 101542. doi:10.1016/j.seta.2021.101542.
rser.2013.09.011. Saidan, M., A. G. Albaali, E. Alasis, and J. K. Kaldellis. 2016.
Pedersen, H., J. Strauss, and J. Selj. 2016. “Effect of Soiling on Photovoltaic “Experimental Study on the Effect of Dust Deposition on Solar
Modules in Norway.” Energy Procedia 92: 585–589. doi:10.1016/j.egy Photovoltaic Panels in Desert Environment.” Renewable Energy 92:
pro.2016.07.023. 499–505. doi:10.1016/j.renene.2016.02.031.
Piedra, P. G., L. R. Llanza, and H. Moosmüller. 2018. “Optical Losses of Said, S. A. M., and H. M. Walwil. 2014. “Fundamental Studies on Dust
Photovoltaic Modules Due to Mineral Dust Deposition: Experimental Fouling Effects on PV Module Performance.” Solar Energy 107:
Measurements and Theoretical Modeling.” Solar Energy 164: 160–173. 328–337. doi:10.1016/j.solener.2014.05.048.
doi:10.1016/j.solener.2018.02.030. Sall, T., M. Fahoume, B. Mari, and M. Mollar“Proceedings of 2017
Piliougine, M., C. Cañete, R. Moreno, J. Carretero, J. Hirose, S. Ogawa, International Renewable and Sustainable Energy Conference, IRSEC,
M. Sidrach-de-cardona, et al. 2013. “Comparative Analysis of Energy Tangier – Morocco. 2017,” [Online]. Available: https://www.scopus.
Produced by Photovoltaic Modules with Anti-soiling Coated Surface in com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-85055860691&partnerID=
Arid Climates”. Applied Energy 112: 626–634. 10.1016/j.apenergy.2013. 40&md5=bb14f33d93b0da735e184c223dd464e7.
01.048. Saluos, W. A. 2015. “Dust Effect on Photovoltaic Electric Systems.”
Prakash, R., and I. K. Bhat. 2009. “Energy, Economics and Environmental International Journal Emerging Engineering Research Technology
Impacts of Renewable Energy Systems.” Renewable Sustainable Energy 3 (10): 4–9.
Review 13 (9): 2716–2721. doi:10.1016/j.rser.2009.05.007. Sarkın, A. S., N. Ekren, and Ş. Sağlam. 2020. “A Review of Anti-reflection
Pulipaka, S., and R. Kumar. 2016. “Power Prediction of Soiled PV Module and Self-cleaning Coatings on Photovoltaic Panels.” Solar Energy 199:
with Neural Networks Using Hybrid Data Clustering and Division 63–73. doi:10.1016/j.solener.2020.01.084.
Techniques.” Solar Energy 133: 485–500. doi:10.1016/j.solener.2016.04. Sarver, T., A. Al-Qaraghuli, and L. L. Kazmerski. 2013. “A Comprehensive
004. Review of the Impact of Dust on the Use of Solar Energy: History,
Investigations, Results, Literature, and Mitigation Approaches.” Son, J., Y. Park, J. Lee, and H. Kim. 2018. “Sensorless PV Power
Renewable Sustainable Energy Review 22: 698–733. doi:10.1016/j.rser. Forecasting in Grid-connected Buildings through Deep Learning.”
2012.12.065. Sensors 18 (8): 2529. doi:10.3390/s18082529.
Sasitharanuwat, A., W. Rakwichian, N. Ketjoy, and S. Yammen. 2007. Sonsuz, O., E. Adigüzel, R. O. Kabaoğlu, and A. Ersoy. 2020. “The Effect
“Performance Evaluation of a 10kWp PV Power System Prototype for Of Pollution On Photovoltaic Panels Under Climate Conditions In
Isolated Building in Thailand.” Renewable Energy 32 (8): 1288–1300. Hatay.” Erzincan Üniversitesi Fen Bilim. Enstitüsü Derg 13 (3):
doi:10.1016/j.renene.2006.05.002. 1413–1423.
Sayyah, A., M. N. Horenstein, and M. K. Mazumder. 2014. “Energy Yield Sulaiman, S. A., H. H. Hussain, N. S. H. Nik Leh, and M. S. I. Razali. 2011.
Loss Caused by Dust Deposition on Photovoltaic Panels.” Solar Energy “Effects of Dust on the Performance of PV Panels.” World Academic
107: 576–604. doi:10.1016/j.solener.2014.05.030. Science Engineering Technology 58 (10): 588–593.
Scopus, “Analyze Search Results,” vol. 2021, no. 30 June 2021. [Online]. Sulaiman, S. A., A. K. Singh, M. M. M. Mokhtar, and M. A. Bou-Rabee.
Available: https://www.scopus.com/term/analyzer.uri?sid= 2014. “Influence of Dirt Accumulation on Performance of PV Panels.”
41336b8f7435152a7b956b2484df846a&origin=resultslist&src=s&s= Energy Procedia 50: 50–56. doi:10.1016/j.egypro.2014.06.006.
TITLE-ABS-KEY%28%22PV%22+and+%22performance%22+and+% Sundaram, S., D. Benson, and T. K. Mallick. 2016. “Chapter 2 - Overview
22dust+accumulation%22+or+%22soiling+losses%22%29&sort=plf- of the PV Industry and Different Technologies.” In Solar Photovoltaic
f&sdt=b&sot=b&sl=81&count=180&analyzeRe. Technology Production, 7–22. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Academic
Shaaban, M. F., A. Alarif, M. Mokhtar, U. Tariq, A. H. Osman, and A. R. Al- Press.
Ali. 2020. “A New Data-based Dust Estimation Unit for Pv Panels.” Sun, K., L. Lu, Y. Jiang, Y. Wang, K. Zhou, and Z. He. 2018. “Integrated
Energies 13 (14): 3601. doi:10.3390/en13143601. Effects of PM2. 5 Deposition, Module Surface Conditions and
Shapsough, S., R. Dhaouadi, and I. Zualkernan. 2019. “Using Linear Nanocoatings on Solar PV Surface Glass Transmittance.” Renewable
Regression and Back Propagation Neural Networks to Predict Sustainable Energy Review 82: 4107–4120. doi:10.1016/j.rser.2017.10.
Performance of Soiled PV Modules.” Procedia Computer Science 155: 062.
463–470. doi:10.1016/j.procs.2019.08.065. Sun, Y., V. Venugopal, and A. R. Brandt, “Convolutional Neural Network
Sharma, V., and S. S. Chandel. 2013. “Performance and Degradation for Short-term Solar Panel Output Prediction,” 2018in 2018 IEEE 7th
Analysis for Long Term Reliability of Solar Photovoltaic Systems: A World Conference on Photovoltaic Energy Conversion (WCPEC)(A
Review.” Renewable Sustainable Energy Review 27: 753–767. doi:10. Joint Conference of 45th IEEE PVSC, 28th PVSEC & 34th EU
1016/j.rser.2013.07.046. PVSEC), Hawaii, pp. 2357–2361.
Sharma, V., and S. S. Chandel. 2016. “A Novel Study for Determining Early Sun, Y., V. Venugopal, and A. R. Brandt. 2019. “Short-term Solar Power
Life Degradation of Multi-crystalline-silicon Photovoltaic Modules Forecast with Deep Learning: Exploring Optimal Input and Output
Observed in Western Himalayan Indian Climatic Conditions.” Solar Configuration.” Solar Energy 188: 730–741. doi:10.1016/j.solener.2019.
Energy 134: 32–44. doi:10.1016/j.solener.2016.04.023. 06.041.
Sharma, V., A. Kumar, O. S. Sastry, and S. S. Chandel. 2013. “Performance Supe, H., R. Avtar, D. Singh, A. Gupta, A. P. Yunus, J. Dou,
Assessment of Different Solar Photovoltaic Technologies under Similar A. A. Ravankar, et al. 2020. “Google Earth Engine for the Detection
Outdoor Conditions.” Energy 58: 511–518. doi:10.1016/j.energy.2013.05. of Soiling on Photovoltaic Solar Panels in Arid Environments.” Remote
068. Sensors 12 (9): 1466. DOI:10.3390/rs12091466.
Shi, J., W.-J. Lee, Y. Liu, Y. Yang, and P. Wang. 2012. “Forecasting Power Tagawa, K. 2012. “Effect of Sand Erosion of Glass Surface on
Output of Photovoltaic Systems Based on Weather Classification and Performances of Photovoltaic Module.” Sustainable Research
Support Vector Machines.” IEEE Transactions on Industry Innovation Processing 4.
Applications 48 (3): 1064–1069. doi:10.1109/TIA.2012.2190816. Tanesab, J., D. Parlevliet, J. Whale, and T. Urmee. 2016. “Dust Effect and
Shuvho, M. B. A., M. A. Chowdhury, S. Ahmed, and M. A. Kashem. 2019. Its Economic Analysis on PV Modules Deployed in a Temperate
“Prediction of Solar Irradiation and Performance Evaluation of Grid Climate Zone.” Energy Procedia 100: 65–68. doi:10.1016/j.egypro.
Connected Solar 80KWp PV Plant in Bangladesh.” Energy Reports 5: 2016.10.154.
714–722. doi:10.1016/j.egyr.2019.06.011. Tanesab, J., D. Parlevliet, J. Whale, and T. Urmee. 2018. “Energy and
Siddiqui, R., R. Kumar, G. K. Jha, G. Gowri, M. Morampudi, P. Rajput, Economic Losses Caused by Dust on Residential Photovoltaic (PV)
S. Lata, et al. 2016. “Comparison of Different Technologies for Solar Systems Deployed in Different Climate Areas.” Renewable Energy 120:
PV (Photovoltaic) Outdoor Performance Using Indoor Accelerated 401–412. doi:10.1016/j.renene.2017.12.076.
Aging Tests for Long Term Reliability.” Energy 107:550–561. doi:10. Tanesab, J., D. Parlevliet, J. Whale, and T. Urmee. 2019. “The Effect of
1016/j.energy.2016.04.054. Dust with Different Morphologies on the Performance Degradation of
Simal Pérez, N., J. Alonso-Montesinos, and F. J. Batlles. 2021. “Estimation Photovoltaic Modules.” Sustainable Energy Technology Assessments 31:
of Soiling Losses from an Experimental Photovoltaic Plant Using 347–354. doi:10.1016/j.seta.2018.12.024.
Artificial Intelligence Techniques.” Applied Science 11 (4): 1516. Tanesab, J., D. Parlevliet, J. Whale, T. Urmee, and T. Pryor. 2015. “The
doi:10.3390/app11041516. Contribution of Dust to Performance Degradation of PV Modules in
Singh, G. K., S. A. Sulaiman, and A. K. Singh. 2013. “Solar Power a Temperate Climate Zone.” Solar Energy 120: 147–157. doi:10.1016/j.
Generation by PV (Photovoltaic) Technology: A Review.” Energy 53: solener.2015.06.052.
1–13. doi:10.1016/j.energy.2013.02.057. Touati, F., et al. 2017. “Long-term Performance Analysis and Power
Smestad, G. P., et al. 2020. “Modelling Photovoltaic Soiling Losses Prediction of PV Technology in the State of Qatar.” Renewable
through Optical Characterization.” Science Reports 10 (1): 1–13. Energy 113:952–965. doi:10.1016/j.renene.2017.06.078.
DOI:10.1038/s41598-019-56868-z. Touati, F., M. Al-Hitmi, and H. Bouchech, “Towards Understanding the
Solar_Feed, “Concentrated Solar Power (CSP) Vs Photovoltaic (PV): All Effects of Climatic and Environmental Factors on Solar PV
In-depth Comparison,” Sol. Feed, 2019, [Online]. Available: https:// Performance in Arid Desert Regions (Qatar) for Various PV
solarfeeds.com/csp-and-pv-differences-comparison/#:~:text=CSP is an Technologies,”2012 in 2012 First International Conference on
indirect method,of the sun’s light instead. Renewable Energies and Vehicular Technology, Nabeul, Tunisia, pp.
Son, J., et al. 2012. “A Practical Superhydrophilic Self Cleaning and 78–83, doi: 10.1109/REVET.2012.6195252.
Antireflective Surface for Outdoor Photovoltaic Applications”. Solar Tranfield, D., D. Denyer, and P. Smart. 2003. “Towards a Methodology for
Energy Materials Solar Cells 98: 46–51. 10.1016/j.solmat.2011.10.011. Developing Evidence-informed Management Knowledge by Means of
Song, Z., J. Liu, and H. Yang. 2021. “Air Pollution and Soiling Systematic Review.” British Journal Management 14 (3): 207–222.
Implications for Solar Photovoltaic Power Generation: doi:10.1111/1467-8551.00375.
A Comprehensive Review.” Applied Energy 298: 117247. doi:10.1016/ Tyagi, V. V., N. A. A. Rahim, N. A. Rahim, A. Jeyraj, and L. Selvaraj. 2013.
j.apenergy.2021.117247. “Progress in Solar PV Technology: Research and Achievement.”
Renewable Sustainable Energy Review 20: 443–461. doi:10.1016/j.rser.2012. Conditions.” Energy Procedia 130: 66–71. doi:10.1016/j.egypro.2017.
09.028. 09.397.
Ullah, A., A. Amin, T. Haider, M. Saleem, and N. Z. Butt. 2020. Xu, R., K. Ni, Y. Hu, J. Si, H. Wen, and D. Yu. 2017. “Analysis of the Optimum
“Investigation of Soiling Effects, Dust Chemistry and Optimum Tilt Angle for a Soiled PV Panel.” Energy Conversion and Management 148:
Cleaning Schedule for PV Modules in Lahore, Pakistan.” Renewable 100–109. doi:10.1016/j.enconman.2017.05.058.
Energy 150: 456–468. doi:10.1016/j.renene.2019.12.090. Yadav, A. K., and S. S. Chandel. 2013. “Tilt Angle Optimization to
Urrejola, E., J. Antonanzas, P. Ayala, M. Salgado, G. Ramírez-Sagner, Maximize Incident Solar Radiation: A Review.” Renewable
C. Cortés, A. Pino, et al. 2016. “Effect of Soiling and Sunlight Sustainable Energy Review 23: 503–513. doi:10.1016/j.rser.2013.02.027.
Exposure on the Performance Ratio of Photovoltaic Technologies in Yap, W. K., M. Baig, and E. Halawa, “Performance Monitoring and
Santiago, Chile”. Energy Conversion and Management 114: 338–347. Evaluation of a CIGS Roof-integrated Photovoltaic System under
10.1016/j.enconman.2016.02.016. the Unique Tropical Environment of Darwin, Northern Territory,”
Ustun, T. S., Y. Nakamura, J. Hashimoto, and K. Otani. 2019. 2014in Proceedings of the Asia Pacific Solar Research Conference,
“Performance Analysis of PV Panels Based on Different Technologies Sydney, vol. 114.
after Two Years of Outdoor Exposure in Fukushima, Japan.” Yoo, S.-H. 2011. “Simulation for an Optimal Application of BIPV through
Renewable Energy 136: 159–178. doi:10.1016/j.renene.2018.12.100. Parameter Variation.” Solar Energy 85 (7): 1291–1301. doi:10.1016/j.
Vázquez, M., and I. Rey-Stolle. 2008. “Photovoltaic Module Reliability solener.2011.03.004.
Model Based on Field Degradation Studies.” Progress in Photovoltaics: Zaihidee, F. M., S. Mekhilef, M. Seyedmahmoudian, and B. Horan. 2016.
Research and Applications 16 (5): 419–433. doi:10.1002/pip.825. “Dust as an Unalterable Deteriorative Factor Affecting PV Panel’s
Wen-Tao, Z., W. Shuai, and D. Xin-Hui. 2017. “Research of Power Efficiency: Why and How.” Renewable Sustainable Energy Review 65:
Prediction about Photovoltaic Power System: Based on Bp Neural 1267–1278. doi:10.1016/j.rser.2016.06.068.
Network.” Multi-Criteria Analysis Air Pollution Urban Environmental Zhang, H., Y. Sun, L. Wu, X. Zhang, and Y. Xiang, “Tracking Mechanism
Due Road Traffic 18: 1614–1623. and Cosine Effect Study of Module-Heliostat Solar Collector,” 2016in
Wilson, N. R., L. M. Norman, M. Villarreal, L. Gass, R. Tiller, and A. Salywon. 2016 4th International Conference on Machinery, Materials and
2016. “Comparison of Remote Sensing Indices for Monitoring of Desert Information Technology Applications, Xi'an, China, pp. 469–474.
Cienegas.” Arid Land Research and Management 30 (4): 460–478. Zhao, W., Y. Lv, Z. Wei, W. Yan, and Q. Zhou. 2021. “Review on Dust
Wolff, B., J. Kühnert, E. Lorenz, O. Kramer, and D. Heinemann. 2016. Deposition and Cleaning Methods for Solar PV Modules.” Journal
“Comparing Support Vector Regression for PV Power Forecasting to Renewable Sustainable Energy 13 (3): 32701. doi:10.1063/5.0053866.
a Physical Modeling Approach Using Measurement, Numerical Ziane, A., A. Necaibia, N. Sahouane, R. Dabou, M. Mostefaoui, A. Bouraiou,
Weather Prediction, and Cloud Motion Data.” Solar Energy 135: S. Khelifi, et al. 2021. “Photovoltaic Output Power Performance
197–208. doi:10.1016/j.solener.2016.05.051. Assessment and Forecasting: Impact of Meteorological Variables.” Solar
Wu, Y., J. Du, G. Liu, D. Ma, F. Jia, J. J. Klemeš, J. Wang, et al. 2022. Energy 220: 745–757. doi:10.1016/j.solener.2021.04.004.
“A Review of Self-cleaning Technology to Reduce Dust and Ice Zitouni, H., et al. 2021. “Experimental Investigation and Modeling of
Accumulation in Photovoltaic Power Generation Using Photovoltaic Soiling Loss as A Function of Environmental Variables:
Superhydrophobic Coating.” Renewable Energy 185:1034–1061. A Case Study of Semi-arid Climate.” Solar Energy Materials Solar Cells
doi:10.1016/j.renene.2021.12.123. 221: 110874. doi:10.1016/j.solmat.2020.110874.
Wu, T.-C., Y.-S. Long, S.-T. Hsu, and E.-Y. Wang. 2017. “Efficiency Zorrilla-Casanova, J., et al. 2011. “Analysis of Dust Losses in Photovoltaic
Rating of Various PV Technologies under Different Indoor Lighting Modules.” World Renewable Energy Congress 2985–2992.

Impact of Dust Accumulation On Photovoltaic Panels A Review Paper

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Impact of Dust Accumulation On Photovoltaic Panels A Review Paper

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Impact of Dust Accumulation On Photovoltaic Panels A Review Paper

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

International Journal of Sustainable Engineering

ISSN: (Print) (Online) Journal homepage: www.tandfonline.com/journals/tsue20

Impact of dust accumulation on photovoltaic

Haneen Abuzaid, Mahmoud Awad & Abdulrahim Shamayleh

To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/19397038.2022.2140222

© 2022 The Author(s). Published by Informa

Published online: 06 Nov 2022.

Submit your article to this journal

Article views: 3461

View related articles

View Crossmark data

Citing articles: 1 View citing articles

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

Impact of dust accumulation on photovoltaic panels: a review paper

ABSTRACT ARTICLE HISTORY

Figure 3. Soiling losses for different Pv Technologies Over Time.

(Kapucu and Cubukcu 2021) F poly-Si X X X X X X X Out

(Shuvho et al. 2019) AT, Irr mono-Si X X X X Out

X. Conclusion and future research

You might also like