energies

Review
Cooling Techniques for Enhanced Efficiency of Photovoltaic
Panels—Comparative Analysis with Environmental and
Economic Insights
Tarek Ibrahim 1 , Mohamad Abou Akrouch 1 , Farouk Hachem 1 , Mohamad Ramadan 1,2 , Haitham S. Ramadan 3,4, *
and Mahmoud Khaled 1,5

1 Energy and Thermo-Fluid Group, Lebanese International University LIU, Bekaa P.O. Box 1801, Lebanon;
[email protected] (T.I.); [email protected] (M.A.A.);
[email protected] (F.H.); [email protected] (M.R.); [email protected] (M.K.)
2 Energy and Thermo-Fluid Group, The International University of Beirut BIU, Beirut P.O. Box 146404, Lebanon
3 Electrical Power and Machines Department, Faculty of Engineering, Zagazig University, Zagazig 44519, Egypt
4 ISTHY, l’Institut International sur le Stockage de l’Hydrogène, 90400 Meroux-Moval, France
5 Center for Sustainable Energy & Economic Development (SEED), Gulf University for Science & Technology,
Hawally 32093, Kuwait
* Correspondence: [email protected]

Abstract: Photovoltaic panels play a pivotal role in the renewable energy sector, serving as a crucial
component for generating environmentally friendly electricity from sunlight. However, a persistent
challenge lies in the adverse effects of rising temperatures resulting from prolonged exposure to
solar radiation. Consequently, this elevated temperature hinders the efficiency of photovoltaic
panels and reduces power production, primarily due to changes in semiconductor properties within
the solar cells. Given the depletion of limited fossil fuel resources and the urgent need to reduce
carbon gas emissions, scientists and researchers are actively exploring innovative strategies to
enhance photovoltaic panel efficiency through advanced cooling methods. This paper conducts
a comprehensive review of various cooling technologies employed to enhance the performance
Citation: Ibrahim, T.; Abou Akrouch,
M.; Hachem, F.; Ramadan, M.;
of PV panels, encompassing water-based, air-based, and phase-change materials, alongside novel
Ramadan, H.S.; Khaled, M. Cooling cooling approaches. This study collects and assesses data from recent studies on cooling the PV panel,
Techniques for Enhanced Efficiency of considering both environmental and economic factors, illustrating the importance of cooling methods
Photovoltaic Panels—Comparative on photovoltaic panel efficiency. Among the investigated cooling methods, the thermoelectric
Analysis with Environmental and cooling method emerges as a promising solution, demonstrating noteworthy improvements in energy
Economic Insights. Energies 2024, 17, efficiency and a positive environmental footprint while maintaining economic viability. As future
713. https://doi.org/10.3390/ work, studies should be made at the level of different periods of time throughout the years and for
en17030713 longer periods. This research contributes to the ongoing effort to identify effective cooling strategies,
Academic Editors: Daniele D. Giusto ultimately advancing electricity generation from photovoltaic panels and promoting the adoption of
and Ignacio Mauleón sustainable energy systems.

Received: 9 November 2023

Keywords: photovoltaic panels; cooling techniques; environmental and economic study;
Revised: 8 January 2024
future recommendations
Accepted: 28 January 2024
Published: 1 February 2024

1. Introduction
Copyright: © 2024 by the authors. The continued population growth has resulted in the need for more energy resources
Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. to satisfy different sectors of life [1–4]. Further, the continued use of fossil fuels has led to
This article is an open access article depletion of resources and increases in price and CO2 in the atmosphere. Therefore, current
distributed under the terms and research focuses on finding alternative solutions through renewable energy resources [5,6]
conditions of the Creative Commons and heat recovery systems [7–10].
Attribution (CC BY) license (https:// Solar energy forms an important factor in renewable energy resources, mainly through
creativecommons.org/licenses/by/ photovoltaic (PV) panels. Solar-energy-based PVs constitute a widely used technology in
4.0/).

Energies 2024, 17, 713. https://doi.org/10.3390/en17030713 https://www.mdpi.com/journal/energies

Energies 2024, 17, 713 2 of 32

modern life based on the principle of converting sunlight into electricity through semicon-
ductor materials. This technology enabled a great leap forward in the world of renewable
energy resources due to its environmental impact on the reduction in CO2 emissions, its
fast payback period, and its long maintenance period (every 25–30 years). However, the
need for innovative installation techniques on modern roofs, the high prices, and the low
power generation on rainy days are obstacles to the installation of this technology.
The main obstacle in this technology is its low efficiency due to high temperatures. The
constant contact of sun rays at the surface of the PV panel increases its temperature, thus
decreasing its efficiency and output power. It was found that the efficiency of crystalline
silicon solar cells falls by 0.45–0.6% for every 1 ◦ C rise above STC (standard test conditions)
in solar cell temperatures and varies according to the type of cell [11].
To increase the efficiency and the affordability of the panels, different approaches
were recorded in the trial to reduce solar cell temperatures. In the literature, four cooling
techniques are demonstrated with their different methods. The first technique is using
passive and active cooling methods of water. The second cooling technique is the use of
free and forced convection of air. The third cooling technique is the use of phase-change
materials (PCM) to absorb the excess of heat produced by the PV panel. Then the last
cooling technique is a sum of uncategorized and modern methods.
Table 1 portrays a collection of recent studies on different cooling techniques of
photovoltaic panels using novel approaches. The studies cover research and review articles.

Table 1. Recent research conducted on cooling PV panels using different novel methods.

Objective Methodology Outcomes References

Electrical and thermal efficiency
Review on photovoltaic–thermal collector Literature review on PVT collector types, enhancement up to 11% and 22.02%
technology and advances in thermally discussion of cooling solar systems, their maximum, respectively. The minimum Jiao et al. [12]
driven cycles for PVT collectors. limitations, and future recommendations. payback period for PVT systems is
8.45–9.3 years.
Literature review on cooling CPV cell
A comprehensive review of different categories, discussion of CPV cooling Agreement between experimental and
cooling techniques used for concentrated systems, mentioning their advantages and numerical results on enhancing the Ibrahim et al. [13]
PV cells. disadvantages, and future efficiency.
recommendations.
Review on state-of-the-art photovoltaic Literature review on PVT systems,
The curve of emissions (Remap) could be
thermal collectors and their abilities to classification, discussion on performance
reduced by 16% by 2030 if PV technology Herrando et al. [14]
increase energy production and CO2 enhancement, applications, and future
was used.
reduction. recommendations.
Literature review on cooling PV panels
Water-based cooling was shown to be
Review on water-based PV systems and methods, classification of water-based
effective in unused water spaces and has Ghosh [15]
factors affecting them. cooling methods, discussion and analysis of
the potential to increase PV performance.
these methods in a statistical manner.
Literature discussing the different factors
Discusses power plant performance,
A comprehensive review on cooling PV affecting the solar systems. Providing
performance-affecting factors, and solutions Aslam et al. [16]
systems. discussions on temperature mitigation
to reduce the effect of those factors.
strategies and cooling methods.
Literature discussing PVT systems and their
Review on photovoltaic thermal systems in Hybrid systems showed the best
integration into buildings, state-of-the-art
buildings and their application in heating, performance, highlighting that PVT Herrando et al. [17]
systems designed for cooling, heating, and
cooling, and power generation. technology is still under development.
power production, and their limitations.
Air cooling was found to be cost-effective
and simple, liquid cooling was found to be
Literature review on PV technology, cooling
Review on PV cooling technologies and efficient but expensive, PCM cooling was
techniques, advances in cooling technology, Hajjaj et al. [18]
their environmental impacts. found to enhance thermal efficiency but
and future recommendations.
bulky, and nanomaterial was found to be
efficient but expensive.
Literature review on PV panels, cooling Solar tracking and floating PV systems were
Review on PV cooling using floating and
methodologies, solar tracking, floating PV found to reduce land usage and increase PV Hammoumi et al. [19]
solar tracking systems.
systems, and future recommendations. performance.
Review of PV cooling technologies and Literature review on cooling methods, PCM combined with nanoparticles was
their abilities in temperature reduction and discussing experimental studies and found to be the most effective in cooling Sheik et al. [20]
power enhancement. cooling systems limitations. compared to water and air-based systems.
Energies 2024, 17, 713 3 of 32

Table 1. Cont.

Objective Methodology Outcomes References

A literature review was conducted about Combined PV-T PCM systems are owed a
different cooling methods, traditional and 3–5% increase in electrical efficiency,
Review on photovoltaic thermal systems advanced PV-T with PCM systems, and 20–30% in thermal efficiency, and cost
Cui et al. [21]
combined with PCM cooling. their potential, analyzing their performance, reduction by 15–20% with a payback period
mentioning the challenges, and future of less than 6 years compared to PV-T
recommendations. systems without PCM.
Literature review on passive PV cooling
Natural air ventilation and floatovoltaics
methods, discussing the passive cooling
cooling systems were found to be the most
Review on PV passive cooling techniques. methods while mentioning the unsolved Mahdavi et al. [22]
effective among the other passive cooling
challenges, and recommending future
methods.
work.
Compared to conventional cooling
Literature review on nano-based PV
methods, the hybrid nano-based cooling
cooling, classifying and discussing each
Review on nano-based cooling techniques. method could reduce PV’s surface Kandeal et al. [23]
method, and proposing designs and future
temperature by up to 16 ◦ C and increase
recommendations.
electrical efficiency by up to 50%.
Literature review on PV panels, and solar Dual-axis solar tracking systems were
Review on and comparison of solar tracking systems while categorizing them found to be more efficient at the level of
Awasthi et al. [24]
tracking systems. and focusing on dual-axis tracking, giving PVs’ performance compared to single-axis
insights and future recommendations. tracking systems and fixed systems.

In summary, this review paper aims to comprehensively explore various aspects of

photovoltaic cooling methods. Most research concentrates on discussing specific cool-
ing systems or evaluating them from a performance perspective, including photovoltaic–
thermal collectors, concentrated PV cells, PVT systems in buildings, environmental impacts
of cooling technologies, and various cooling methods such as air cooling, water-based
systems, phase-change materials, and passive cooling techniques. The manuscript’s novelty
lies in its discussion of different technologies used in cooling PV panels while providing
insights into the economic and environmental benefits of each cooling method.
This comprehensive review paper takes a unique and methodical approach to explor-
ing various cooling methods for photovoltaic panels, distinguishing itself from previous
research that often narrowly focused on specific systems or performance aspects. The goal
is to provide a thorough and current analysis of advanced cooling technologies for solar
systems, shedding light on both their economic and environmental benefits. Covering a
diverse array of topics, from photovoltaic–thermal collectors to concentrated PV cells, the
review showcases advancements in electrical and thermal efficiency, resulting in significant
reductions in payback periods. This study emphasizes the critical role that cooling methods
play in enhancing the sustainability and efficiency of PV systems. Noteworthy findings
include the effectiveness of hybrid systems, thermoelectric, phase-change materials, and
nano-based cooling methods in improving overall PV performance. Through this system-
atic categorization and assessment, coupled with insightful economic and environmental
considerations, this research contributes valuable recommendations for future studies and
advances in the realm of PV cooling methods, making a substantial contribution to the
field.
The manuscripts mentioned in Table 1 provides valuable insights on future work and
limitations that should be addressed that could be conducted in this field such as
• PVT collectors should take into consideration the available space of installation.
• Heat pipe PVT collectors are better in cooling than PVT collectors with refrigerants.
However, their manufacturing and installation could be challenging.
• BIPVT collectors reduce the use of fossil fuels through offering savings at the level of
electricity production and the materials that could be used.
• The PCM selection to be used for cooling could be challenging and depend on many
factors. Studies should be performed at the level of the PCM to select the optimal one
for this study.
• Pulsating flow for CPV cooling was found to increase the PV performance. It is
suggested that this could be overcome through experimentation with the vibrations
that come with pulsating flow for CPV collectors.
 Energies 2024, 17, 713 4 of 32

• It is suggested to study CPV cooling with the integration of porous media, PCM, or
nanofluids.
• Building artificial intelligence devices to remove accumulated dust on PV panels as a
means of cleaning and increasing efficiency.
• Despite the amount of research conducted in this field, more research needs to be
performed to cover the different aspects of PV deterioration.

2. Theoretical Background
2.1. Principle
The phenomenon of photovoltaic energy was first discovered by Edmund Bequerel.
The principle behind it is that when a photon reaches a semiconductor, two conductors
are created: the free electron and the electron hole through rejection of the electrons by the
negative transitional surface of the polarity. The released electrons flow to the upper layer.
Energies 2024, 17, x FOR PEER REVIEW 5 of 38
In the bottom layer, the electrons are transferred from one atom to the other in order to fill
the empty spaces. Free electrons are conducted from the upper layer into the electric field,
where the solar cell is located. The constant contact of sunlight on the surface of the solar
2.2. Parameters Affecting
panel ensures Panel Efficiency
the continuity of electricity generation.
Scientists and engineers found through experimental and numerical studies that dif-
2.2. Parameters Affecting Panel Efficiency
ferent parameters other than panel temperature would affect its efficiency. Jathar et al.
Scientists
[25] reviewed and engineers
the different found through
environmental factorsexperimental
affecting PV and
panel numerical
efficiency. studies that dif-
Environ-
ferent parameters other than panel temperature would
mental factors affecting panel efficiency are shown in Figure 1. affect its efficiency. Jathar et al. [25]
reviewed the different environmental factors affecting PV panel efficiency. Environmental
factors affecting panel efficiency are shown in Figure 1.

Figure 1. Environmental factors affecting the efficiency of PV panels [25].

Figure 1. Environmental factors affecting the efficiency of PV panels [25].

2.3. Effect of Temperature on Panel Efficiency

Among all the mentioned parameters in Figure 1, temperature is dominant in effi-
ciency deterioration. A PV panel absorbs approximately 80% of the incident radiation, but
not all of it is converted into electricity. A definite range of wavelengths can be converted
 Energies 2024, 17, 713 5 of 32

2.3. Effect of Temperature on Panel Efficiency

Among all the mentioned parameters in Figure 1, temperature is dominant in efficiency
deterioration. A PV panel absorbs approximately 80% of the incident radiation, but not
all of it is converted into electricity. A definite range of wavelengths can be converted
into electricity and all the others are converted into heat [26]. The remainder unconverted
wavelengths can increase the solar cell temperature above the atmospheric temperature [27].
The current literature has proven the decrease in temperature coefficients (such as PV
voltage and open-circuit current) with the increase in temperature [28]. Chander et al. [29]
carried out an experimental study employing a solar cell simulator with varying cell
temperatures, and the results showed that cell temperature has a significant effect on the
PV parameters and controls the quality and performance of the solar cell.
2024, 17, x FOR PEER REVIEW The current literature has also shown that there are many advantages
6 of 38 and disad-
vantages of using each cooling method. The advantages and disadvantages of using the
standardized cooling methods of air, PCM, and water are represented in Figure 2.

2. Advantages
Figureand
Figure 2. Advantages andofdisadvantages
disadvantages of cooling methods.
cooling methods.
2.4. Governing Equations
2.4. Governing Equations
Every PV panel has a length L, a width W, and a thickness t. To calculate the total area
Every PV of
panel
a PVhas a length
panel, then, L, a width W, and a thickness t. To calculate the total
area of a PV panel, then, A = L×W (1)
where 𝐴=𝐿 ×W (1)
A: Area of the P panel (m ).2
where
A: Area of the PL:panel
Length
(mof).the PV panel (m).
L: Length of theW:PVWidth
panelof(m).
the PV panel (m).
However, the
W: Width of the PV panel (m). effective area of the PV panel is the area which yields power. This area
can be calculated as:
However, the effective area of the PV panel is the area which yields power. This area
can be calculated as: Ae f f = Acell × nbcell (2)
where 𝐴 = 𝐴 × 𝑛𝑏 (2)
Ae f f : Effective area of the PV panel (m2 ).
where Acell : Area of one cell (m2 ).
𝐴 : Effective area
nbcellof the PV panel
: Number (min).a PV panel.
of cells
𝐴 : Area of one cell (m ).
𝑛𝑏 : Number of cells in a PV panel.
The power received from the sun is:
𝑄 =𝐺 ×𝐴 × 𝛼 × 𝜏 (3)

where
Energies 2024, 17, 713 6 of 32

The power received from the sun is:

Qsolar = G × Ae f f × α × τ (3)

where
Qsolar : Solar energy falling perpendicularly on the frontal surface of the PV panel as
an input power (W).
G: Solar radiation intensity incident on the panel in ( W/m2 .

α: Glass absorptivity.
τ: Glass transmissivity.
The power output of the PV panel is calculated by:

Pelect = V × I (4)

where
Pelect : Electric power output of the PV panel (W).
V: Output voltage ( V)
I: Output current ( A).
The output voltage and currents could be measured by mustimeters, where the voltage
is measured in parallel and the current in series.
The electric efficiency of a PV panel is measured using:

Pelect
ηelect = × 100 (5)
Psolar

where
ηelect : Electric efficiency ( %).
Pelect : Output electric power (W).
Psolar : Input electric power (W).
The solar incident angle is the angle between the perpendicular and the incoming
light from the sun. It is quantified by:
h i
AOI = cos−1 cos(Θz ) cos(θ T ) + sin(Θz ) sin(θ T ) cos(θ A − θ Aarray ) (6)

where
Θz : The solar zenith angle.
θ T : The tilt angle of the array.
θ A : The solar azimuth angle.
θ Aarray : The azimuth angle of the array.
The installation angle of a PV panel is the same as the tilt angle. It is the angle between
the horizontal surface and the PV panel. It is quantified as:
For the northern hemisphere:

α = 90◦ − (ϕ − δ) (7)

For the southern hemisphere:

α = 90◦ + (ϕ − δ) (8)

where
ϕ: The latitude.
δ: The angle of declination.

3. PV Cooling Methods
Efficiency improvement of PV panels depends mainly on mitigating panel temperature.
Figure 3 shows the three main cooling techniques in addition to other not-well-known
Energies 2024, 17, 713 7 of 32

and new techniques. The water cooling technique involves an earth water heat exchanger,
solar water disinfection, a heat pipe system and an automotive radiator system. These
methods are classified as either active or passive methods. The phase-change material
(PCM) cooling technique is divided into organic PCM and non-organic PCM, while the air
cooling method is divided into the installation of heat sinks, jet impingements, air duct or
cavity air flow systems to the PV panel. These air cooling methods are classified as forced
or free convection systems. Finally, non-categorized cooling methods are divided
Energies 2024, 17, x FOR PEER REVIEW 8 of 38 into the
Energies 2024, 17, x FOR PEER REVIEW thermoelectric cooling method, the coating method and nanofluids. These 8 of 38methods are

either new or not well known compared to the other cooling techniques.

Figure 3. Classification of cooling techniques.

Figure
Figure 3. Classification
3. Classification of cooling
of cooling techniques.
techniques.
3.1. Air Cooling Methods
3.1.Cooling
3.1. Air Air Cooling Methods
The airMethods
cooling method for PV refers to the technique of dissipating heat from PV
The The
modules byair
air cooling cooling
method
circulating method
air for PV for
around PVto
refers
them. Itrefers
the be
can to the technique
technique
implemented in freeof
of dissipating ordissipating
heat from
forced PVheat from PV
convection,
modules
modules by by circulating
circulating air air
around around
them. It them.
can be It can be
implemented implemented
in free or in
forced
using heat sinks, fans, or blowers to increase airflow. As shown in Figure 4, natural convec- free or forced
convection, convection,
usingusing
heat heat
sinks, sinks,
fans, or fans,
blowers ortoblowers
increase to increase
airflow. As airflow.
shown in As
Figure
tion occurs by the means of circulation and heat exchange between hot and cold fluids, this shown
4, natural in Figure
convec- 4, natural
convection
tioncirculation
occurs by the is occurs
means by
caused bycirculation
of thebuoyancy
the means andof circulation
heat
effect. When theand
exchange PV heat
between exchange
panelhot and cold
becomes between
fluids,
hot, thishot
it warms upand cold
circulation
fluids,
the isthis
layer caused
of air by the buoyancy
circulation is caused
surrounding effect.
it, thus by When
thethe the PV of
buoyancy
temperature panel
effect.becomes
Whenhot,
air increases, anditPV
the warms
the panelupbecomes
density in- hot,
the layer
creasesof air surrounding
accordingly. it, thus
Consequently, the temperature
hot air rises, of air
causing increases,
a movement
it warms up the layer of air surrounding it, thus the temperature of air increases, and theand the
called density
a in-
natural con-
creases accordingly.
vection
density current.
increases Consequently,
accordingly. hot Consequently,
air rises, causinghot a movement
air rises,called
causinga natural con-
a movement called a
vection current.
natural convection current.

Figure 4. PV panel under free convection with or without a heat sink.

Figure 4. PV panel under free convection with or without a heat sink.
Figure 4. PV panel under free convection with or without a heat sink.
Energies 2024, 17, 713 8 of 32

Forced convection is considered one of the most effective heat transfer mechanisms. It
is characterized by using external sources such as fans, pumps, and suction devices to aid
fluid transportation.
Air cooling is relatively simple and cost-effective, making it a popular choice for
cooling PV systems. However, its effectiveness depends on various factors such as ambient
temperature, humidity, and wind speed. Heat sinks can be used in conjunction with air
cooling to further improve heat dissipation and maintain a stable operating temperature
for the PV modules.
Below, we present a summary table that outlines various cooling techniques with both
free and forced convection methods for photovoltaic panel cooling.
Table 2 summarizes various cooling methods applied to photovoltaic panels to enhance
their efficiency under different convection conditions. The studies cover a spectrum of
techniques, including forced convection with ducts and fans, free convection using multi-
level fin heat sinks, and hybrid approaches combining free and forced convection with
phase-change materials. Results indicate notable improvements in efficiency, ranging from
2.1% to 21.68%, with specific configurations achieving enhanced performance in different
climates. Additionally, studies explore novel strategies such as curved eave and vortex
generators, graphite-infused PCM, and heat spreaders with cotton wicks. Overall, the
studies explore a range of cooling methods and their impacts on PV panel performance,
contributing valuable insights to the field of renewable energy.
Moreover, the numerical studies in Table 2 have shown more novel approaches in the
designs of the cooling methods used in cooling the PV panel. Numerical investigations
shown a temperature reduction ranging between 5.89 ◦ C and 27 ◦ C while mainly focusing
the studies on using free convection. However, experimental investigations were combining
both free and forced convection and comparing their results. Air cooling was found to be
effective in significant solar radiation climates, where the temperature of the air is lower
than the temperature of the PV’s operating temperature.

Table 2. Free and forced convection cooling methods.

Convection Method Cooling Method Test Methodology Results Climate Author

Enhanced efficiency by 2.1%
PV 1: Lower duct with blower. Experimental and
Forced convection and 1.34% using fans and Benha, Egypt Hussein et al. [30]
PV 2: Duct with DC fans Numerical
blower, respectively
Recorded a 6.13% temperature
Truncated multi-level fin heat
Free Convection Numerical decrease and a 2.87% increase - Ahmad et al. [31]
sink
in output power
PV 1: Heat sink under free
Improvements in efficiency by
convection. PV 2: Duct under
0%, 33%, 53%, and 72% for
forced convection. PV 3: Fins
Free convection and PCM, heat sink under free
in a duct under forced Experimental Kumasi, Ghana Abdallah et al. [32]
forced convection convection, duct under free
convection. PV 4: PCM
convection, and duct under
(White petroleum jelly with a
forced convection, respectively
melting point of 37 ◦ C)
PV 1: Free convection using
through-holes in the PV panel.
PV 2: Active water spraying
Hybrid cooling resulted in an Pomares-Hernández
Free convection on the surface. PV 3: Passive Numerical -
average reduction of 17.24 ◦ C et al. [33]
and active cooling using
through-holes in the PV and
water spraying on surface
Curved eave and vortex Achieved a 5.89 ◦ C temperature
Forced convection Numerical - Wang et al. [34]
generators reduction
Electric efficiency between 12%
PVT system under forced and 12.4% with 0.05 m channel
Forced convection Experimental Tehran, Iran Kasaeian et al. [35]
convection by DC fans depth and 0.018 kg/s to 0.06
kg/s air mass flow rate
PV 1: 30 mm graphite-infused
PCM (paraffin wax with a Finned heat sink with
melting point of 40 ◦ C). PV 2: Experimental and graphite-infused PCM New Zealand
Free convection Atkin et al. [36]
Finned heat sink. PV 3: Numerical demonstrated an overall (Laboratory)
Finned heat sink with efficiency increase of 12.97%
graphite-infused PCM
Energies 2024, 17, 713 9 of 32

Table 2. Cont.

Convection Method Cooling Method Test Methodology Results Climate Author

Recorded a 12% decrease in
Heat spreader with cotton Tamil Nadu,
Free convection Experimental temperature and a 14% increase Chandrasekar et al. [37]
wicks India
in electric output
Efficiency increases by 1.21%
Twisted baffle at the rear and 3.36% for solar radiation of
Free convection Numerical - Benzarti et al. [38]
surface of the PV 200 W/m2 and 1000 W/m2 ,
respectively
PV 1: L-profile aluminum
fins with parallel Electric efficiency increased by
Free convection configuration. PV 2: L-profile Experimental 2% for L-profile aluminum fins Split, Croatia Grubišić-Čabo et al. [39]
aluminum fins randomly with random distribution
positioned
Recorded a maximum efficiency
PV/T system with of 13.75% for 4 fins under solar
Forced convection Experimental Malaysia Mojumder et al. [40]
rectangular finned plate radiation of 700 W/m2 and a
mass flow rate of 0.14 kg/s
Cooling tower with PV Averaged 6.83% increase in
Free convection Numerical - Abdelsalam et al. [41]
module annual efficiency of the PV
PV 1: Air from above and
water from below. PV 2: Air
Water below the PV panel
from above and below. PV 3: Sakaka Al-Jouf,
Forced convection Numerical decreased the temperature by Soliman [42]
Air from above. PV 4: Air KSA
21 ◦ C
from below. PV 5: Water
from below
Effect of using the racking
Achieved a 3% increase in
structure of the PV panel Experimental and Dammam, Saudi
Free convection electric efficiency with a 6.3 ◦ C El-Amri et al. [43]
system as a passive heat sink Numerical Arabia
PV temperature reduction
for cooling
Investigated the use of Utilizing a 7 cm by 20 cm
different dimensions of a staggered fin array resulted in
Free convection Experimental Elazig, Turkey Bayrak et al. [44]
finned plate in cooling the PV the best performance with an
panel energy efficiency of 11.55%
Studied the effect of dust
accumulation density on the Increased convective heat Zhongwei,
Free convection convective heat transfer Experimental transfer coefficient by 4.13% Ningxia province Hu et al. [45]
coefficient for a large-scale compared to a clean PV module in China
PV panel array
PV 1: PV-duct under free
The highest electric efficiency of
convection. PV 2: PV-duct
21.68% was recorded by the PV
Free and forced under forced convection. PV
Experimental panel under forced convection India Kumar et al. [46]
convection 3: PV-duct under forced
with an L-shaped barrier in its
convection with L-shaped
duct
barrier
The initial heat sink model was
PV–heat sink system with
Free convection Numerical able to cool the PV panel by 27 Dubai, UAE Mankani et al. [47]
different fin dimensions ◦C

PV module with porous Increase of 6.73%, 8.34%, and

material. This study was 9.19% in efficiency for the three
Free convection performed on three porous Numerical porous fins, porous layer, and - Kirwan et al. [48]
fins, a porous layer, and five five porous fins configurations,
porous fins respectively
This method improved the
output power of the PV panel
Forced convection PV-compressed air module Numerical - Li et al. [49]
and as a result, improved its
efficiency

3.2. Water Cooling Methods

PV water cooling methods are a set of techniques that involve the use of water or
other fluids to absorb and dissipate heat from PV panels, with the goal of improving their
electrical performance and prolonging their lifespan. These methods can be implemented
through passive or active means and may involve the use of heat sinks, heat exchangers,
direct water immersion, or other related approaches. The effectiveness of PV water cooling
methods depends on various factors, such as water flow rate, temperature, and quality, as
well as the design and construction of the cooling system. Table 3 represents the different
cooling techniques that are either passive or active.
 electrical performance and prolonging their lifespan. These methods can be implemented
through passive or active means and may involve the use of heat sinks, heat exchangers,
direct water immersion, or other related approaches. The effectiveness of PV water cooling
methods depends on various factors, such as water flow rate, temperature, and quality, as
Energies 2024, 17, 713 well as the design and construction of the cooling system. Table 3 represents the different
10 of 32
cooling techniques that are either passive or active.

Table3.3.Classification
Table Classificationof
ofpassive
passiveand
andactive
activewater-based
water-basedcooling
coolingtechniques.
techniques.

PassiveCooling
Passive Cooling Techniques
Techniques ActiveCooling
Active Cooling Techniques
Techniques
Liquidimmersion
Liquid immersion Earthwater
Earth waterheat
heat exchanger
exchanger
Heat
Heat pipe
pipe Solarwater
Solar water disinfection
disinfection
Automotive
Automotive radiator
radiator

Passive cooling
Passive cooling techniques
techniques forfor cooling
cooling PV
PV systems
systems refer
refer to
to natural
natural methods
methods usedused for
for
reducingthe
reducing thetemperature
temperatureofof PVPV modules
modules without
without thethe
useuse of mechanical
of mechanical or electrical
or electrical de-
devices.
They
vices.rely
Theyonrely
convection, radiation,
on convection, and evaporation
radiation, and evaporationto dissipate heat heat
to dissipate and improve
and improvethe
performance
the performance and andlifespan of PV
lifespan ofmodules.
PV modules.
Tina
Tina etet al.
al. [50]
[50] have
have increased
increased the
the electrical
electrical efficiency
efficiency by by approximately
approximately 10%10% after
after
experimentally
experimentallysubmerging
submerginga aPV PVpanel inside
panel insidewater in ainstudy
water of enhancing
a study PV temperature.
of enhancing PV tempera-
Figure 5 represents
ture. Figure the submerged
5 represents PV inside
the submerged a vessel
PV inside containing
a vessel water.water.
containing

Energies 2024, 17, x FOR PEER REVIEW

Figure
5. PV panel immersed in water [50]. 12 of 38
Figure 5. PV panel immersed in water [50].

On the other hand, active water cooling for PV required a mechanical or electrical
On to
devices theactively
other hand, active
reduce thewater cooling for
temperature ofPVPVrequired
modules.a mechanical
This may or electrical
include circulating
devices to actively reduce the temperature of PV modules. This may include
water or other fluids through a heat exchanger. They are useful in hot climates or high- circulating
water or
power other fluids
output systemsthrough a heat exchanger.
and provide They areefficiency
greater cooling useful in hot
andclimates
controlorover
high-
operating
power output systems and provide
temperature than passive cooling methods. greater cooling efficiency and control over operating
temperature than passive cooling methods.
Irwan et al. [51], carried an indoor experiment in order to investigate the effect of
Irwan et al. [51], carried an indoor experiment in order to investigate the effect of
water flowing at the surface in cooling the PV panel. Results showed that a decrease in PV
water flowing at the surface in cooling the PV panel. Results showed that a decrease in PV
temperature by 5–23 ◦ C increases the output power of the PV panel by 9–22%.
temperature by 5–23 °C increases the output power of the PV panel by 9–22%.
On
On thethe other
other hand,
hand,Moradgholi
Moradgholietetal.al.[52]
[52]experimentally
experimentally investigated
investigated the the effect
effect of of heat
pipes in cooling PV panels, and the module used in his experimental study
heat pipes in cooling PV panels, and the module used in his experimental study is repre- is represented in
Figure
sented 6.in Results
Figure 6.showed
Results an increase
showed of 5.67%ofin
an increase power
5.67% when using
in power methanol
when using as a working
methanol
fluid in spring
as a working andinan
fluid increase
spring and ofan7.7% in power
increase of 7.7%when using
in power acetone
when usingasacetone
a working
as a fluid in
summer.
working fluid in summer.

Figure Heatpipes
6. Heat
Figure 6. pipesmodule
module [52].
[52].

Moreover, Sandeep Koundinya et al. [53] investigated experimentally and by simu-

lation the effect of a finned heat pipe with water as the working fluid in cooling photovol-
taic panels. Results showed a total decrease of 13.8 K in PV panel temperature and good
agreement was found between experimental and computational studies.
Energies 2024, 17, 713 11 of 32

Moreover, Sandeep Koundinya et al. [53] investigated experimentally and by simula-

tion the effect of a finned heat pipe with water as the working fluid in cooling photovoltaic
panels. Results showed a total decrease of 13.8 K in PV panel temperature and good
agreement was found between experimental and computational studies.
Below, a summary table is presented for several studies about cooling PV modules
with passive and active cooling techniques.
Table 4 presents a wide array of outcomes across various cooling methods for photovoltaic
panels. Passive approaches, like water-saturated microencapsulated phase-change materials
(MEPCM) and immersion in dielectric liquids, effectively reduce temperatures, leading to
improved electric efficiency. Passive cooling techniques exhibit diverse results, with efficiency
enhancements ranging from 2.7% to 12.4% and a temperature reduction of up to 13.8 K. Active
cooling methods, such as spraying water and flowing water on the PV surface, consistently
boost power generation and efficiency, demonstrating improvements from 8% to 9% to a
significant 24 K temperature decrease. Innovative methods like floating PV on water surfaces
and geothermal cooling systems show efficiency increases of 2.7% and up to 13.8%, respectively.
The choice between passive and active cooling depends on factors like climate, available
resources, and desired efficiency levels. These findings collectively contribute to advancing PV
panel cooling, facilitating more efficient and sustainable solar power generation.

Table 4. Summary of several studies on water-based cooling techniques for PVs.

Cooling
Cooling Method Test Methodology Key Outcomes Climate Author
Classification
Water-saturated A layer of PCM of 5 cm thickness
microencapsulated with a melting temperature of 30 ◦ C
Passive Numerical - Ho et al. [54]
phase-change material gave the best performance in
(MEPCM) enhancing the electric efficiency.
Liquid immersion of Immersing the solar cells in the
solar cells in 4 different Passive Numerical dielectric liquids maintained a low - Liu et al. [55]
dielectric liquids. temperature in the solar cells.
Spraying water on Increase in power and efficiency by
Passive Experimental Croatia Nizetic et al. [56]
frontal and rear surfaces. 16.3% and 14.1%, respectively.
A total decrease of 13.8 K in PV
Finned heat pipe system panel temperature and good
Experimental and
with water as a working Passive agreement was found between India Koundinya et al. [53]
Numerical
fluid. experimental and computational
studies.
Water was found to be a better
PV/T system with water
Experimental and coolant than ethylene glycol with an
and ethylene glycol as Passive Joy et al. [57]
Numerical overall efficiency enhancement by
working fluids.
25%.
Cooling system have good
Spraying water on Experimental and
Active performance in hot and dusty Egypt Moharram et al. [58]
surface. Numerical
regions.
Flat-plate PV/T system Empirical correlations were
with and without glass Active Numerical performed and conclusions were - Bajestan et al. [59]
cover. conducted.
Flowing water on PV
Active Experimental Increase in power by 8–9% Laboratory Krauter [60]
surface.
As the convective heat, transfer
coefficient increases the solar cells
Heat pipe. Active Numerical temperatures decreases when - Sabry [61]
operating at low flow rates and at
high optical concentration ratios.
Spraying water on the Increase of 2.7% in electrical
Active Experimental Alexandria, Egypt Elnozahy et al. [62]
PV surface. efficiency and 21 W in power.
Flowing water on the Increase in the power generated and
Active Experimental Iran Kordzadeh et al. [63]
surface. in total efficiency.
Water system with air
Yearly improvement of 5% in
blowing to the back of Active Numerical - Arcuri et al. [64]
efficiency.
the PV.
Increasing the length of the feed
Earth water heat Pilani, Rajhasthan,
Active Numerical pipe to 60 m would decrease PV Jakhar et al. [65]
exchanger. India
temperature by 23 ◦ C.
Energies 2024, 17, 713 12 of 32

Table 4. Cont.

Cooling
Cooling Method Test Methodology Key Outcomes Climate Author
Classification
Empirical correlations were
Concentrated PV/T
Active Numerical performed and conclusions were - Mittelman et al. [66]
system.
conducted.
Theoretical heat rejection by 91%
Experimental and Kuala Lumpur,
Automotive radiator. Active and experimental efficiency Chong et al. [67]
Numerical Malaysia
increased by 4.46%.
Solar desalination
combined with an
A 13.75% energy efficiency for the
intermittent Active Experimental Cairo, Egypt Ibrahim et al. [68]
system.
solar-operated cooling
unit.
PV/T system laminated
The maximum efficiency recorded
with polymer matrix Experimental and
Active was 20.8% with a 53.5% thermal - Korkut et al. [69]
composite with water as Numerical
efficiency.
a coolant.
PV 1: single-pass ducts.
PV 2: multi-pass ducts.
Cell temperature achieved a
PV 3: tube-type heat Active Numerical Islamabad, Pakistan Sattar et al. [70]
maximum of 38.310 ◦ C.
absorber.
Water is used as a fluid.
The system showed a temperature
Experimental decrease of 24 K with a power
Flowing water on the PV
Active (laboratory and real-life generation increase of 10% with a Krakow, Poland Sornek et al. [71]
surface.
conditions) return on investment of less than 10
years.
An efficiency increase of 2.7% was
Floating PV on the water
Passive Experimental recorded with a temperature Cagliari, Italy Majumder et al. [72]
surface.
decrease of 2.7 ◦ C
Electric efficiency of 17.79% and a
A new innovative thermal efficiency of 76.13% when
cooling box acting as a Active Numerical the system was studied with a mass - Yildirim et al. [73]
thermal collector. flow rate of 0.014 kg/s and an inlet
water temperature of 15 ◦ C.
Sisattanark district,
Water flows on the An increase in exergy efficiency
Passive Experimental Vientiane Capital, Chanphavong et al. [74]
surface of the PV panel. from 2.91% to 12.76%.
Laos
Comparison between
Running water on the upper surface
water flowing on the
Passive Experimental of the PV helps in cooling it and Gwalior, India Panda et al. [75]
surface of the PV panel
increasing its efficiency.
and wet grass cooling.
Comparison between
Significant increase in the efficiency
conventional PV panels,
and power output of the
concentrated PV
Experimental and water-cooled CPV system to 17%
systems, and Active Duhok, North of Iraq Zubeer et al. [76]
Numerical and 23%, respectively. The overall
water-cooled
output power of the water-cooled
concentrated PV
CPV was 24.4%.
systems.
A geothermal cooling
An increase in electric efficiency up
system containing a Alcalá de Henares,
Active Experimental to 13.8% using a constant coolant Lopez-Pascual et al. [77]
mixture of water and Madrid, Spain
flow rate of 1.8 L/min.
ethylene glycol.
Increase in efficiency by 1.21% and
0.96% in summer and autumn,
respectively, for the system without
Radiative cooling
Active Experimental cold storage. For the system with a China Li et al. [78]
module.
cold storage, the efficiency increased
by 1.69% and 1.51% in summer and
autumn, respectively.
Decrease by 35.7% of PV’s surface
temperature and increase by 9.4% in
Porous media with Experimental and
Active the output power under a volume Jordan Masalha et al. [79]
water as a cooling fluid. Numerical
flow rate of 3 L/m with a porosity of
0.35.
Geothermal heat
exchanger with water Experimental and Increase in PV’s electric power
Active Turkey Jafari et al. [80]
and ethylene glycol as Numerical generation by 9.8%.
cooling fluids.
Water cooling system
and phase-change
Increase in the electric efficiency by
material (PCM) module
Passive Experimental 12.4% compared to the other Chennai, India Sudhakar et al. [81]
with OM35 as a PCM
configurations.
with a melting point of
35 ◦ C.
Energies 2024, 17, 713 13 of 32

The use of evaporative cooling could be more beneficial than vapor compression at
the level of the cost. However, the system is not reliable or needs more design work [82].
Moreover, it was noticed in the water-cooled methods that the experimental studies
mentioned in Table 4 were greater than the numerical studies and the climates the water
cooling methods were studied in are hot such as India, Egypt, and Saudi Arabia.

3.3. PCM Cooling Methods

Phase-change materials (PCMs) are substances used in cooling systems for photo-
voltaic modules to absorb and store heat from the panels during peak sunlight hours.
PCMs have a high latent heat of fusion, which means they can absorb large amounts of
heat without a significant increase in temperature. PCMs can be integrated into PV panels,
or used in a separate thermal management system to enhance the overall efficiency and
lifetime of the PV system.
In a typical PV–PCM hybrid system, illustrated in Figure 7, the PCM functions as a heat
sink that absorbs excess heat from the PV panel, thereby reducing its temperature. During
the peak sun hours, the temperature of the PV panel exceeds the melting temperature of
the PCM. As a result, the PCM absorbs excess heat from the PV panel and maintain a stable
operating temperature for the PV system until it completely melts, transitioning from solid
to PEER
Energies 2024, 17, x FOR liquid phase. During the low sunlight period, as the ambient temperature
REVIEW 16 ofdecreases
38

and the temperature of the PV panel drops below the melting point of the PCM, the PCM
releases excess heat and solidifies again.

Figure 7. Typical PV–PCM system [83].

Figure 7. Typical PV–PCM system [83].

Table Table
5 summarizes
5. Summary ofthe various
PV cooling cooling
techniques techniques
based on PCMs. using PCM with different combi-
nations and materials. Test
PCM Melting Cooling
PCM Used Method Key Outcomes Climate Author
Point
Table 5. Summary Method
of PV cooling techniques based on PCMs.
ology
Pure PCM: white
PCM Used PCM Melting Point Cooling Method Test Methodology EfficiencyKey increased
Outcomes by an Climate Author
petroleum jelly.
Pure PCM: white petroleum Pure and average of 3% when using
Efficiency increased by an average of 3%
jelly. Combined PCM: Combined PCM: Bekaa Valley,
Bekaa Valley, Hachem et
white petroleum
36–60 36–60
Pure and combined PCM combined Exp. Exp. pure
whenPCM and
using pure PCMbyandanby average
an average
Lebanon.
Hachem et al. [84]
jelly + graphite + copper white petroleum of 5.8% when using combined PCM. Lebanon. al. [84]
PCM of 5.8% when using combined
jelly + graphite + PV panel containing an
- 0–50
integrated layer of PCM
Num. PCM.
Efficiency exceeds 6% in some regions. - Smith et al. [85]
copper
Maintain panel operating temperature
RT25 25
Impure PCM layer PV panel Num. under 40 ◦ C for 80 min under solar - Biwole et al. [86]
integrated into the PV panel
radiation of 1000 W/m2 .
containing an Efficiency exceeds 6% in some Smith et al.
- 0–50 Num. CaCl2 ·6H2 O showed an increased power
-
integrated regions.
output of 3% compared to capric-palmitic
[85]
Salt hydrate, CaCl2 ·6H2 O CaCl2 ·6H2 O: 29.8 and PCM layer with aluminum
and eutectic of capric eutectic of capric layer
alloy fins integrated into the of PCM Exp.
acid in Pakistan. The two PCMs showed Dublin, Ireland and
Hasan et al. [87]
better results in Vehari, Pakistan than in Vehari, Pakistan
acid–palmitic acid acid-palmitic acid: 22.5 PV panel
Impure PCM Maintain panel
Dublin, Ireland with aoperating
total of 13% in
power saving.
layer temperature under 40 °C for Biwole et
RT25 25 Num. Average maximum efficiency and power -
Paraffin wax 37.5–42.5 PV–PCM system integrated into Exp. 80 min underbysolar
were increased radiation
1.63% and 1.35 W, Laboratory al. [86]
Xu et al. [88]
respectively.
the PV panel of 1000 W/m .
Rubitherm 28 HC: 27–29 Increase by 10% in peak power and 3.5%
inCaCl ·6H2O throughout
showedthean
Rubitherm 28 HC and
and PV–PCM system Num. energy2produced whole - Aneli et al. [89]
Rubitherm 35 HC
Rubitherm 35 HC: 34–36 year round.
PCM layer increased power output of 3%
CaCl2·6H2O: 29.8
Salt hydrate, with compared to capric-palmitic Dublin,
and eutectic of
CaCl2·6H2O and aluminum acid in Pakistan. The two Ireland and Hasan et
capric acid- Exp.
eutectic of capric alloy fins PCMs showed better results in Vehari, al. [87]
palmitic acid:
acid–palmitic acid integrated into Vehari, Pakistan than in Pakistan
22.5
the PV panel Dublin, Ireland with a total of
13% in power saving.
Average maximum efficiency
Energies 2024, 17, 713 14 of 32

Table 5. Cont.

PCM Used PCM Melting Point Cooling Method Test Methodology Key Outcomes Climate Author

An increase of 1.05% in efficiency and a

Docosane paraffin wax 42 PV–PCM system Num. and Exp. Doha, Qatar. Amalu et al. [90]
34% increase in life span.

Temperature reduction by 24.9 ◦ C and an

RT35HC 36 PV–PCM system Num. - Zhao et al. [91]
increase of 11.02% in electric output.

RT35 35 PV–PCM system Num. Total increase of 5% in productivity. - Kant et al. [92]

Song-do, Incheon,
- 24.85 PV–PCM system Num. and Exp. Increase of 1–1.5% in electric efficiency. Park et al. [93]
South Korea

Increase in power by 9.2% experimentally

RT28HC 28 PV–PCM system Exp. and Num. Ljubljana, Slovenia Stropnik et al. [94]
and 4.3–8.7% numerically.

Maximum electric and thermal efficiencies

- 23 BIPV–PCM Exp. and Num. Lisbon, Portugal Aelenei et al. [95]
recorded were 10% and 12%, respectively.

An electric output increase of 5.18% in the

PV–PCM system and
Paraffin wax 34.9–42 Exp. PV–PCM system and 30.4% electric sum Shanghai, China Li et al. [96]
PV–PCM thermal system
was recorded in the PV–PCM-T system.

Annual enhancement of 5.9% in electric Al Ain, United Arab

RT42 38–43 PV–PCM system Exp. Hasan et al. [97]
yield in hot climate. Emirates

RT27 Enhancement in energy by 4.19% and

& RT27: 25–28 and RT31: 27–33 PV–PCM systems Exp. 4.24% when using RT27 and RT31, Chania, Greece Savvakis et al. [98]
RT31 respectively.

Eutectic of capricpalmitic
Eutectic of capricpalmitic
acid: 22.5 and calcium Increase in electric efficiency by 6.9% and
acid and calcium chloride Dhahran, Saudi
chloride hexahydrate: 29.8 PV-T-nano-PCM system Num. 22% in winter and summer weather, Abdelrazik et al. [99]
hexahydrate and RT20 and Arabia
and RT20: 25.73 and RT25 respectively.
RT25 and RT35
26.6 and RT35: 29–36

Electric performance increased by 7.2% Kuala Lumpur,

Paraffin A44 44 PVT–PCM system Exp. and Num. Fayaz et al. [100]
numerically and 7.6% experimentally. Malaysia

PVT–PCM system increased the electric

Kuala Lumpur,
Lauric acid 44–46 PVT–PCM system Exp. efficiency of the PV by 1.2% under a Hossain et al. [101]
Malaysia
volume flow rate of 4 LPM.

Energy loss percentage was decreased by

PVT–PCM system with pure
9.28%, 23.33%, and 48.58% for the
Paraffin wax 46–48 water and ethylene glycol as Exp. Mashhad, Iran Kazemian et al. [102]
PVT/water, PVT/ethylene glycol (50%),
working fluids
and PVT/ethylene glycol (100%).

Increase of 2.5% and 3.5% in electric

PV–PCM and PV–PCM–fins Different weather
RT25 26 Num. efficiency in fair and sunny weather, Metwally et al. [103]
systems conditions
respectively.

Temperature drop of 18.3 ◦ K, 21.2 ◦ K,

RT58, RT42, and C22-C40 RT58: 58 and RT42: 42 PV–PCM–heat sink system Num. and 26.1 ◦ K when using C22-C40, RT58, Oujda, Morocco Bria et al. [104]
and RT42, respectively.

PV–PCM matrix absorber Analytical and numerical results were in

- 273.15 K Num. - Hassabou et al. [105]
system agreement.

PV/T system with

Power output increased by 535 KWh/year Derby, United
- - nano-enhanced MXene-PCM Num. Cui et al. [106]
and electric efficiency increased by 3.01%. Kingdom
and R407C working fluid

PV cell temperature decreased by 7.14%,

PV–PCM system with a heat
4.65%, and 2.22% when studying the PV
- - sink with convex/concave Num. - Soliman et al. [107]
cells at inclinations of 90◦ , 60◦ , and 30◦ ,
dimples
respectively.

Efficiency was improved by 14.4% when

Paraffin wax 38–43 PV–PCM system Exp. using a PCM thickness of 3 cm and tilting Qena, Egypt Maghrabie et al. [108]
the PV at an angle of 30◦ .

Increase in electric and thermal

Paraffin wax Paraffin wax: 45 Water-cooled PVT system Indoor (Simulating
Exp. efficiencies up to 13.7% and 39%, Chaichan et al. [109]
and vaseline Vaseline: 25 with PCM Iraq’s weather)
respectively.

Enhancement by 2.5% in the power Mediterranean

RT28HC 25–29 PV–PCM system Exp. Nizetic et al. [110]
output. climate

Table 5 presents a comprehensive overview of different phase-change materials uti-

lized in conjunction with photovoltaic (PV) panels. Each entry includes details on the
specific PCM used, its melting point, cooling method, test methodology, key outcomes,
climate conditions, and the contributing authors. Noteworthy PCMs like white petroleum
jelly, paraffin wax, and specialized formulations such as Rubitherm 28 HC and Rubitherm
35 HC are explored across various cooling systems. Passive cooling methods incorporating
PCMs exhibit efficiency gains ranging from 1.05% to 12.4%. On the other hand, active sys-
tems like PV–PCM configurations and PV/T systems consistently showcase improvements
in electric efficiency and power output, reaching up to 24%. These findings underscore
the impact of factors such as climate, location, and PCM composition on the effectiveness
of these cooling techniques. Overall, Researchers have identified optimal PCM parame-
ters, thicknesses, and integration methods, contributing to the advancement of efficient
photovoltaic cooling strategies.
Moreover, cooling by PCM is shown to be used in hot climates where solar irradiation
is considered to be high such as in Egypt, Iran, Saudi Arabia, and United Arab Emirates.
Energies 2024, 17, 713 15 of 32
Energies 2024, 17, x FOR PEER REVIEW 19 of 38

3.4. Other Cooling Methods

3.4. Other Cooling Methods
There are various cooling methods for photovoltaic systems other than air, water,
There are various cooling methods for photovoltaic systems other than air, water,
andand phase-changematerials.
phase-change materials. One Oneofofthese
these methods
methods is using
is using encapsulated
encapsulated PCM,PCM,whichwhich
improves the PCM’s expansion property during melting. Another
improves the PCM’s expansion property during melting. Another method is thermoelec-method is thermoelectric
cooling, whichwhich
tric cooling, uses uses
the Peltier effect
the Peltier to create
effect a temperature
to create a temperaturedifference
difference andandtransfer
transfer heat
away
heatfrom
awaythe PV module.
from Additionally,
the PV module. researchers
Additionally, have explored
researchers the use
have explored theofuse
nanofluids,
of
which are liquids
nanofluids, which containing
are liquids nanoparticles that can improve
containing nanoparticles the thermal
that can improve properties
the thermal prop- of the
erties fluid.
cooling of the cooling fluid. Other
Other methods methods
include usinginclude using refrigeration
refrigeration systems or systems
hybrid or systems
hybrid that
combine multiple cooling methods. Each of these cooling methods has its ownhas
systems that combine multiple cooling methods. Each of these cooling methods its
advantages
own advantages and disadvantages and can be suitable for different
and disadvantages and can be suitable for different types of PV systems and operating types of PV systems
and operating conditions.
conditions.
Saleh et al. [111] numerically studied the effect of nanofluid and water in cooling
Saleh et al. [111] numerically studied the effect of nanofluid and water in cooling
photovoltaic–thermal (PVT) collectors. Results showed that the use of 1% volumetric frac-
photovoltaic–thermal (PVT) collectors. Results showed that the use of 1% volumetric
tion of nanofluids increases the thermal efficiency up to 19.5% and the electric efficiency
fraction of nanofluids increases the thermal efficiency up to 19.5% and the electric efficiency
up to 55.45%.
up to 55.45%.
Ghadiri et al. [112], experimentally studied the effect of cooling a PVT system by fer-
Ghadiri
rofluids et al.
shown in [112],
Figureexperimentally
8. Different fluidsstudied
were usedtheateffect of cooling
a constant and ana alternating
PVT system by
ferrofluids
magnetic shown
field ininorder
Figure 8. Different
to discuss fluidsofwere
the effect used field
magnetic at a constant and an
on ferrofluids. alternating
Results
magnetic
showedfield in order
an increase ofto
45%discuss
in thethe effect
overall of magnetic
efficiency whenfield
usingonferrofluid
ferrofluids.
and Results showed
a total in-
an crease of 50%
increase of 45%in the
inoverall efficiency
the overall when using
efficiency whenanusing
alternating magnetic
ferrofluid andfield of 50
a total Hz
increase of
50%frequency. Also, aefficiency
in the overall total of 48 when
W of exergy
usingwas increased after
an alternating using ferrofluid.
magnetic field of 50 Hz frequency.
Also, a total of 48 W of exergy was increased after using ferrofluid.

Figure 8. Ferrofluids cooling system [112].

Energies 2024, 17, x FOR PEER REVIEWFigure 8. Ferrofluids cooling system [112]. 20 of 38
Figure 9 illustrates the use of thermoelectric water-nanofluid cooling and thermoelec-
Figure 9 illustrates the use of thermoelectric water-nanofluid cooling and thermoe-
tric finned heat sink cooling in PV/T and PV systems respectively [113].
lectric finned heat sink cooling in PV/T and PV systems respectively [113].

Figure 9. PV with thermoelectric plate and: (a) photovoltaic/thermal-thermoelectric water-nanofluid

(PV/T-TEG-NF)
Figure 9. PV withcooling system and
thermoelectric (b)and:
plate photovoltaic-thermoelectric finned heat sink
(a) photovoltaic/thermal-thermoelectric (PV/TEG-Hs)
water-nanofluid
(PV/T-TEG-NF)
cooling cooling system and (b) photovoltaic-thermoelectric finned heat sink (PV/TEG-Hs)
system [113].
cooling system [113].

Table 6 shows the recent studies performed on cooling the PV panel using different
methods.
Energies 2024, 17, 713 16 of 32

Table 6 shows the recent studies performed on cooling the PV panel using different
methods.

Table 6. Different cooling techniques.

Cooling Method Test Methodology Key Outcomes Climate Author

Microencapsulated PCM heat Increase in efficiency by 2% in
sink with a thermoelectric Experimental the intermediate season and Republic of Korea Kang et al. [114]
generator by 2.5% in the summer.
Electric efficiency was
PCM-integrated PV system
improved up to 17.02% while
with fins and nanofluid Experimental Tehran, Iran Kouravand et al. [115]
thermal efficiency was
(CPV/T/NF/FPCM)
improved up to 61.25%.
The micro-fins, nanofluids,
Photovoltaic thermal collector
and nano-PCM PV had a
with a nano-PCM and
Experimental thermal efficiency of 77.5% Indoor (Solar Simulator) Bassam et al. [116]
micro-fin tube nanofluid
with an increase in electric
system
power of 4.01 W.
Micro-fin tube
Increase of 44.5% in electric
counterclockwise twisted tape Experimental Indoor (Solar Simulator) Bassam et al. [117]
power.
nanofluid and nano-PCM
The GNP-CuO 3% mixture
has enhanced the thermal
PV/nano-enhanced PCM heat conductivity by 91.81%,
Experimental Iran Moein-Jahromi et al. [118]
sink system reduced temperature by
6.6 ◦ C, and enhanced the
electricity output by 3%.
PCM, thermoelectric cooling, The PV panel with aluminum
and installing fins made of fins had the highest power
Experimental Elazig, Turkey Bayrak et al. [119]
aluminum in cooling the PV generation enhancement of
panel 47.88 watts.
PV/T with spectrum-splitting Conversion efficiency
Numerical - Xu et al. [120]
module exceeded 43%.

The outcomes presented in Table 6 highlight the diverse and innovative cooling
methods for photovoltaic panels. The utilization of a microencapsulated phase-change
material combined with a heat sink, and a thermoelectric generator, demonstrated a 2%
efficiency increase in the intermediate season and 2.5% in summer. The integration of PCM
with fins and nanofluid (CPV/T/NF/FPCM) showed significant improvements, achieving
an electric efficiency of 17.02% and a thermal efficiency of 61.25%. Indoor experiments
involving a photovoltaic thermal collector with Nano-PCM and micro-fin tube nanofluid
revealed a remarkable thermal efficiency of 77.5% and a 4.01 W increase in electric power.
Another noteworthy system, incorporating a micro-fin tube counter clockwise twisted tape
nanofluid and nano-PCM, demonstrated a substantial 44.5% increase in electric power. The
PV/nano-enhanced PCM heat sink system displayed enhancements, including a 91.81%
increase in thermal conductivity, a 6.6 ◦ C temperature reduction, and a 3% improvement
in electricity output. Further experiments, incorporating PCM, thermoelectric cooling,
and aluminum fins, yielded the highest power generation enhancement of 47.88 Watts.
Additionally, a numerical simulation of a PV/T system with a spectrum-splitting module
revealed an impressive conversion efficiency exceeding 43%. These advancements hold
promise for improving the energy efficiency and sustainability of photovoltaic panels and
increasing the adoption of renewable energy sources.

4. Discussion and Analysis

The literature has provided numerous methods for cooling the PV panel and increasing
its efficiency, resulting in methods with more effectiveness over others. With different
methods of cooling, different ranges of efficiency arise that were obtained and illustrated in
Figure 10.
 tovoltaic panels and increasing the adoption of renewable energy sources.

4. Discussion and Analysis

The literature has provided numerous methods for cooling the PV panel and increas-
ing its efficiency, resulting in methods with more effectiveness over others. With different
Energies 2024, 17, 713 methods of cooling, different ranges of efficiency arise that were obtained and illustrated 17 of 32
in Figure 10.

Figure 10. Efficiencies of cooling methods.

Figure 10. Efficiencies of cooling methods.

According
According to the to the literature,
literature, efficiency
efficiency ranged ranged
between 6% and between
13% when 6% PCMand 13% when PCM was
was
used
used as as a cooling
a cooling technique.
technique. This This method
method hadadvantages
had both both advantages and disadvantages. Through
and disadvantages.
Through
all theallprevious
the previous studies,the
studies, the main
mainproblem that that
problem facedfaced
the researchers is the low is the low thermal
the researchers
thermal conductivity of PCM, and the change in volume when PCM melts, which in turn
conductivity of PCM, and the change in volume when PCM melts, which in turn leads
leads to poor temperature management. Researchers tried to solve these problems
to poor
through temperature
several ways such asmanagement.
mixing PCM withResearchers tried to solve
graphite and developing these problems through
a shape-stabi-
several
lized PCM. ways suchthe
In contrast, asadvantages
mixing PCM of thiswith graphite
method were theand developing
simplicity a shape-stabilized PCM.
of the cooling
In contrast,
system, the and
the low cost, advantages of this
the long lifetime. method
With the needwere thea simplicity
for only tank filled withof PCM
the cooling system, the
low cost, and the long lifetime. With the need for only a tank filled with PCM attached to
the back of the PV panel, the price of this system was low, and with the absence of electrical
instruments, there will be no need for maintenance.
The air cooling techniques literature revealed a range of efficiency between 6% and
15%, and several methods were tested experimentally and numerically based on natural
convection and forced convection. Several systems were tested by scientists such as
finned plates, fans and air ducts, finned plates combined with fans and air ducts, and
jet impingements. Others tried to combine the effects of the latent heat storage of PCM
along with finned plates under natural and forced convection. The simplest method and
most effective was using finned plates under forced or natural convection. Under forced
convection, a better efficiency was recorded but a higher cost compared with the use of
finned plates under natural convection. Therefore, there is no method better than another
in general; but in specific conditions, optimization between efficiency and cost can be
achieved. In a windy location, a finned free convective system will give great efficiency
with low cost, while in a non-windy location, a finned forced convective system would cost
a little bit more but will give a higher efficiency.
The highest efficiency was recorded when water cooling systems were tested. Different
techniques were taken into consideration, spraying water over the surface of the panel,
immersion of the panel in water, using water as a circulation fluid in heat pipes attached
to the back of the PV, etc. Efficiency with water systems ranged in the literature between
8% and 17%, but designing systems to deal with water had a high cost because of the need
for pumps, pipes, fittings, etc. In addition, when taking the location of the project into
consideration, a water cooling system was the best technique in dusty or sandy places,
where high efficiency could be maintained by removing dust from the front surface of the
panel which would otherwise reduce the amount of irradiation received.

5. Economic Study
After cooling the PV panels, cooling techniques showed an increase in power for each
PV panel with different increased values. This increase in power showed a remarkable
Energies 2024, 17, 713 18 of 32

increase financially when compared to the standard PV. Economic and environmental
analyses were conducted on a PV panel with an area of 0.218 m2 .
The governing equations used in the economic study are presented as follows.

E = I × Ae f f ective × ηelectrical × 30 (9)

where
E: The energy produced by the PV panel in kWh.
I: The average solar insolation per day in mkWh
2 ×day .

Ae f f ective : The effective area of the PV panel in m2 .

ηelectrical : The electrical efficiency of the PV panel.
The relative efficiency is the relative difference between the cooled PV efficiency and
the standard PV. This relative efficiency is used to calculate the absolute electrical efficiency
of each cooled PV case and is quantified as:

η2 − η1
ηrelative = × 100 (10)
η1

where
η2 : The efficiency of cooled PV (%).
Energies 2024, 17, x FOR PEER REVIEW η1 : The efficiency of standard PV (%). 23 of 38
Savings were quantified as:
Savings = E × S (11)
where
kWh.
E: The energy produced by the PV panel in kWh.
kWh.
S: The price of each kWh.

5.1. Water
5.1. Water Cooling
Cooling
The sun
The sun hours
hours vary
vary according
according to
to the
the months
months ofof the
the year.
year. Figure
Figure 11
11 shows
shows the
the variation
variation
in the sun hours with respect to the months in Lebanon. As shown in the following
in the sun hours with respect to the months in Lebanon. As shown in the following figure, figure,
July month
July month reached
reached the
the maximum
maximum of of 438.2
438.2 h.
h.

Figure 11. Number of sun hours versus months.

The solar
The solar insolation
insolation in
in Beirut,
Beirut, Lebanon
Lebanon is
is shown
shown in
in Figure
Figure 12
12 [121].
[121].
 Figure 11. Number of sun hours versus months.
Energies 2024, 17, 713 19 of 32
The solar insolation in Beirut, Lebanon is shown in Figure 12 [121].

Energies 2024, 17, x FOR PEER REVIEW 24 of 38

Figure12.
Figure Solar
12.Solar insolation
insolation in Beirut,
in Beirut, Lebanon
Lebanon [121].[121].

As
Asshown
shownininFigure
Figure12,
12,the
theminimum
minimum solar
solarinsolation waswas
insolation recorded in December,
recorded in December, with
with a value of 2 kWh
kWh
a value of 2 m2 per m day. The highest solar insolation was recorded in in
per day. The highest solar insolation was recorded July,
July, witha value of
with
a value of 6.67 kWh
6.67 kWh
m2
per day. m per day.
Water
Watercooling
coolingmethods
methods were
werefound to be
found toeffective in cooling
be effective the PV
in cooling panels.
the As shown
PV panels. As shown in
in Figure 13, flowing water on the surface of the PV panel was found to produce the max-
Figure 13, flowing water on the surface of the PV panel was found to produce the maximum
imum energy, with an average of 32.29 kWh compared to the other cooling methods. Fol-
energy, with an average of 32.29 kWh compared to the other cooling methods. Following this
lowing this method, the liquid immersion method, with an average of 32.17 kWh, proved
method, the liquid immersion method, with an average of 32.17 kWh, proved to be the next
to be the next best. Also, the heat pipe cooling system recorded an average of 31 kWh,
best. Also,
while the heat pipe
the automotive cooling
radiator systemsystem recorded
recorded an energy
the least averagebetween
of 31 kWh, while the
the cooling automotive
meth-
radiator system recorded the least energy between the cooling methods,
ods, with an average of 30.55 kWh. The standard PV panel recorded an average of 29.24 with an average of
30.55 kWh. The standard PV panel recorded an average of 29.24 kWh.
kWh.

Figure13.
Figure Energy
13.Energy produced
produced versus
versus months
months for water
for water cooling
cooling methods.
methods.

Figure
Figure1414shows
showsthat thethe
that maximum
maximumcost saving by theby
cost saving cooling methodsmethods
the cooling was recorded
was recorded
for
for flowing
flowingwater
water onon
thethe
surface cooling
surface method,
cooling with an
method, average
with cost saving
an average costofsaving
Unitedof United
States Dollar (USD) 0.273. The liquid immersion method follows, with an average cost
saving of USD 0.263, and the heat pipe cooling method showed an average cost saving of
USD 0.157. The automotive radiator cooling method showed the lowest average cost sav-
ing, as shown in the following figure with an average compared to a standard PV panel
of USD 0.117.
Energies 2024, 17, 713 20 of 32

States Dollar (USD) 0.273. The liquid immersion method follows, with an average cost
saving of USD 0.263, and the heat pipe cooling method showed an average cost saving
Energies 2024, 17, x FOR PEER REVIEW 25 of 38
of USD 0.157. The automotive radiator cooling method showed the lowest average
Energies 2024, 17, x FOR PEER REVIEW cost
25 of 38
saving, as shown in the following figure with an average compared to a standard PV panel
of USD 0.117.

Figure 14.
Figure 14. Cost savings
Cost savings versus months
savings versus
versus for water
months for
for water cooling
cooling methods.
methods.
Figure 14. Cost months water cooling methods.

5.2. Air Cooling

5.2. Air Cooling
In air cooling methods, the exhaust air cooling method was found to produce the
In air cooling methods, the exhaust air cooling method was found to produce the
maximum
maximum energy
energy output,
output,withwithan
anaverage
averageofof32.201
32.201kWh.
kWh.Figure 1515
Figure shows
shows thethe
variation in
variation
maximum energy output, with an average of 32.201 kWh. Figure 15 shows the variation
energy
in energyproduced forfor
produced air air
cooling methods
cooling with
methods respect
with to the
respect months
to the of the
months year.
of the year.
in energy produced for air cooling methods with respect to the months of the year.

Figure
Figure 15. Energy produced
15. Energy produced versus
versus months
months for
for air
air cooling
cooling methods.
methods.
Figure 15. Energy produced versus months for air cooling methods.
As shown in Figure 16, the exhaust air cooling method showed the highest cost savings,
As shown in Figure 16, the exhaust air cooling method showed the highest cost savings,
with As
an shown inof
average Figure
USD 16, the exhaust air cooling method showed the highest cost savings,
0.265.
with an average of USD 0.265.
with an average of USD 0.265.
Energies 2024, 17, x FOR PEER REVIEW 26 of 38

Energies 2024, 17, x FOR PEER REVIEW 26 of 38

Energies 2024, 17, 713 21 of 32

Figure 16. Cost savings versus months for air cooling methods.
Figure 16. Cost savings versus months for air cooling methods.
Figure 16. Cost savings versus months for air cooling methods.
5.3. PCM Cooling
5.3. PCM Cooling
Figure
5.3. PCM 17shows
showsthat
FigureCooling
17 that cooling
cooling by by
PCMPCM increased
increased the total
the total energy
energy produced
produced compared
compared
to the standard
to theFigure PV
17 shows
standard panel.
thatAn
PV panel. An average
cooling of
byofPCM
average 31.733
31.733 kWh
increased
kWh wasthe was recorded
total energy
recorded for cooling
produced
for cooling by PCM
compared
by PCM
compared
compared
to toan
to
the standardanaverage
averageof of
PV panel. 3737
kWh
An kWh recorded
recorded
average offor forstandard
the
31.733 the
kWh standard PV panel.
PV panel.
was recorded for cooling by PCM
compared to an average of 37 kWh recorded for the standard PV panel.

Figure 17. Energy produced versus months for PCM cooling method.
Figure 17. Energy produced versus months for PCM cooling method.
Cooling
Figure by PCM
17. Energy increased
produced costmonths
versus savingsfor
compared to the method.
PCM cooling standard PV panel. Figure 18
Cooling
shows that theby PCM increased
maximum amount ofcost savings
money savedcompared to thewas
by PCM cooling standard PV panel. Figure
USD 0.223.
18 shows that by
Cooling thePCM
maximum amount
increased cost of moneycompared
savings saved by to
PCMthe cooling was
standard PVUSD 0.223.
panel. Figure
18 shows that the maximum amount of money saved by PCM cooling was USD 0.223.
Energies 2024, 17, x FOR PEER REVIEW 27 of 38
Energies 2024, 17, x FOR PEER REVIEW 27 of 38
Energies 2024, 17, 713 22 of 32

Figure 18. Cost savings versus months for PCM cooling method.
Figure 18. Cost savings versus months for PCM cooling method.
Figure 18. Cost savings versus months for PCM cooling method.
5.4.
5.4. Other CoolingMethods
Other Cooling Methods
5.4. Other
As Cooling
As shown
shown Methods
ininFigure
Figure19,19,
thethe thermoelectric
thermoelectric cooling
cooling method
method was found
was found to produce
to produce the the
maximum
maximum energy,
energy,
As shown with an
with an
in Figure 19,average
average of of 34.512 kWh.
34.512 kWh.
the thermoelectric cooling method was found to produce the
maximum energy, with an average of 34.512 kWh.

19. Energy
Figure 19.
Figure Energyproduced
producedversus months
versus for other
months cooling
for other methods.
cooling methods.
Figure 19.maximum
The Energy produced versus
cost saving wasmonths
recordedforby
other
the cooling methods.
thermoelectric cooling method, with
The maximum cost saving was recorded by the thermoelectric
an average of USD 0.473 recorded in July, as shown in Figure 20.
cooling method, with
an average of USD 0.473
The maximum recorded
cost saving inrecorded
was July, as shown
by the in Figure 20. cooling method, with
thermoelectric
an average of USD 0.473 recorded in July, as shown in Figure 20.
Energies 2024, 17, x FOR PEER REVIEW 28 of 38
Energies 2024, 17, 713 23 of 32

Figure20.
Figure Costsavings
20.Cost savingsversus
versusmonths
monthsfor
forother
othercooling
coolingmethods.
methods.

In the realm of photovoltaic panel cooling methods, the economic evaluation high-
In the realm of photovoltaic panel cooling methods, the economic evaluation high-
lighted the significant benefits of these technologies, both in terms of increased energy
lighted the significant benefits of these technologies, both in terms of increased energy
production and cost savings compared to standard PV systems. Water-based cooling meth-
production and cost savings compared to standard PV systems. Water-based cooling
ods, exemplified by flowing water on the PV panel, have exhibited the highest energy
methods, exemplified by flowing water on the PV panel, have exhibited the highest energy
production, yielding an average of 32.29 kWh. This translated into significant financial
production, yielding an average of 32.29 kWh. This translated into significant financial
gains, with cost savings averaging USD 0.273. Liquid immersion and heat pipe cooling
gains, with cost savings averaging USD 0.273. Liquid immersion and heat pipe cooling
systems also demonstrated promising results, while automotive radiator-based cooling
systems also demonstrated promising results, while automotive radiator-based cooling
methods exhibited slightly lower energy gains and cost savings. In the air cooling category,
methods exhibited
exhaust air coolingslightly
proved lower energy
to be the mostgains and generating
effective, cost savings.anIn the airof
average cooling
32.201 cate-
kWh
gory, exhaust air cooling proved to be the most effective, generating
and yielding the highest cost savings of USD 0.265. Additionally, phase-change an average of 32.201
mate-
kWh and yielding
rial cooling the highest
strategies cost savings
contributed of USDenergy
to increased 0.265. Additionally, phase-change
production, with an average ma-
of
terial cooling strategies contributed to increased energy production, with
31.73 kWh, resulting in notable cost savings of up to USD 0.223. Among various cooling an average of
31.73 kWh,thermoelectric
methods, resulting in notable
coolingcost savingsasofthe
emerged upleader
to USD in 0.223.
energyAmong various
production, cooling
delivering
methods, thermoelectric cooling emerged as the leader in energy production,
an average of 34.512 kWh and recording the highest cost savings—particularly in July, delivering
an average
with of 34.512
an average kWh
of USD andThese
0.473. recording theconfirm
results highestthe
cost savings—particularly
economic in July,
feasibility and financial
with an average of USD 0.473. These results confirm the economic feasibility
advantages of applying advanced cooling technologies in PV panel systems, enhancing and financial
advantages
their abilityof
to applying advanced
drive sustainable andcooling technologies
cost-effective energy insolutions.
PV panel systems, enhancing
their ability to drive sustainable and cost-effective energy solutions.
6. Environmental Study
6. Environmental
The increasedStudy
use of fossil fuels has increased CO2 emissions, which pollutes the air
and The
leads to manyuse
increased serious problems,
of fossil fuels hasmainly global
increased COwarming. Photovoltaic
2 emissions, panels
which pollutes thewere
air
found
and to reduce
leads to many COserious
2 emissions to the mainly
problems, atmosphere as warming.
global a renewable energy resource.
Photovoltaic panels were
foundThe governing
to reduce CO2 equations
emissions used
to thein the environmental
atmosphere study are
as a renewable as follows.
energy resource.
Thegoverning
The CO2 reduction valueused
equations is quantified as:
in the environmental study are as follows.
The CO2 reduction value is quantified as:
CO2 reduced = E × P (12)
CO2 reduced = E × P (12)
where
whereCO
2 reduced : The amount of CO2 reduced in kg.
COE: Energy : The amount
2 reduced produced by aofPVCO 2 reduced
panel in kWh.in kg.
EP: :The
Energy amount of CO2by
produced produced
a PV panel perin1 kWh
kg
kWh.of electricity kWh .
P : The amount of CO2 produced per 1 kWh of electricity .
Energies 2024, 17, x FOR PEER REVIEW 29 of 38
Energies 2024, 17, x FOR PEER REVIEW 29 of 38
Energies 2024, 17, 713 24 of 32

6.1. Water Cooling

6.1.
6.1. Water
WaterCooling
Cooling
Water cooling methods had a major impact on cooling techniques in reducing CO2
Water
Wateras cooling
cooling methods
methods had
had aa resource.
major
major impact
impact on
on cooling
cooling techniques
techniques in reducing CO
in reducing 2
emissions a renewable energy A system of nozzles flowing water onCO the2
emissions
emissions as a renewable energy resource. A system of nozzles flowing water on the
surface of asthea renewable energy
PV panel was resource.
found A system
to result of nozzles flowing
in the maximum water onofthe
CO2 reduction surface
26.509 kg
surface
of the of the
PV panelPVwaspanel was found
found to to in
result result
the in the maximum
maximum CO 2
CO2 reduction
reduction of of 26.509
26.509 kg kg
with
with respect to the other water cooling methods, as shown in Figure 21.
with respect
respect to thetoother
the other
waterwater cooling
cooling methods,
methods, as shown
as shown in Figure
in Figure 21. 21.

Figure 21.
Figure 21. CO emission
CO222emission reduction
emissionreduction versus
reductionversus month
versusmonth for
monthfor water
forwater cooling
watercooling methods.
coolingmethods.
methods.
Figure 21. CO
6.2. Air Cooling
6.2. Air Cooling
6.2. Air Cooling
The
The air
aircooling
coolingtechnique
techniqueCOCO2 emission reduction
2 emission varies
reduction between
varies the methods.
between How-
the methods.
The air cooling technique CO2 emission reduction varies between the methods.
ever, as shown
However, in Figure
as shown 22, 22,
in Figure thetheexhaust airair
exhaust system
systemhad
hadthe
themaximum
maximumCO CO22 emission
emission
However,
reduction, as shown in Figure 22, the exhaust air systemother
had the maximum CO2 emission
reduction, with
with an
an average
average of
of 26.437
26.437 kg,
kg, compared
compared the
the other methods.
methods.
reduction, with an average of 26.437 kg, compared the other methods.

Figure
Figure 22. CO22 emission
22. CO emission reduction
reduction versus
versus months
months for
for air
air cooling
cooling methods.
methods.
Figure 22. CO2 emission reduction versus months for air cooling methods.
Energies 2024,
Energies 2024, 17,
17, 713
x FOR PEER REVIEW 30 of 38
25 of 32

Energies 2024, 17, x FOR PEER REVIEW 30 of 38

6.3. PCM Cooling

PCMcooling
The Cooling
6.3. PCM PCM coolingmethod
method was
was found
found to reduce
to reduce CO2CO 2 emissions
emissions by anby an average
average of
of 26.053
26.053
kg, kg, as shown
as shown in Figure
in Figure 23. 23.
The PCM cooling method was found to reduce CO2 emissions by an average of 26.053
kg, as shown in Figure 23.

Figure CO
23.CO
Figure 23. 2 emission
2 emission
reduction
reduction versus
versus months
months for cooling
for PCM PCM cooling
method.method.
Figure 23. CO
6.4. Other 2 emission reduction versus months for PCM cooling method.
Cooling Methods
6.4. Other Cooling Methods
Otheruncategorized
uncategorized cooling techniques had a good impact on the reduction in CO2
6.4. Other
Other Cooling Methods
cooling techniques had a good impact on the reduction in CO2
emissions.
emissions. The thermoelectric cooling
The thermoelectric cooling system
system had
had aamaximum
maximumreduction
reductioninin
COCO2 emissions,
2
with Other uncategorized
an average cooling techniques had a good impact on the reduction in CO2
emissions, with anofaverage
28.334ofkg, as shown
28.334 in Figure
kg, as shown 24. 24.
in Figure
emissions. The thermoelectric cooling system had a maximum reduction in CO2
emissions, with an average of 28.334 kg, as shown in Figure 24.

Figure 24.
Figure 24.CO
CO2 emission reduction
2 emission versus
reduction months
versus for other
months for cooling methods.
other cooling methods.

In short, the escalating use of fossil fuels has led to an alarming rise in carbon dioxide
emissions, which has greatly contributed to worsening environmental issues such as global
Figure 24. CO
warming. 2 emission reduction
Photovoltaic versus
panels have monthsasfor
emerged other cooling
a renewable methods.
energy resource with the poten-
Energies 2024, 17, 713 26 of 32

tial to mitigate these emissions. This study investigated different cooling technologies and
their effectiveness in reducing carbon dioxide emissions. Of these, water cooling methods,
particularly the nozzle-based system, showed the greatest impact, reducing emissions by
26.509 kg. Air cooling technologies, especially the exhaust air system, also played a decisive
role, achieving an average reduction of 26.437 kg. PCM cooling methods contributed to
an average weight reduction of 26.053 kg. Even other unclassified cooling technologies,
such as the thermoelectric cooling system, succeeded in reducing CO2 emissions, with an
average reduction of 28.334 kg. These results underscore the pivotal role of photovoltaic
panels not only in generating renewable energy but also in combating carbon dioxide
emissions. As the world grapples with the necessity of tackling climate change, innovative
cooling strategies offer promising ways to reduce carbon dioxide emissions, thus promoting
a more sustainable and environmentally conscious future.

7. Payback Period
The payback period of each system was studied as investments in order to reveal how
much each system approximately costs and how much time it would need to pay the initial
investment.
The payback period is quantified by the following equation.

Income
Payback period = (13)
Cost
where
Income: Profit produced by the system.
Cost: Initial cost of the system.
Figure 25 shows the payback period for the systems consisting of one PV panel each.
As shown in the following figure, the automotive radiator system needs approximately
7.576 years in order to pay the initial investment while the standard PV needs32approximately
Energies 2024, 17, x FOR PEER REVIEW of 38
1.9 years.

Figure 25.
Figure 25.Payback
Paybackperiod of each
period system.
of each system.

As
Asshown
shownininFigure 25,25,
Figure thethe
return on invest
return period
on invest differsdiffers
period drastically based onbased
drastically the on the
initial investment paid for each system. The standard PV needs approximately 1.9 years
initial investment paid for each system. The standard PV needs approximately 1.9 years to
to return the initial investment, while the automotive radiator and nanofluid cooling sys-
tems need approximately 7.576 years to return the initial investment paid from their en-
hanced electric output.
It is true that the payback period has increased when constructing a cooling tech-
nique for the PV panel; however, the benefits of the cooling technique on the PV are far
more beneficial. The PV panel lifespan increases whenever a cooling system is used be-
Energies 2024, 17, 713 27 of 32

return the initial investment, while the automotive radiator and nanofluid cooling systems
need approximately 7.576 years to return the initial investment paid from their enhanced
electric output.
It is true that the payback period has increased when constructing a cooling technique
for the PV panel; however, the benefits of the cooling technique on the PV are far more
beneficial. The PV panel lifespan increases whenever a cooling system is used because a
cooling system decreases its temperature with time. The increase in green energy produced
by the PV panel with a cooling system could benefit the environment and be a smart
investment on bigger systems, where in the case of cooling, the system needs fewer PV
panels to operate and produce higher power outputs, while contributing with a decrease in
CO2 emissions.

8. Conclusions and Recommendations

This review paper addresses the importance of effective cooling strategies to enhance
the efficiency of photovoltaic panels. It highlights the negative impact of high tempera-
tures on the performance of photovoltaic panels and emphasizes the necessity of efficient
cooling technologies. This review thoroughly explores and discusses a variety of cooling
methods, including traditional methods such as water and air cooling, along with innova-
tive solutions such as incorporating phase-change materials, thermoelectric cooling, heat
pipes, evaporative cooling, and nanofluids. Furthermore, this review takes into account
environmental and economic factors to comprehensively assess the impact of cooling on
the performance of photovoltaic panels.
Additionally, the findings of this review emphasize that all evaluated cooling methods
have the potential to improve the electrical efficiency of PV panels. However, specific
techniques stand out for their superior performance. Notably, among these approaches,
the automatic water spraying system, exhaust ventilated air, phase-change materials, and
thermoelectric cooling methods exhibited the highest energy production levels. In terms
of cost-effectiveness, thermoelectric cooling outperformed evaporative cooling, water-
nanofluid cooling, and the automatic spraying system. Furthermore, thermoelectric cooling,
evaporative cooling, exhaust-ventilated air, and automatic water spraying demonstrated
the greatest reductions in CO2 emissions.
Moreover, the evaporative cooling technique, along with thermoelectric and PCM
cooling methods, showed the shortest payback period. Consequently, evaporative and
thermoelectric cooling emerge as particularly promising choices, offering substantial energy
improvements, positive environmental effects, and favorable returns on investment. These
results emphasize the importance of integrating cooling strategies to improve the efficiency
of photovoltaic panels and to maximize the generation of eco-friendly electricity. Given
the essential role of renewable energy in addressing climate change and the transition to
sustainable energy systems, the integration of efficient cooling technologies can contribute
significantly to the advancement of the renewable energy sector.
The development of a highly conductive phase-change material would increase the
effect of PCM cooling, enhancing the efficiency and performance of the PV panel. Studies
should be targeted on testing different combinations of PCM with other materials, and on
the PCM itself to reach a formula where the thermal conductivity is as high as possible and
the melting point of the PCM is as close as possible to the standard test conditions of the PV
panel. Also, as a future recommendation, the period of analysis at the level of the cooling
techniques and methods could be for longer periods, meaning that each cooling method
should be studied over different periods of time and for longer hours. Moreover, not many
review studies combine all of the cooling methods in one paper. This study mentions nearly
all of the cooling methods and a parametric investigation was conducted at the level of
environmental and economic analysis, a state-of-the art analysis.

Funding: This research received no external funding.

Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest.
Energies 2024, 17, 713 28 of 32

References
1. Khaled, M.; Harambat, F.; Hage, H.E.; Peerhossaini, H. Spatial Optimization of an Underhood Cooling Module—Towards an
Innovative Control Approach. Appl. Energy 2011, 88, 3841–3849. [CrossRef]
2. Khaled, M.; Harambat, F.; Peerhossaini, H. Towards the Control of Car Underhood Thermal Conditions. Appl. Therm. Eng. 2011,
31, 902–910. [CrossRef]
3. Khaled, M.; Harambat, F.; Peerhossaini, H. Temperature and Heat Flux Behavior of Complex Flows in Car Underhood Compart-
ment. Heat Transf. Eng. 2010, 31, 1057–1067. [CrossRef]
4. Taher, R.; Ahmed, M.M.; Haddad, Z.; Abid, C. Poiseuille-Rayleigh-Bénard Mixed Convection Flow in a Channel: Heat Transfer
and Fluid Flow Patterns. Int. J. Heat Mass Transf. 2021, 180, 121745. [CrossRef]
5. Razi, F.; Dincer, I. Renewable Energy Development and Hydrogen Economy in MENA Region: A Review. Renew. Sustain. Energy
Rev. 2022, 168, 112763. [CrossRef]
6. Haddad, A.; Ramadan, M.; Khaled, M.; Ramadan, H.S.M.; Becherif, M. Triple Hybrid System Coupling Fuel Cell with Wind
Turbine and Thermal Solar System. Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 2020, 45, 11484–11491. [CrossRef]
7. Khaled, M.; Ramadan, M.; Hage, H.E. Parametric Analysis of Heat Recovery from Exhaust Gases of Generators. Energy Procedia
2015, 75, 3295–3300. [CrossRef]
8. Du, W.; Yin, Q.; Cheng, L. Experiments on Novel Heat Recovery Systems on Rotary Kilns. Appl. Therm. Eng. 2018, 139, 535–541.
[CrossRef]
9. Hage, H.E.; Ramadan, M.; Jaber, H.; Khaled, M.; Olabi, A.G. A Short Review on the Techniques of Waste Heat Recovery from
Domestic Applications. Energy Sources Part A Recovery Util. Environ. Eff. 2019, 42, 3019–3034. [CrossRef]
10. Akbari, A.; Kouravand, S.; Chegini, G. Experimental Analysis of a Rotary Heat Exchanger for Waste Heat Recovery from the
Exhaust Gas of Dryer. Appl. Therm. Eng. 2018, 138, 668–674. [CrossRef]
11. Gomaa, M.R.; Ahmed, M.; Rezk, H. Temperature Distribution Modeling of PV and Cooling Water PV/T Collectors through Thin
and Thick Cooling Cross-Fined Channel Box. Energy Rep. 2022, 8, 1144–1153. [CrossRef]
12. Jiao, C.; Li, Z. An updated review of solar cooling systems driven by Photovoltaic–Thermal collectors. Energies 2023, 16, 5331.
[CrossRef]
13. Ibrahim, K.A.; Luk, P.; Luo, Z. Cooling of Concentrated Photovoltaic Cells—A review and the perspective of Pulsating flow
Cooling. Energies 2023, 16, 2842. [CrossRef]
14. Herrando, M.; Wang, K.; Huang, G.; Otanicar, T.; Mousa, O.B.; Agathokleous, R.A.; Ding, Y.; Kalogirou, S.A.; Ekins-Daukes, N.J.;
Taylor, R.A.; et al. A review of solar hybrid photovoltaic-thermal (PV-T) collectors and systems. Prog. Energy Combust. Sci. 2023,
97, 101072. [CrossRef]
15. Ghosh, A. A Comprehensive Review of Water Based PV: Flotavoltaics, under Water, Offshore & Canal Top. Ocean Eng. 2023,
281, 115044. [CrossRef]
16. Aslam, A.; Ahmed, N.; Qureshi, S.A.; Assadi, M.; Ahmed, N. Advances in Solar PV Systems; A Comprehensive Review of PV
Performance, Influencing Factors, and Mitigation Techniques. Energies 2022, 15, 7595. [CrossRef]
17. Herrando, M.; Ramos, A.C. Photovoltaic-Thermal (PV-T) systems for combined cooling, heating and power in buildings: A
review. Energies 2022, 15, 3021. [CrossRef]
18. Hajjaj, S.S.H.; Aqeel, A.A.K.A.; Sultan, M.T.H.; Shahar, F.S.; Shah, A.U.M. Review of recent efforts in cooling photovoltaic panels
(PVs) for enhanced performance and better impact on the environment. Nanomaterials 2022, 12, 1664. [CrossRef]
19. Hammoumi, A.E.; Chtita, S.; Motahhir, S.; Ghzizal, A.E. Solar PV energy: From material to use, and the most commonly used
techniques to maximize the power output of PV systems: A focus on solar trackers and floating solar panels. Energy Rep. 2022,
8, 11992–12010. [CrossRef]
20. Sheik, M.S.; Kakati, P.; Dandotiya, D.; Udaya Ravi, M.; Ramesh, C.S. A Comprehensive Review on Various Cooling Techniques to
Decrease an Operating Temperature of Solar Photovoltaic Panels. Energy Nexus 2022, 8, 100161. [CrossRef]
21. Cui, Y.; Zhu, J.; Zhang, F.; Shao, Y.; Xue, Y. Current status and future development of hybrid PV/T system with PCM module: 4E
(energy, exergy, economic and environmental) assessments. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2022, 158, 112147. [CrossRef]
22. Mahdavi, A.; Farhadi, M.; Gorji-Bandpy, M.; Mahmoudi, A.H. A review of passive cooling of photovoltaic devices. Clean. Eng.
Technol. 2022, 11, 100579. [CrossRef]
23. Kandeal, A.; Algazzar, A.M.; Elkadeem, M.R.; Thakur, A.K.; Abdelaziz, G.B.; El-Said, E.M.; Elsaid, A.M.; An, M.; Kandel, R.; Fawzy,
H.E.; et al. Nano-enhanced cooling techniques for photovoltaic panels: A systematic review and prospect recommendations. Sol.
Energy 2021, 227, 259–272. [CrossRef]
24. Awasthi, A.; Shukla, A.K.; Manohar, S.R.M.; Dondariya, C.; Shukla, K.K.; Porwal, D.; Richhariya, G. Review on sun tracking
technology in solar PV system. Energy Rep. 2020, 6, 392–405. [CrossRef]
25. Jathar, L.D.; Ganesan, S.; Awasarmol, U.; Nikam, K.C.; Shahapurkar, K.; Soudagar, M.E.M.; Fayaz, H.; El-Shafay, A.; Kalam, M.A.;
Boudila, S.; et al. Comprehensive review of environmental factors influencing the performance of photovoltaic panels: Concern
over emissions at various phases throughout the lifecycle. Environ. Pollut. 2023, 326, 121474. [CrossRef]
26. Şahin, G. Effect of Wavelength on the Electrical Parameters of a Vertical Parallel Junction Silicon Solar Cell Illuminated by Its Rear
Side in Frequency Domain. Results Phys. 2016, 6, 107–111. [CrossRef]
27. Maka, A.O.; O’Donovan, T.S. Effect of thermal load on performance parameters of solar concentrating photovoltaic: High-
efficiency solar cells. Energy Built Environ. 2022, 3, 201–209. [CrossRef]
Energies 2024, 17, 713 29 of 32

28. Paudyal, B.R.; Imenes, A.G. Investigation of temperature coefficients of PV modules through field measured data. Sol. Energy
2021, 224, 425–439. [CrossRef]
29. Chander, S.; Purohit, A.; Sharma, A.; Arvind, A.; Nehra, S.; Dhaka, M.S. A study on photovoltaic parameters of mono-crystalline
silicon solar cell with cell temperature. Energy Rep. 2015, 1, 104–109. [CrossRef]
30. Hussien, A.A.; Eltayesh, A.; El-Batsh, H.M. Experimental and numerical investigation for PV cooling by forced convection. Alex.
Eng. J. 2022, 64, 427–440. [CrossRef]
31. Ahmad, E.Z.; Fazlizan, A.; Jarimi, H.; Sopian, K.; Ibrahim, A. Enhanced heat dissipation of truncated multi-level fin heat sink
(MLFHS) in case of natural convection for photovoltaic cooling. Case Stud. Therm. Eng. 2021, 28, 101578. [CrossRef]
32. Abdallah, A.; Opoku, R.; Sekyere, C.; Boahen, S.; Amoabeng, K.O.; Uba, F.; Obeng, G.Y.; Forson, F. Experimental investigation
of thermal management techniques for improving the efficiencies and levelized cost of energy of solar PV modules. Case Stud.
Therm. Eng. 2022, 35, 102133. [CrossRef]
33. Pomares-Hernández, C.; Zuluaga-García, E.A.; Escorcia Salas, G.E.; Robles-Algarín, C.; Sierra Ortega, J. Computational Modeling
of Passive and Active Cooling Methods to Improve PV Panels Efficiency. Appl. Sci. 2021, 11, 11370. [CrossRef]
34. Wang, Y.; Zhao, T.; Cao, Z.; Zhai, C.; Zhou, Y.; Lv, W.; Xu, T.; Wu, S. Numerical study on the forced convection enhancement of
flat-roof integrated photovoltaic by passive components. Energy Build. 2023, 289, 113063. [CrossRef]
35. Kasaeian, A.; Khanjari, Y.; Golzari, S.; Mahian, O.; Wongwises, S. Effects of forced convection on the performance of a photovoltaic
thermal system: An experimental study. Exp. Therm. Fluid Sci. 2017, 85, 13–21. [CrossRef]
36. Atkin, P.; Farid, M. Improving the efficiency of photovoltaic cells using PCM infused graphite and aluminium fins. Sol. Energy
2015, 114, 217–228. [CrossRef]
37. Chandrasekar, M.; Senthilkumar, T. Experimental demonstration of enhanced solar energy utilization in flat PV (photovoltaic)
modules cooled by heat spreaders in conjunction with cotton wick structures. Energy 2015, 90, 1401–1410. [CrossRef]
38. Benzarti, S.; Chaabane, M.; Mhiri, H.; Bournot, P. Performance improvement of a naturally ventilated building integrated
photovoltaic system using twisted baffle inserts. J. Build. Eng. 2022, 53, 104553. [CrossRef]
39. Grubišić-Čabo, F.; Nižetić, S.; Čoko, D.; Kragić, I.; Papadopoulos, A.M. Experimental investigation of the passive cooled
free-standing photovoltaic panel with fixed aluminum fins on the backside surface. J. Clean. Prod. 2018, 176, 119–129. [CrossRef]
40. Mojumder, J.C.; Chong, W.T.; Show, P.L.; Leong, K.W.; Abdullah-Al-Mamoon. An experimental investigation on performance
analysis of air type photovoltaic thermal collector system integrated with cooling fins design. Energy Build. 2016, 130, 272–285.
[CrossRef]
41. Abdelsalam, E.; Alnawafah, H.; Almomani, F.; Mousa, A.; Jamjoum, M.; Alkasrawi, M. Efficiency Improvement of Photovoltaic
Panels: A Novel Integration Approach with Cooling Tower. Energies 2023, 16, 1070. [CrossRef]
42. Soliman, A.M. A Numerical Investigation of PVT System Performance with Various Cooling Configurations. Energies 2023,
16, 3052. [CrossRef]
43. Al-Amri, F.; Saeed, F.; Mujeebu, M.A. Novel dual-function racking structure for passive cooling of solar PV panels–thermal
performance analysis. Renew. Energy 2022, 198, 100–113. [CrossRef]
44. Bayrak, F.; Oztop, H.F.; Selimefendigil, F. Effects of different fin parameters on temperature and efficiency for cooling of
photovoltaic panels under natural convection. Sol. Energy 2019, 188, 484–494. [CrossRef]
45. Hu, W.; Li, X.; Wang, J.; Tian, Z.; Zhou, B.; Wu, J.; Li, R.; Li, W.; Ma, N.; Kang, J.; et al. Experimental research on the convective
heat transfer coefficient of photovoltaic panel. Renew. Energy 2021, 185, 820–826. [CrossRef]
46. Kumar, P.S.; NaveenKumar, R.; Sharifpur, M.; Issakhov, A.; Ravichandran, M.; Maridurai, T.; Al-Sulaiman, F.A.; Banapurmath,
N.R. Experimental investigations to improve the electrical efficiency of photovoltaic modules using different convection mode.
Sustain. Energy Technol. Assess. 2021, 48, 101582. [CrossRef]
47. Mankani, K.L.; Chaudhry, H.N.; Calautit, J.K. Optimization of an air-cooled heat sink for cooling of a solar photovoltaic panel: A
computational study. Energy Build. 2022, 270, 112274. [CrossRef]
48. Kiwan, S.; Khlefat, A.M. Thermal cooling of photovoltaic panels using porous material. Case Stud. Therm. Eng. 2021, 24, 100837.
[CrossRef]
49. Li, D.; King, M.; Dooner, M.S.; Guo, S.; Wang, J. Study on the cleaning and cooling of solar photovoltaic panels using compressed
airflow. Sol. Energy 2021, 221, 433–444. [CrossRef]
50. Tina, G.M.; Rosa-Clot, M.; Rosa-Clot, P.; Scandura, P.F. Optical and thermal behavior of submerged photovoltaic solar panel: SP2.
Energy 2012, 39, 17–26. [CrossRef]
51. Irwan, Y.; Leow, W.; Irwanto, M.; Fareq, M.; Amelia, A.; Gomesh, N.; Safwati, I. Indoor Test Performance of PV Panel through
Water Cooling Method. Energy Procedia 2015, 79, 604–611. [CrossRef]
52. Moradgholi, M.; Nowee, S.M.; Abrishamchi, I. Application of heat pipe in an experimental investigation on a novel photo-
voltaic/thermal (PV/T) system. Sol. Energy 2014, 107, 82–88. [CrossRef]
53. Koundinya, S.; Vigneshkumar, N.; Krishnan, A.S. Experimental Study and Comparison with the Computational Study on Cooling
of PV Solar Panel Using Finned Heat Pipe Technology. Mater. Today Proc. 2017, 4, 2693–2700. [CrossRef]
54. Ho, C.; Chou, W.Y.; Lai, C.M. Thermal and electrical performance of a water-surface floating PV integrated with a water-saturated
MEPCM layer. Energy Convers. Manag. 2015, 89, 862–872. [CrossRef]
55. Liu, L.; Zhu, L.; Wang, Y.; Huang, Q.; Sun, Y.; Yin, Z. Heat dissipation performance of silicon solar cells by direct dielectric liquid
immersion under intensified illuminations. Sol. Energy 2011, 85, 922–930. [CrossRef]
Energies 2024, 17, 713 30 of 32

56. Nižetić, S.; Čoko, D.; Yadav, A.; Grubišić-Čabo, F. Water spray cooling technique applied on a photovoltaic panel: The performance
response. Energy Convers. Manag. 2016, 108, 287–296. [CrossRef]
57. Joy, B.; Philip, J.; Zachariah, R. Investigations on serpentine tube type solar photovoltaic/thermal collector with different heat
transfer fluids: Experiment and numerical analysis. Sol. Energy 2016, 140, 12–20. [CrossRef]
58. Moharram, K.A.; Kandil, H.A.; El-Sherif, H. Enhancing the performance of photovoltaic panels by water cooling. Ain Shams Eng. J.
2013, 4, 869–877. [CrossRef]
59. Yazdanifard, F.; Ebrahimnia-Bajestan, E.; Ameri, M. Investigating the performance of a water-based photovoltaic/thermal (PV/T)
collector in laminar and turbulent flow regime. Renew. Energy 2016, 99, 295–306. [CrossRef]
60. Krauter, S. Increased electrical yield via water flow over the front of photovoltaic panels. Sol. Energy Mater. Sol. Cells 2004,
82, 131–137. [CrossRef]
61. Sabry, M. Temperature optimization of high concentrated active cooled solar cells. NRIAG J. Astron. Geophys. 2016, 5, 23–29.
[CrossRef]
62. Elnozahy, A.; Rahman, A.K.A.; Ali, A.H.H.; Abdel-Salam, M.; Ookawara, S. Performance of a PV module integrated with
standalone building in hot arid areas as enhanced by surface cooling and cleaning. Energy Build. 2015, 88, 100–109. [CrossRef]
63. Kordzadeh, A. The effects of nominal power of array and system head on the operation of photovoltaic water pumping set with
array surface covered by a film of water. Renew. Energy 2010, 35, 1098–1102. [CrossRef]
64. Arcuri, N.; Reda, F.; De Simone, M. Energy and thermo-fluid-dynamics evaluations of photovoltaic panels cooled by water and
air. Sol. Energy 2014, 105, 147–156. [CrossRef]
65. Jakhar, S.; Soni, M.; Gakkhar, N. Performance Analysis of Earth Water Heat Exchanger for Concentrating Photovoltaic Cooling.
Energy Procedia 2016, 90, 145–153. [CrossRef]
66. Mittelman, G.; Kribus, A.; Mouchtar, O.; Dayan, A. Water desalination with concentrating photovoltaic/thermal (CPVT) systems.
Sol. Energy 2009, 83, 1322–1334. [CrossRef]
67. Chong, K.; Tan, W. Study of automotive radiator cooling system for dense-array concentration photovoltaic system. Sol. Energy
2012, 86, 2632–2643. [CrossRef]
68. Ibrahim, A.M.; Dincer, I. Experimental performance evaluation of a combined solar system to produce cooling and potable water.
Sol. Energy 2015, 122, 1066–1079. [CrossRef]
69. Korkut, T.B.; Gören, A.; Rachid, A. Numerical and Experimental Study of a PVT Water System under Daily Weather Conditions.
Energies 2022, 15, 6538. [CrossRef]
70. Sattar, M.; Rehman, A.; Ahmad, N.; Mohammad, A.; Alahmadi, A.; Ullah, N. Performance Analysis and Optimization of a
Cooling System for Hybrid Solar Panels Based on Climatic Conditions of Islamabad, Pakistan. Energies 2022, 15, 6278. [CrossRef]
71. Sornek, K.; Goryl, W.; Figaj, R.D.; Dabrowska,
˛ G.B.; Brezdeń, J. Development and Tests of the Water Cooling System Dedicated to
Photovoltaic Panels. Energies 2022, 15, 5884. [CrossRef]
72. Majumder, A.; Innamorati, R.; Ghiani, E.; Kumar, A.; Gatto, G. Performance Analysis of a Floating Photovoltaic System and
Estimation of the Evaporation Losses Reduction. Energies 2021, 14, 8336. [CrossRef]
73. Yildirim, M.; Cebula, A.; Sułowicz, M. A cooling design for photovoltaic panels—Water-based PV/T system. Energy 2022,
256, 124654. [CrossRef]
74. Chanphavong, L.; Chanthaboune, V.; Phommachanh, S.; Vilaida, X.; Bounyanite, P. Enhancement of performance and exergy
analysis of a water-cooling solar photovoltaic panel. Total Environ. Res. Themes 2022, 3–4, 100018. [CrossRef]
75. Panda, S.; Panda, B.; Jena, C.; Nanda, L.; Pradhan, A. Investigating the similarities and differences between front and back surface
cooling for PV panels. Mater. Today Proc. 2022, 74, 358–363. [CrossRef]
76. Zubeer, S.A.; Ali, O. Experimental and numerical study of low concentration and water-cooling effect on PV module performance.
Case Stud. Therm. Eng. 2022, 34, 102007. [CrossRef]
77. Lopez-Pascual, D.; Valiente-Blanco, I.; Manzano-Narro, O.; Fernandez-Munoz, M.; Diez-Jimenez, E. Experimental characterization
of a geothermal cooling system for enhancement of the efficiency of solar photovoltaic panels. Energy Rep. 2022, 8, 756–763.
[CrossRef]
78. Li, S.; Zhou, Z.; Liu, J.; Zhang, J.; Tang, H.; Zhuofen, Z.; Na, Y.; Jiang, C. Research on indirect cooling for photovoltaic panels
based on radiative cooling. Renew. Energy 2022, 198, 947–959. [CrossRef]
79. Masalha, I.; Masuri, S.; Badran, O.; Ariffin, M.; Talib, A.A.; Alfaqs, F. Outdoor experimental and numerical simulation of
photovoltaic cooling using porous media. Case Stud. Therm. Eng. 2023, 42, 102748. [CrossRef]
80. Jafari, R. Optimization and energy analysis of a novel geothermal heat exchanger for photovoltaic panel cooling. Sol. Energy 2021,
226, 122–133. [CrossRef]
81. Sudhakar, P.; Santosh, R.; Asthalakshmi, B.; Kumaresan, G.; Velraj, R. Performance augmentation of solar photovoltaic panel
through PCM integrated natural water circulation cooling technique. Renew. Energy 2021, 172, 1433–1448. [CrossRef]
82. Pezzutto, S.; Quaglini, G.; Rivière, P.; Kranzl, L.; Novelli, A.; Zambito, A.; Wilczynski, E. Screening of cooling technologies in
Europe: Alternatives to vapour compression and possible market developments. Sustainability 2022, 14, 2971. [CrossRef]
83. Waqas, A.; Ji, J.; Xu, L.; Ali, M.; Zeashan; Alvi, J.Z. Thermal and Electrical Management of Photovoltaic Panels Using Phase
Change Materials—A Review. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2018, 92, 254–271. [CrossRef]
Energies 2024, 17, 713 31 of 32

84. Hachem, F.; Abdulhay, B.; Ramadan, M.; Hage, H.E.; Rab, M.G.E.; Khaled, M. Improving the performance of photovoltaic cells
using pure and combined phase change materials—Experiments and transient energy balance. Renew. Energy 2017, 107, 567–575.
[CrossRef]
85. Smith, C.; Forster, P.M.; Crook, R. Global analysis of photovoltaic energy output enhanced by phase change material cooling.
Appl. Energy 2014, 126, 21–28. [CrossRef]
86. Biwole, P.H.; Eclache, P.; Kuznik, F. Phase-change materials to improve solar panel’s performance. Energy Build. 2013, 62, 59–67.
[CrossRef]
87. Hasan, A.; McCormack, S.; Huang, M.; Sarwar, J.; Norton, B. Increased photovoltaic performance through temperature regulation
by phase change materials: Materials comparison in different climates. Sol. Energy 2015, 115, 264–276. [CrossRef]
88. Xu, Z.; Kong, Q.; Qu, H.; Wang, C. Cooling characteristics of solar photovoltaic panels based on phase change materials. Case
Stud. Therm. Eng. 2023, 41, 102667. [CrossRef]
89. Aneli, S.; Arena, R.; Gagliano, A. Numerical Simulations of a PV Module with Phase Change Material (PV-PCM) under Variable
Weather Conditions. Int. J. Heat Technol. 2021, 39, 643–652. [CrossRef]
90. Amalu, E.H.; Fabunmi, O.A. Thermal control of crystalline silicon photovoltaic (c-Si PV) module using Docosane phase change
material (PCM) for improved performance. Sol. Energy 2022, 234, 203–221. [CrossRef]
91. Zhao, J.; Li, Z.; Ma, T. Performance analysis of a photovoltaic panel integrated with phase change material. Energy Procedia 2019,
158, 1093–1098. [CrossRef]
92. Kant, K.; Shukla, A.; Sharma, A.; Biwole, P.H. Heat transfer studies of photovoltaic panel coupled with phase change material.
Sol. Energy 2016, 140, 151–161. [CrossRef]
93. Park, J.; Kim, T.; Leigh, S.B. Application of a phase-change material to improve the electrical performance of vertical-building-
added photovoltaics considering the annual weather conditions. Sol. Energy 2014, 105, 561–574. [CrossRef]
94. Stropnik, R.; Stritih, U. Increasing the efficiency of PV panel with the use of PCM. Renew. Energy 2016, 97, 671–679. [CrossRef]
95. Aelenei, L.; Pereira, R.N.C.; Gonçalves, H.; Athienitis, A.K. Thermal Performance of a Hybrid BIPV-PCM: Modeling, Design and
Experimental Investigation. Energy Procedia 2014, 48, 474–483. [CrossRef]
96. Li, Z.; Ma, T.; Zhao, J.; Song, A.; Cheng, Y. Experimental study and performance analysis on solar photovoltaic panel integrated
with phase change material. Energy 2019, 178, 471–486. [CrossRef]
97. Hasan, A.; Sarwar, J.; Alnoman, H.; Abdelbaqi, S. Yearly energy performance of a photovoltaic-phase change material (PV-PCM)
system in hot climate. Sol. Energy 2017, 146, 417–429. [CrossRef]
98. Savvakis, N.; Dialyna, E.; Tsoutsos, T. Investigation of the operational performance and efficiency of an alternative PV + PCM
concept. Sol. Energy 2020, 211, 1283–1300. [CrossRef]
99. Abdelrazik, A.; Al-Sulaiman, F.A.; Saidur, R. Numerical investigation of the effects of the nano-enhanced phase change materials
on the thermal and electrical performance of hybrid PV/thermal systems. Energy Convers. Manag. 2020, 205, 112449. [CrossRef]
100. Fayaz, H.; Rahim, N.A.; Hasanuzzaman, M.; Rivai, A.K.; Nasrin, R. Numerical and outdoor real time experimental investigation
of performance of PCM based PVT system. Sol. Energy 2019, 179, 135–150. [CrossRef]
101. Hossain, M.S.; Pandey, A.K.; Selvaraj, J.; Rahim, N.A.; Islam, M.S.; Tyagi, V. Two side serpentine flow based photovoltaic-
thermal-phase change materials (PVT-PCM) system: Energy, exergy and economic analysis. Renew. Energy 2019, 136, 1320–1336.
[CrossRef]
102. Kazemian, A.; Taheri, A.; Sardarabadi, A.; Ma, T.; Passandideh-Fard, M.; Peng, J. Energy, exergy and environmental analysis
of glazed and unglazed PVT system integrated with phase change material: An experimental approach. Sol. Energy 2020, 201,
178–189. [CrossRef]
103. Metwally, H.; Mahmoud, N.A.; Aboelsoud, W.; Ezzat, M. Comprehensive analysis of PCM container construction effects PV
panels thermal management. Adv. Environ. Waste Manag. Recycl. 2022, 5, 326–338.
104. Bria, A.; Raillani, B.; Chaatouf, D.; Salhi, M.; Amraqui, S.; Mezrhab, A. Numerical investigation of the PCM effect on the performance
of photovoltaic panels; comparison between different types of PCM. In Proceedings of the 2022 2nd International Conference on
Innovative Research in Applied Science, Engineering and Technology (IRASET), Meknes, Morocco, 3–4 March 2022. [CrossRef]
105. Hassabou, A.; Isaifan, R.J. Simulation of Phase Change Material Absorbers for Passive Cooling of Solar Systems. Energies 2022,
15, 9288. [CrossRef]
106. Cui, Y.; Zhu, J.; Zoras, S.; Hassan, K.; Tong, H. Photovoltaic/Thermal Module Integrated with Nano-Enhanced Phase Change
Material: A Numerical Analysis. Energies 2022, 15, 4988. [CrossRef]
107. Soliman, A.S.; Xu, L.; Dong, J.; Cheng, P. A novel heat sink for cooling photovoltaic systems using convex/concave dimples and
multiple PCMs. Appl. Therm. Eng. 2022, 215, 119001. [CrossRef]
108. Maghrabie, H.M.; Mohamed, A.; Fahmy, A.M.; Samee, A.a.A. Performance enhancement of PV panels using phase change
material (PCM): An experimental implementation. Case Stud. Therm. Eng. 2023, 42, 102741. [CrossRef]
109. Chaichan, M.T.; Kazem, H.A.; Al-Waeli, A.H.; Sopian, K. Controlling the melting and solidification points temperature of PCMs
on the performance and economic return of the water-cooled photovoltaic thermal system. Sol. Energy 2021, 224, 1344–1357.
[CrossRef]
110. Nižetić, S.; Jurčević, M.; Čoko, D.; Arıcı, M. A novel and effective passive cooling strategy for photovoltaic panel. Renew. Sustain.
Energy Rev. 2021, 145, 111164. [CrossRef]
Energies 2024, 17, 713 32 of 32

111. Saleh, A.H.; Hussein, A.M.; Danook, S.H. Efficiency Enhancement of Solar Cell Collector Using Fe3 O4 /Water Nanofluid. IOP
Conf. Ser. 2021, 1105, 012059. [CrossRef]
112. Ghadiri, M.; Sardarabadi, M.; Pasandideh-Fard, M.; Moghadam, A.J. Experimental Investigation of a PVT System Performance
Using Nano Ferrofluids. Energy Convers. Manag. 2015, 103, 468–476. [CrossRef]
113. Lekbir, A.; Hassani, S.; Ghani, M.R.A.; Gan, C.K.; Mekhilef, S.; Saidur, R. Improved Energy Conversion Performance of a Novel
Design of Concentrated Photovoltaic System Combined with Thermoelectric Generator with Advance Cooling System. Energy
Convers. Manag. 2018, 177, 19–29. [CrossRef]
114. Kang, Y.; Joung, J.; Kim, M.; Jeong, J. Energy impact of heat pipe-assisted microencapsulated phase change material heat sink for
photovoltaic and thermoelectric generator hybrid panel. Renew. Energy 2023, 207, 298–308. [CrossRef]
115. Kouravand, A.; Kasaeian, A.; Pourfayaz, F.; Rad, M.A.V. Evaluation of a nanofluid-based concentrating photovoltaic thermal
system integrated with finned PCM heatsink: An experimental study. Renew. Energy 2022, 201, 1010–1025. [CrossRef]
116. Bassam, A.M.; Sopian, K.; Ibrahim, A.; Fauzan, M.F.; Al-Aasam, A.B.; Abusaibaa, G.Y. Experimental analysis for the photovoltaic
thermal collector (PVT) with nano PCM and micro-fins tube nanofluid. Case Stud. Therm. Eng. 2022, 41, 102579. [CrossRef]
117. Bassam, A.M.; Sopian, K.; Ibrahim, A.; Al-Aasam, A.B.; Dayer, M. Experimental analysis of photovoltaic thermal collector (PVT)
with nano PCM and micro-fins tube counterclockwise twisted tape nanofluid. Case Stud. Therm. Eng. 2023, 45, 102883. [CrossRef]
118. Moein-Jahromi, M.; Rahmanian-Koushkaki, H.; Rahmanian, S.; Jahromi, S.P. Evaluation of nanostructured GNP and CuO
compositions in PCM-based heat sinks for photovoltaic systems. J. Energy Storage 2022, 53, 105240. [CrossRef]
119. Bayrak, F.; Oztop, H.F.; Selimefendigil, F. Experimental study for the application of different cooling techniques in photovoltaic
(PV) panels. Energy Convers. Manag. 2020, 212, 112789. [CrossRef]
120. Xu, Q.; Ji, Y.; Riggs, B.C.; Ollanik, A.; Farrar-Foley, N.; Ermer, J.; Romanin, V.; Lynn, P.; Codd, D.S.; Escarra, M.D. A transmissive,
spectrum-splitting concentrating photovoltaic module for hybrid photovoltaic-solar thermal energy conversion. Sol. Energy 2016,
137, 585–593. [CrossRef]
121. Bayssary, A.; Hajjar, C. Solar Irradiation Data for Lebanon. The Lebanese Center for Energy Conservation (LCEC). 2020. Available
online: https://lcec.org.lb/sites/default/files/2021-02/Solar%20Irradiation%20Data%20for%20Lebanon%20August%202020.pdf
(accessed on 8 November 2023).

Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual
author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to
people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.