Sustainable Energy Technologies and Assessments 45 (2021) 101100 Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Sustainable Energy Technologies and Assessments journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/seta Climate assessment of greenhouse equipped with south-oriented PV roofs: An experimental and computational fluid dynamics study Hela Ben Amara a, *, Salwa Bouadila a, Hicham Fatnassi b, d, Müslüm Arici c, Amen Allah Guizani a a Laboratory of Thermal Processes, Research and Technology Center of Energy, Borj Cedria, 2050 Hammam-Lif, Tunisia INRAE, Univ Nice Sophia Antipolis, CNRS, UMR 1355-7254 Institut Sophia Agrobiotech, 06900 Sophia Antipolis, France c Kocaeli University, Engineering Faculty, Mechanical Engineering Department, Umuttepe Campus, 4001 Kocaeli, Turkey d International Center for Biosaline Agriculture, ICBA, Dubai, P.O Box 14660, United Arab Emirates b A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T Keywords: Renewable energy Photovoltaic panels Greenhouse Solar radiation Shading Economic analysis The present study was undertaken to better understand the effect of the shading induced by south oriented photovoltaic panels on the distributed climate and plant activities in a mono-span greenhouse using CFD tool The climate behavior during summer and winter days inside a greenhouse integrated with PV panels on the roof and a reference was assessed Solar radiation distribution, wind velocity, relative humidity, and ambient tem perature from the two greenhouses were presented and energy production and plant activity parameters were evaluated The greenhouse equipped with photovoltaic panels provides more favorable climatic conditions during summer season Therefore, results of the paper can be useful for farmers in the Mediterranean area to contain the ability level of this innovative photovoltaic greenhouse crop and to perceive if it can perform a balance between yield crop and PV electricity production Results showed that PV panels can produce around 55 W/m2 for the cultivation period of January During a summer day, the solar radiation of the PV greenhouse was lower than that of the reference greenhouse and exceeded 115 W/m2, and the difference between the inside and the outside reached 220 W/m2 The annual solar energy of the photovoltaic panel was around 5054.4 kWh Accordingly, the shading plays a positive effect on plants in decreasing temperature due to the reduced thermal load of the sun inside the greenhouse In addition, the payback period of PV system was found to be less than years Introduction The food security is among the challenges that humanity have much interest According the International Renewable Energy Agency [1], food production will need to increase by 60% and water availability by 55% until 2030 To ensure the food security, greenhouse is a potential alternative to provide needed both energy and food production [2] In fact, greenhouses cultivation, even if they are required to control the microclimate of reason with cultivate the desired culture where all the growth factors of the plants can be maintained on an optimal level, also permitted a highly-quality production and technology [3,4] Greenhouses become one of the largest scale of food production in the agricultural industry [5] because of its ability to increase production while around 405 thousand of greenhouses distributed on all the zones Hence, the use of renewable energies in greenhouses in Medi terranean area was an interesting proposition for growers Solar energy [6,7], wind energy [8] or geothermal energy [9] have been proposed for providing ideal growth conditions to enhance the greenhouse energy efficiency To limit global warming problems and environmental pollution in the future, innovative renewable energy sources, specif ically solar energy based on photovoltaic (PV) technology can be used [10] The generation of photovoltaic energy is considered as an effective means, clean and valuable energy source for both indoor [11] and outdoor applications [6] Meanwhile, the exploitation of the solar photovoltaic presents a good solution to generate the electricity regarding the limitation of the traditional energy resources The dependability of photovoltaic systems in agricultural in frastructures resides in the use for waste water treatment plants, food and herb drying, producing electricity without carbon and preserving the agricultural resources [12] or its use for agricultural land by combining mobile photovoltaic panels and plants to balance energy and food crops production [13] Compared to ordinary greenhouses, photovoltaic greenhouses can provide higher fruit quality and yield, * Corresponding author E-mail address: benamarahela@hotmail.fr (H Ben Amara) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.seta.2021.101100 Received 24 November 2020; Received in revised form 30 December 2020; Accepted 25 January 2021 Available online March 2021 2213-1388/© 2021 Elsevier Ltd All rights reserved H Ben Amara et al Sustainable Energy Technologies and Assessments 45 (2021) 101100 Nomenclature R(z) Rgi Rabs r rs rsu rsl rt rs,min Tcrop Ti A ratio of the stomatal resistances of the upper and lower sides of the leaf a1 ,a2 , b1 ,b2 coefficients for the determination of stomatal resistance Cp specific heat, (J kg− 1K− 1) D saturation deficit of the leaf, (Pa) f1 , f2 functions for the determination of stomatal resistance h reference height, (m) H total height of the canopy, (m) ILAv crop stand leaf area index per volume unit crop stand leaf area index per unit area ILAs k turbulent kinetic energy, (m2s− 2) kc extinction coefficient of radiation Lν latent heat of water vaporization, (J kg− 1) z arbitrary height, (m) z0 friction length, (m) friction velocity, (ms− 1) u0 Uh reference velocity, (ms− 1) Uinl inlet velocity, (ms− 1) → U interior air speed, (ms− 1) P* saturated water vapor pressure, (Pa) Pa ambient pressure, (Pa) RG global radiation outside the greenhouse, (Wm− 2) RH relative humidity, (%) solar radiation at z, (Wm− 2) global radiation inside the greenhouse, (Wm− 2) absorbed radiation, (Wm− 2) reflectivity coefficient stomatal resistance of the leaf, (s m− 1) stomatal resistance of the upper side of the leaf, (s m− 1) stomatal resistance of the lower side of the leaf, (s m− 1) total resistance for the mass transfer, (s m− 1) minimal stomatal resistance for tomatoes, (s m− 1) tomato crop temperature, (K) internal temperature, (K) Greek symbols λ thermal conductivity, (W m− v viscosity, (m2s− 1) ρ density, (kg m− 3) α absorptivity coefficient τ transmittivity coefficient ε emissivity coefficient K− 1) Abbreviation G glass s soil gv gravel pv photovoltaic panels greater opportunity, and better environmental sustainability of green house cultivation Photovoltaic greenhouses appear not only to be a fascinating option to progress horticultural sector economy but also to generate more energy and develop agricultural activities In order to improve the management level of the greenhouse photovoltaic, it is of great importance to study the performance of the photovoltaic power system and data on both its potential and actual output In fact, mounting PV modules on the greenhouse roof is an interesting proposition for growers and it can meet the increasing de mand of energy of the agricultural industry and improved crop pro ductivity, simultaneously However, PV modules mounted on the roof could decrease plants growth due to shading especially in winter season For that reason, the relationship between orientation, position, and generated energy of the PV cells fixed on the roof greenhouses must be considered carefully For instance, the effect of the geometrical ar rangements of PV arrays can significantly affect the cultivated plants growth [14] A comparative study of PV shading effects on the internal microclimate and crop growth during the winter and summer period under greenhouse that 40% roof area covering by PV has been reported by [15] Moreover, distribution and variation of the shading percentage were examined on the 21st day of every month, in order to perceive the percentage of shading with the PV arrangement adopted during every month of the year [16] In another work [17], a similar subject has been applied by placing flexible photovoltaic panels on 10% of the roof area of a Canarian greenhouse, confirming that the use of PV panels in a checkerboard arrangement does not seem to produce a significant impact on the agronomic parameters including quality-yield and height tomato crop, and all others climatic parameters under the Agrivoltaic Meanwhile, varying the degree of shading panels seems to be a good solution to optimizing the energy production and agriculture In a pre vious paper [18], a dynamic PV greenhouse prototype with varying the degree of shading according to the weather conditions was proposed in order to achieve a better global daily radiation and energy flow Furthermore, arid and semi-arid regions are unusually fitting for PV electricity production because of their heat and cold weather A great research effort has been made for energy sustainable greenhouses in order to improve their electrical [19] and thermal [20] efficiency and the feasibility of PV technologies to supply the food production chain by affording regenerated electricity from sunlight Marrou et al [21] showed that air temperature and wind speed were less affected than soil temperature by shading In addition, the impact of energy production and plant growing in the greenhouse shading with the PV panels are evaluated by [22] Theoretical results demonstrated that the PV panels can produce over 50 kWh/m2 for the characteristic agriculture period and can create around 20% of the greenhouse shading That study also indicated that the shading led to better results on crop growth and yield compared to those of the greenhouse without PV In particular, the large use of greenhouse roofs covered by PV modules requires an environmental load For that purpose, an economic analysis such as payback period [23], energy payback time [24], social performance [25] of greenhouses have been evaluated The estimation of the photovoltaic energy need of a 150 m2 greenhouse was conducted by [26].It was indicated that the photovoltaic greenhouse can meet 33–67.2% of electricity demand in summer The system energy payback time is five years while the crop cultivations payback time is ranged from 7.0 to 7.4 years and the annual PV generated electricity was re ported as 21510.4 kWh Another study in Agrivoltaic systems was per formed on tomato in South Eastern Spain, in which the yearly electricity production was 8.25 kWh m− [27] For their side, Fatnassi et al [28] revealed in their CFD numerical study that the use of integrated PV system in greenhouse can decrease automatically the solar irradiation at the top and at the bottom, the values of which were respectively 138 W/ m2 and 20 W/m2 of the cover in summer conditions, and 70 W/m2 and 10 W/m2 of the cover in the winter conditions A similar numerical study was made by Marucci et al [29] to evaluate the electrical energy production of a photovoltaic greenhouse with different shadow rates in summer conditions Modeling tools were also used by Cossu et al [30] They proposed an algorithm which allows to calculate the solar radia tion distribution inside a commercial pitched roof PV greenhouse with East-West orientation The results of the calculation of the light distri bution on different canopy height showed that the incident solar energy on the crop changes steadily, depending on the stage of plant growth H Ben Amara et al Sustainable Energy Technologies and Assessments 45 (2021) 101100 Amaducci et al [31] developed an innovative platform that can be employed both for predicting the energy and food crops production under specific Agrivoltaic configurations and for enhancing the design of the PV infrastructure Their proposed platform was developed by coupling a radiation and shading model to the generic growth of maize under Agrivoltaic system It has been shown that yield of crop was more favorable than in conditions of full light, and the suitable shading under Agrivoltaic as it can affect photosynthesis, soil temperature and evapotranspiration, can provide better conditions for crop yield and water/energy In this sense, the purpose of our study is to consider the ability of energy production and plant growing from photovoltaic integrated greenhouse and to assess their influence on the internal microclimate under different external climate conditions (winter and summer) The aim of this study is to achieve a comparison between two types of greenhouses with a PV roof cover ratio of 50% and a reference green house (without PV) by using CFD tools It assesses the shading effect of panel photovoltaic on the microclimate and energy production through two typical days of the summer and winter periods when the intensity light is at these two extremes (maximum and minimum dura tion sun) The photovoltaic panels mounted in the straight-line format on the greenhouse roof surface has specific advantages for farmers in the Mediterranean area The novelty of this work is to develop sustainable farming systems on their own farms and to understand the daily per formance of these system for large scale agricultural It represents therefore a modern technology that can both improve the power of hightech agricultural production and perform a balance between yield crop and photovoltaic electricity production on summer and winter days (January and June) The distribution of the micrometeorology was measured indoor/outdoor the greenhouse with an array of sensors and instruments noted as follows: • The 083E sensors are used to measure the variation of temperature and relative humidity inside the greenhouse at eight equidistant positions The schematic layout illustrated in (Fig 2) describes these positions of sensors distributed inside the greenhouse For both measurement periods, temperature and relative humidity were measured in the horizontal plane located at a height of 1.8 m above the ground level • A meteorological station located at m above the ground in the site of Sophia Antipoils is used to provide external weather conditions • The CR1000X data logger (Campell Scientific datalogger) is used to record the internal and external environmental parameters every 10 and overall daytime and nighttime mean values were calculated for each time • Analyzer datalogger is used to process and analyze the calculated parameters and measured data Uncertainty analysis During the experimental period, obtained measurements may contain several uncertainties An uncertainty analysis is then required to estimate the experiment measurements accuracies and to extend the accuracy performed experiments We note that the experimental error is defined as the difference between an experimental value and the actual value of a quantity and this difference designates the accuracy of the measurement Calculation of experimental uncertainties came essentially from all available data, like sensor measurements used for the determining wind speed, solar radiation, temperature, and RH distribution inside and outside the greenhouse, and the sensitiveness and collects and stores data uncertainty More details of the sensitiveness of the used sensors and equipment devices required for greenhouse measurements are given in Table Experimental setup Greenhouse description The experimental greenhouse (Fig 1) is a mono-span greenhouse with a polyethylene plastic cover (100 µm thick) It is located at the Research Center of INRAE in Sophia Antipolis, France (latitude: 43◦ 56, longitude: 7◦ 18, altitude:100 m) The greenhouse covers an area of 172.8 m2 (18 m length and 9.6 m width) with a maximum height reaches m with Southern-Eastern orientation The ventilation of greenhouse was achieved by two continuous roofs (1.5 m × 18 m each, total of 54 m2) with each protected by an insect proof Table summarizes the thermal and spectral properties used in this study Climatic parameters measurements The experimental measurements have been taken on two typical days: a clear sky day in winter (January, 10th) and on a clear sky day in summer (June, 21th) The hourly variation of weathers data is shown in Table and Table The solar irradiation, temperature and relative humidity in greenhouse were considered from 6:00 to 18:00 In winter, the indoor and the outdoor temperature difference was lower in the early hours of the day and at the end of afternoon (3–4 ◦ C), especially during the central hours when the differential was quite high Experimental measurements This section aimed to explore the internal microclimate of the reference greenhouse (without PV) and the outside climatic conditions Fig Schematic view of the experimental greenhouse H Ben Amara et al Sustainable Energy Technologies and Assessments 45 (2021) 101100 Table Physical properties of the greenhouse components Characteristics Density ρ(kgm− ) Specific heatCp (Jkg− K− ) Thermal conductivityλ(Wm− K− ) Under visible wavelength Under long infra-red wavelength polyethylene film (200 µm thick) Photovoltaic panels: Polycrystalline Glass 920 2300 0.35 – – 233 700 1.5 rpv = 0αpv = 0.1εpv = 0.9 2530 800 1.2 rG = 0.95αG = 0.5εG = 0.95 Gravel 2400 880 2.1 rgv = 0.3αgv = 0.7τgv = rgv = 0.25αgv = 0.75εgv = 0.9 Soil 1625 1491 2.541 rs = 0.25αs = 0.75τs = rs = 0.2αs = 0.8εs = 0.9 Air Wood 1.225 750 1007.26 2100 0.22 0.49 – – – – Fig Representation of measurement points inside the greenhouse (from to ◦ C) due to the effect of greenhouse Greenhouse ventilation is crucial in summer season because it is necessary to control the airflow and internal climate which interact with the heat exchanges with the crops It was observed that the peak value of relative humidity recorded outdoor was about 99%, observed at dawn and in the late afternoon and the maximum value of relative humidity recorded in the indoor envi ronment was noted 92%, whose average values ranged between 62% and 85% ⎧ ⎪ ⎪ ⎪ ⎪ ⎪ ⎪ ⎪ ⎪ ⎨ ∂ρ ∂(ρuj ) =0 + ∂t ∂xi [ ( ∂ ∂(ρui uj ) ∂ ∂ui ∂uj = + (ρui ) + − ρδij + μ ∂ ∂ t ∂ x x ∂xj ∂xi ⎪ j i ⎪ ⎪ ⎪ ⎪ ⎪ ⎪ ⎪ ⎩ )] + ρgi (1) ∂ ∂(ρuj Cp T) ∂ λ∂T − ( ) = Sϕ (ρCp T) + ∂t ∂xj ∂xj ∂xj As the fluid flow in the greenhouse is assumed to be incompressible and turbulent, the two-equation k-ε model was employed to specify the turbulence intensity of air flow by solving two additional governing equations for turbulent kinetic energy and its dissipation rate profiles of energy The solution of the governing equations is obtained by the CFD code ANSYS Fluent (R.16.1 Academic) The radiative heat transfer in side the greenhouse was also considered in the analysis The radiation was simulated in Fluent by using Discrete Ordinates (DO) model CFD tool was employed to simulate dynamic fields, solar radiation, and temperature distribution as well as shading effect inside reference greenhouse without PV and that with integrated photovoltaic panels on the roof, for sunny and cloudy conditions Besides, User Defined Func tions (UDFs) were introduced to the software to calculate crop transpi ration by addition of evapotranspiration and energy equations as chosen Mathematic modeling Computational fluid dynamic model Computational fluids dynamic (CFD) tools provide powerful means for simulating the spatial distribution of the microclimatic conditions within the entire greenhouses and evaluating the climate variables and their action in crop progress In this paper, a three-dimensional CFD greenhouse model consisting continuity, momentum and energy equa tions (Eq (1)) was built H Ben Amara et al Sustainable Energy Technologies and Assessments 45 (2021) 101100 Table Sensitiveness of equipment required for greenhouse measurements Equipment Meteorological station Measured variable Measuring area Location level Sensitiveness Relative humidity and Air temperature Solar radiation Internal greenhouse at 1.8 m above the ground level (9 locations in the horizontal plane) at 1.2 m above the ground level ± 0.01 ◦ C and ± 2% RH ± W/m2 Wind speed Solar radiation Relative humidity and Air temperature External greenhouse m above the ground Outside: m above the ground Outside: m above the ground ± 0.01 m/s ± W/m2 ± 0.5 ◦ C and ± 3% RH Acquisition system – Outside the greenhouse ± 0.1 ◦ C CR1000X data logger Table Weather data on January, 10th Table Weather data on June, 21th Time (h) Solar radiation (W/m2) Outside temperature (◦ C) Inside temperature (◦ C) Outside relative humidity (%) Inside relative humidity (%) Time (h) Solar radiation (W/m2) Outside temperature (◦ C) Inside temperature (◦ C) Outside relative humidity (%) Inside relative humidity (%) 06:00 07:00 08:00 09:00 10:00 11:00 12:00 13:00 14:00 15:00 16:00 17:00 18:00 0 111 224 318 373 349 283 246 95 11 7.9 7.5 7.2 8.9 14.9 21.2 21.7 22.6 21.6 22.1 20.6 16.7 14 4.8 4.3 4.2 5.8 11.4 13.7 16.4 14 14.5 14.6 12.6 11.4 10 92 92 92 92 79 72 55 50 53 54 62 77 89 99 99 99 99 83 68 62 73 80 85 96 99 99 06:00 07:00 08:00 09:00 10:00 11:00 12:00 13:00 14:00 15:00 16:00 17:00 18:00 138 289 449 606 727 817 856 856 807 708 578 424 19.2 20.2 23.2 24.5 26.5 25.9 25.5 25.9 25.4 24.7 25.2 25.3 24.5 22.3 22.7 24.1 26.5 30 31.3 32.1 32.2 33.6 31.9 33.4 31.5 29 99 99 79 69 61 72 70 74 80 83 84 81 79 92 89 80 67 60 57 53 54 55 58 55 58 61 The mesh and boundary conditions greenhouse system five rows perpendicular to the direction of the wind and the distance between parallel rows was take equal to m and around 0.5 m between plants The modeled domain of each crop row was a rectangular par allelepiped of m high and 16 m wide The imposition of accurate and specific boundary conditions in the CFD models is crucial for obtaining reliable results For this study, Fluent was employed with specific input variables associated with the Fluent manual and values of experimental greenhouse to simulate the spatial distribution of different climatic parameters within the greenhouse as well as the action of the photovoltaic system and crop on the flow and energy production The numerical calculations introduced in this study was described with the following boundary conditions to determinate these profiles The inlet velocity profile consists of a vertical logarithmic velocity distribution taken from the literature [32]: The mesh is generated in a three-dimensional computational domain The choice of suitable numerical factors, grid refinement and sufficiently accurate boundary conditions to describe flow models around complex profiles of the greenhouse is of primary importance for accurate results The greenhouse was considered as a blockage and included leeward in a large domain which has 109.6 m wide, 58 m length and 30 m high The computational domain chosen for the greenhouse was made up m high and 18 m wide After conducting a grid independent study by progressively refining the grid, an unstructured grid with around 102,000 grid cells was used for the analysis A finer resolution was chosen at the vent openings, the crop canopy, all wall and at the level of photovoltaic panel as described in Fig 3, where sharp gradients in ve locity and temperature were expected Tomatoes crop were arranged in H Ben Amara et al Sustainable Energy Technologies and Assessments 45 (2021) 101100 Fig Computational domain and boundary conditions Uinl (z) = ( ) u0 z ln z0 k The total resistance rt is defined by [37] : ( ) r + Arsl2 + (1 + A)ra rsl rt = a 2ra + (1 + A)rsl (2) The friction velocity is expressed as: u0 = kUh ln(h + z/z0 ) The stomatal resistance of the leaf rs is given by the following rela tionship [37]: { f1 = + [exp(a1 (RG − b1 ))]− rs = rs,min f1 f2 where (7) f2 = + a2 [exp(b2 (D − 10)] (3) The turbulent kinetic energy k (m2s− 2) and dissipation rate profilesε (m s ) are calculated as functions of the friction velocity u0 : − u20 ̅ k = √̅̅̅̅̅ Cμ ε= u30 k(z + z0 ) (6) P*(Tv ) is the saturated water vapor pressure at the canopy temper ature which is defined as follows [38]: ( ) 17.25 Tv P*(Tv ) = 6.11exp (8) 237.8 + Tv (4) (5) The aerodynamic resistance, (sm− 1), is deduced from the surface and the reference height, and is expressed by the following relationship [39] : The dynamic boundary conditions prescribed a symmetry boundary at the greater frontier of the domain The outlet boundary conditions were consisted of a zero-diffusion flux condition in which an entirely developed air movement was assumed The Wall type boundary condi tions (i.e no-slip conditions) were imposed a classical logarithmic wall function along the roof, the ground, the gravel, the polyethylene cover and the wood The thermal boundary conditions executed fixed tem peratures at the side walls, roof, and surfaces and along the ground of the greenhouse model The boundary profile of the crop canopy is also considered in this study with its influence of transpiration, convection, evaporation of water, and radiation on the flow and the internal greenhouse climate The energy source terms, porous medium, and water vapor balance equations were activated via a UDF in Fluent for specifying vegetal biological of each crop row within natural ecosystems = ρCp ⃦ ⃦ ⃦→⃦ 0.288 λ (dv v/⃦U ⃦)0.5 (9) R(z)is the solar irradiation received at z (m), which is expressed by Beer’s law [40] as follows: R(z) = Rgi exp(− kc ILAs (H − z)/H) The crop temperature Tcrop is calculated according to: [ ( )] dR(z) ωi − ωa − ρLν Tcrop = Ti + ILAν dz ρCp 2ILAν rt (10) (11) Model validation The greenhouse crop system parameters The numerical model was validated by comparing the simulation results against measurements carried out in the experimental green house through two typical days of the summer and winter periods (June, 21th and January, 10th) when the intensity light is at these two extremes (maximum and minimum duration sun) The greenhouse indoor tem perature and relative humidity in the reference greenhouse were measured and compared with the numerical results obtained in the similar conditions RH values (%) and temperature values (◦ C) were obtained for each data point represented in Section 2.2 (Fig 2) Table and Table show the absolute error of the simulated tem perature and humidity values inside the reference greenhouse with experimented measured values in two weather condition (summer and winter period) Absolute error to the experimental data of temperature To simulate the crop transpiration, we have used a sub-model (i.e user defined function) in which latent and sensible heat exchanges be tween the crop cover and the air inside greenhouse have been taken in account [33] The absorbed radiation R(z) in each cell of the canopy was deduced from Beer’s law, as described in [34] The radiation extinction coefficient that appears in Beer’s law was estimated from PAR radiation measurements above the canopy at a value 0.75 like in the study of Goudriaan [35] The five rows of crop arranged in the shape of rectan gular parallelepiped with m high, m wide and 16 m length each, are considered as porous mediums in the model Crop transpiration and plant activities in greenhouses are estimated based on the Penman-Monteith approach[36] H Ben Amara et al Sustainable Energy Technologies and Assessments 45 (2021) 101100 Table Temperature and Relative Humidity rises measured and simulated during the winter period T1 T2 T3 T4 T5 T6 T7 T8 T9 X (m) Y (m) Measured T (◦ C) Calculated T (◦ C) Error (%) Measured RH (%) Calculated RH (%) Error (%) 2.5 4.3 2.5 4.3 2.5 4.3 2.8 2.8 2.8 8.7 8.7 8.7 14.8 14.8 14.8 14.82 14.81 14.83 14.96 15.04 14.97 15.1 15.06 14.99 16.09 16.07 16.22 15.95 17.23 16.25 16.33 17.03 16.45 1.27 1.26 1.39 0.98 2.19 1.28 1.23 1.97 1.46 80.26 79.32 81.65 83.11 83.02 77.05 79.83 80.44 81.41 72.58 71.87 73.23 75.25 74.98 72.7 77.08 76.02 75.6 7.68 7.44 8.42 7.86 8.03 4.34 2.75 4.42 5.81 (T) and relative humidity (RH) in summer day were summarized in Table The error of RH and T was ranged between 0.62 and 1.7% and 0.3–1.3%, respectively Experimental errors derived mainly from the relative humidity and temperature sensor and the measurement un certainties, and measurement error based of data acquisition Experi mentally measured RH is generally lower than the simulated one, since the boundary conditions such as air velocity profile, may not strictly reflect real internal airflow patterns Further infiltration may also affect the airflow behavior by the air exhaust through the openings and the door In the simulation, the ventilation through the roof openings will eventually decrease the RH and temperature in summer day Absolute error to the experimental data of RH and T in winter day were also summarized in Table The error was ranged between 2.75% minimum and 8.42% maximum for the relative humidity and between 0.9% and 2.19% for the temperature Simulated RH values were higher than the experimental measurements Indeed, in the experiments, the evaporation crop will eventually increase the RH because of some water droplets that not evaporated instantly The droplets will stay too longer to evaporate in cloud day Fig Dynamic field parallel to the wind speed inside greenhouse without PV in a typical summer day (2.5 ms− wind speed) Results and discussion typical summer day The results exhibit that the air velocity is charac terized by a high outside flow through the roofs opening on the wind ward Windward and leeward roof openings improved ventilation capacity of the greenhouse and strongly affect the inside flow mecha nism Fed both by incoming air jets on the windward and buoyancy forces encouraged by the heat exchanges at crop level, a counter rotating cell develops inside the greenhouse This phenomenon was also described by [41] Fig presents the temperature distribution in the middle of the unshaded greenhouse in a sunny day The convective developed cell is fed by cold air coming through the roof openings and the thermal heat exchange between walls Because of a big airflow in the region located above the roof, the temperature has nearly the same value of the outside, whereas it decreases in most of the cavity and the temperature auto matically follows the air profile The air temperature has high gradients near the lateral walls (from + ◦ C to + 4.5 ◦ C) and roof (+5 ◦ C) With low-speed flow near the corner of the opening roofs, an air temperature elevation around ◦ C with respect to outdoor temperature is noticed The integration of PV panels on greenhouse roofs dramatically af fects plants growing and internal climate due to shading of the PV modules To determine those effects, tests with shading and un-shading PV greenhouses were carried out The experiments were performed for a summer day (June, 21st) and a winter day (January, 10th) The obtained results are presented and discussed below Internal climate simulation under un-shading PV greenhouse This section aims at investigating internal climate inside the green house without PV, i.e the reference greenhouse The internal climate of this greenhouse was simulated in a large greenhouse (172.8 m2) equipped with two continuous roofs The boundary conditions corre sponding to climatic data of the two typical days are described in section 3.4 Case study 1: Summer day Fig shows the dynamic field parallel to the prevailing wind in a Table Temperature and Relative Humidity rises measured and simulated during the summer period T1 T2 T3 T4 T5 T6 T7 T8 T9 X (m) Y (m) Measured T (◦ C) Calculated T (◦ C) Error (%) Measured RH (%) Calculated RH (%) Error (%) 2.5 4.3 2.5 4.3 2.5 4.3 2.8 2.8 2.8 8.7 8.7 8.7 14.8 14.8 14.8 28.52 28.50 28.77 27.81 27.83 27.93 29.87 29.98 29.65 29.60 29.75 29.33 28.19 28.85 29.03 31.30 30.78 31.02 1.08 1.25 0.56 0.38 1.02 1.10 1.43 0.80 1.37 82.68 81.97 82.03 82.64 85.82 84.73 89.78 91.02 91.60 80.97 83.44 81.38 83.45 85.21 83.30 90.60 91.90 92.52 1.71 1.47 0.65 0.81 0.61 1.43 0.82 0.88 0.92 H Ben Amara et al Sustainable Energy Technologies and Assessments 45 (2021) 101100 Fig Air temperature distributions inside the reference greenhouse in a typical winter day Fig Simulated distribution of air temperature in a typical summer day within a reference greenhouse and domain Fig shows the dynamic field distributions in a vertical section in the center of the greenhouse equipped with PV panel It was observed that wind affect the airflow patterns under greenhouse designed with buoyancy-driven natural effect Fresh air eliminates the heat absorbed, cooling the rear of the PV cells with the effect of an increase in the electrical conversion efficiency The climate was also more homoge neous in the greenhouse with PV panel compared to the reference case, i e the greenhouse without PV In Fig (a) and (b), the experimental measurements of outside, inside and under PV of solar radiation in two typical days are presented The photovoltaic system mounted on the roof acts as a passive cooling system The result illustrate that the transmission rate of the external solar radiation was only 16% under the photovoltaic panels On other hand, it was noted that about 80% of the external solar radiation was diffused by polyethylene section in the greenhouse On a clear cold day Fig (a), the effects of shading were maximized causing a big drop in the cooling load compared to the exposed roof For example, on January 10th, the peak irradiance for the PV covered roof was 55 Wm− at 14:00, which was less than 10 Wm− at the dawn and late afternoon The Fig (b), the increased solar radiation from the panel develops a benefit on night and on cloudy day The irradiance was high in June, reaching a peak value about 115 Wm− at 14:00 whereas it was nearly zero (0.01 kWm− 2) at dawn and late afternoon Case study 2: Winter day In Fig 6, the dynamic field in a vertical section in the middle of the greenhouse, parallel to the prevailing wind in a typical winter day is presented The results showed that the flow was characterized by two contra-rotating cells inside the greenhouse caused by the buoyancy forces which enhances the homogenization of the temperature distri bution Above plants level, a lower airflow due to the high density of plants is noted Fig shows the temperature distributions inside the greenhouse during winter conditions This distribution was homogeneous inside the greenhouse The internal temperature was around 14 ◦ C which was about 12 ◦ C elsewhere, due to the intensification of natural ventilation In winter conditions, when the greenhouse with crop is completely closed, the absorbed and stored heat by soil changing during the day represents an important heat source Internal climate simulation under shading greenhouse This section is referred to the application of photovoltaic panel The photovoltaic panel occupied array with 28.8 m2 cell area, related to half of the roof area, was mounted in the straight-line format on the green house roof surface which has around 172.8 m2 ground area The fixed installation was studied for a slope of 33◦ for PV panel aligned east–west, mounted on the south roof of an east–west oriented greenhouse, which is suitable for electricity production For this reason, south roofs shading is used to mitigate excessive summer sunlight for greenhouses in high insolation, reflecting important part of the solar energy The effect of shading greenhouse at the crop level The microclimate at the crop level is strongly linked to the climate in the greenhouse The distribution of solar radiation and air temperature in a greenhouse are two of the main factors influencing the growth and yield of plant PV inherently conflicts with cultivation because both Fig.6 Dynamic field parallel to the wind speed inside the greenhouse without PV in a typical winter day (2.5 ms− wind speed) Fig Flow field inside greenhouse equipped with PV panel H Ben Amara et al Sustainable Energy Technologies and Assessments 45 (2021) 101100 Fig Experimental measurement of solar radiation in the outside, inside and under PV of solar radiation panel during a typical summer (a) and winter (b) day photosynthesis and PV depend on sunlight availability For this reason, studying the spatial distribution of the internal air temperature and solar radiation and also the distribution of crop transpiration flux are very important to provide useful information for knowing the effect of the shading of photovoltaic panels at the crop level on the climate param eters inside the greenhouse To assess the shading on the microclimate at 1.8 m above the crop level, we simulated numerically the distributed climate in the reference greenhouse and photovoltaic greenhouse Fig 10 indicates the tem perature distribution at plant level inside greenhouse equipped without (a) and with (b) panel PV in the summer day The variation of temper ature may be explained by plant activities and the shading The inte gration of PV modules to the roof was accountable to rise the indoor temperature of the greenhouse by convection The result showed that a lower homogeneous climate was attained in the greenhouse with PV panels, with respect to the reference greenhouse, which provides suit able conditions for growing plants [31] The minimum temperature verified in the shaded greenhouse varied from 26 ◦ C to 27.9 ◦ C, while the maximum temperature range was be tween 28.9 ◦ C and 30.19 ◦ C On the other hand, the minimum temper ature in the greenhouse without PV panel ranged between 28 ◦ C and 29.3 ◦ C, and the maximum temperature varied from 31 ◦ C to 32.9 ◦ C Therefore, utilization of PV panels results in about 1.6 ◦ C reduction in maximum temperature This phenomenon has also been reported by [17] Fig 11 presents the distribution of the crop transpiration flux in the reference greenhouse (a) and photovoltaic (b) greenhouse under the same conditions Analysis of this figure reveals that the crop transpira tion was less homogeneous, and the tomato crops had more transpira tion in the reference greenhouse In this greenhouse, the minimum and maximum transpiration fluxes of tomato crop are 128 W/m2 and 427 W/ m2, respectively, for an ambient temperature of 33 ◦ C, while this flux is ranged from 85 W/m2 to 185 W/m2 in the PV greenhouse, for an ambient temperature of 27 ◦ C This difference is attributed to the in fluence of photovoltaic panels shading The strong values of the crop transpiration flux observed in the reference greenhouse can be explained by the high solar irradiation on hot day of summer It can be deduced from the above results that photovoltaic system can play a positive and improving effect on plants by decreasing higher temperature due to reduction in the thermal load of the sun inside the greenhouse Fig 12 illustrates the relative humidity distributed in the horizontal plane located at a height of 1.8 m above the ground level under the greenhouse with 50% and 0% shading Analysis of the figure shows a difference of relative humidity between shaded and an unshaded greenhouse The relative humidity ranged between 81 and 90% in the reference greenhouse and 71–77% in the greenhouse with photovoltaic panels Fig 10 Distributions of air temperature at plant level: inside the greenhouse equipped without (a) and with PV panel (b) in summer day H Ben Amara et al Sustainable Energy Technologies and Assessments 45 (2021) 101100 Fig 11 Distribution of crop transpiration flux: inside the greenhouse equipped without (a) and with PV panel (b) in summer condition Fig 12 Top-view contour maps of air relative humidity: inside the photovoltaic greenhouse (a) and the control greenhouse (b) in sunny day The average relative humidity was about 72.5% inside the PV greenhouse, which is apparently more stable and lower compared to the reference greenhouse (83.4%) This reduction caused by the shading of solar panels, directly allowed tomato plants to grow on sweaty condi tions Reducing humidity is beneficial as higher values of humidity promotes the fungal growth planted in protected environment [15] (greenhouse without PV panel) The Tunisian production period under greenhouse is spread out between October and May Greenhouse heating is necessary only for three months (from December to February) what is equivalent to 910 h of operation (10 h /day) The annual solar energy of the photovoltaic panel was around 5054.4 kWh In the cloudy condition, shading PV and electricity production were extremely reduced to be insignificant, as the solar energy that extents the ground is sufficient for cultivated crops Table presents the cost systems (hybrid system and conventional greenhouse) and the payback time It is apparent that the installation cost associated with PV panel covered half roof area is the most expensive (16320 $), accounting for about 51% compared to the cost of the greenhouse without PV (8000 $) In particular, the mainte nance has less cost (300 $) in the PV integrated system, representing around 40% with respect to the reference greenhouse (500 $) The operation cost reduced by 46% (1180 $ instead of 2200 $) for the Economic analysis In the sunny condition, with the internal solar irradiation of 115 Wm− 2, the energy demand of the greenhouse was about 528 kWh/m2 The use of ventilator can provide heat to the greenhouse during winter and cooling during summer The energy use and the cost production in the greenhouse equipped with PV panel was estimated by comparing the hybrid system (PV + greenhouse) with the conventional system 10 H Ben Amara et al Sustainable Energy Technologies and Assessments 45 (2021) 101100 variation of shading for various rates Table Comparison of the cost and the payback times between Hybrid system (PV + Greenhouse) and the greenhouse according to the conventional electric energy System cost ($) Operation cost ($) Maintenance cost ($) Annual energy consumption (kWh) Gain of energy (kWh) Energy cost ($) Payback (year) Hybrid system (PV + Greenhouse) Conventional system Greenhouse 16,320 1180 300 500 8000 2200 500 10,000 9500 101.408 5.33 – 3247.83 – Declaration of Competing Interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper References [1] IRENA Renewable energy in the water, energy and food nexus Int Renew Energy Agency; 2015 p 1–125 [2] Vadiee A, Martin V Energy management strategies for commercial greenhouses Appl Energy 2014;114:880–8 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2013.08.089 [3] Jain D, Tiwari GN Modeling and optimal design of evaporative cooling system in controlled environment greenhouse Energy Convers Manag 2002;43:2235–50 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0196-8904(01)00151-0 [4] Esen M, Yuksel T Experimental evaluation of using various renewable energy sources for heating a greenhouse 2013;65:340–51 [5] IRENA Renewable energy statistics 2019 International Renewable Energy Agency; 2019 [6] Banda MH, Nyeinga K, Okello D Energy for Sustainable Development Performance evaluation of 830 kWp grid-connected photovoltaic power plant at Kamuzu International Airport-Malawi Energy Sustain Dev 2019;51:50–5 https://doi.org/ 10.1016/j.esd.2019.05.005 [7] Ghazouani K Thermal optimization of solar dish collector for indirect vapor generation 2019:1–14 10.1002/er.4748 [8] Santolini E, Pulvirenti B, Benni S, Barbaresi L, Torreggiani D, Tassinari P Numerical study of wind-driven natural ventilation in a greenhouse with screens Comput Electron Agric 2017 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compag.2017.09.027 [9] Sethi VP, Sumathy K, Lee C, Pal DS Thermal modeling aspects of solar greenhouse microclimate control : A review on heating technologies 2013;96:56–82 10.1016/ j.solener.2013.06.034 [10] Ameur A, Sekkat A, Loudiyi K, Aggour M Energy for Sustainable Development Performance evaluation of different photovoltaic technologies in the region of Ifrane, Morocco Energy Sustain Dev 2019;52:96–103 https://doi.org/10.1016/j esd.2019.07.007 [11] Lin W, Ma Z, Sohel MI, Cooper P Development and evaluation of a ceiling ventilation system enhanced by solar photovoltaic thermal collectors and phase change materials Energy Convers Manag 2014;88:218–30 https://doi.org/ 10.1016/j.enconman.2014.08.019 [12] Majumdar D, Pasqualetti MJ Landscape and Urban Planning Dual use of agricultural land : Introducing ‘ agrivoltaics ’ in Phoenix Metropolitan Statistical Area, USA Landsc Urban Plan 2017 https://doi.org/10.1016/j landurbplan.2017.10.011 [13] Valle B, Simonneau T, Sourd F, Pechier P, Hamard P, Frisson T, et al Increasing the total productivity of a land by combining mobile photovoltaic panels and food crops Appl Energy 2017 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2017.09.113 [14] Kadowaki M, Yano A, Ishizu F, Tanaka T, Noda S Effects of greenhouse photovoltaic array shading on Welsh onion growth Biosyst Eng 2012;111:290–7 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biosystemseng.2011.12.006 [15] Ezzaeri K, Fatnassi H, Wifaya A, Bazgaou A, Aharoune A, Poncet C, et al Performance of photovoltaic canarian greenhouse: A comparison study between summer and winter seasons Sol Energy 2020;198:275–82 https://doi.org/ 10.1016/j.solener.2020.01.057 [16] Marucci A, Zambon I, Colantoni A, Monarca D A combination of agricultural and energy purposes : Evaluation of a prototype of photovoltaic greenhouse tunnel Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2018;82:1178–86 https://doi.org/10.1016/j rser.2017.09.029 [17] Ezzaeri K, Fatnassi H, Bouharroud R, Gourdo L, Bazgaou A, Wifaya A, et al The e ff ect of photovoltaic panels on the microclimate and on the tomato production under photovoltaic canarian greenhouses Sol Energy 2018;173:1126–34 https://doi org/10.1016/j.solener.2018.08.043 [18] Moretti S, Marucci A A photovoltaic greenhouse with variable shading for the optimization of agricultural and energy production Energies 2019;12 https://doi org/10.3390/en12132589 [19] Taki M, Rohani A, Rahmati-joneidabad M Title Solar thermal simulation and applications in greenhouse Inf Process Agric 2017 https://doi.org/10.1016/j inpa.2017.10.003 [20] Chaysaz A, Reza S, Seyedi M, Motevali A Effects of di ff erent greenhouse coverings on energy parameters of a photovoltaic – thermal solar system 2019;194: 519–29 10.1016/j.solener.2019.11.003 [21] Marrou H, Guilioni L, Dufour L, Dupraz C, Wery J Agricultural and Forest Meteorology Microclimate under agrivoltaic systems : Is crop growth rate affected in the partial shade of solar panels ? Agric For Meteorol 2013;177:117–32 https:// doi.org/10.1016/j.agrformet.2013.04.012 [22] Trypanagnostopoulos G, Kavga A, Tripanagnostopoulos Y Greenhouse performance results for roof installed photovoltaics Renew Energy 2017 https:// doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2017.04.066 [23] Barbera E, Sforza E, Vecchiato L, Bertucco A Energy and economic analysis of microalgae cultivation in a photovoltaic-assisted greenhouse : Scenedesmus obliquus as a case study Energy 2017 https://doi.org/10.1016/j energy.2017.08.069 shading greenhouse In the other hand, the energy gain in the solar greenhouse is about 9500 kWh and the annual energy consumption with PV integrated system is much lower than the accurate without The photovoltaic greenhouse payback period applies to the amount of life which needs to recoup the cost of this investment system The calculated payback period of using PV system for our study was calculated to be 5.3 years It should be noted that the greenhouse with photovoltaic is an economically attractive investment for agricultural and the view of its employees will become extra attractive within a shorter time if the technological advancement moderates the installation costs of PV greenhouses in the upcoming years Conclusion The present study provides a sustainable approach that gives an opportunity associated with crops in clean environments (e.g., green houses) and sustainable development in the agricultural, with focused attention on renewable energy sources as well as solar photovoltaic The use of photovoltaic system on the roofs of greenhouses is ex pected to be an attractive solution and a most important technology to solve the problems concerning the energy in the horticultural sector in Mediterranean area due to their advantages compared to the solar thermal systems Additionally, computational results provide an idea about its energy efficiency and paybacks It has been experimentally evaluating the climate behavior during summer and winter days inside the reference greenhouse and numeri cally under specific photovoltaic greenhouse in the same conditions seeing the energy production and the impact of shading at the crop level The analysis of the numerical and experimental data established that: • The mounting of PV panels decreases the irradiation by 65% and generates a shadow inside the greenhouse allowing drops of the in ternal air temperature by about ◦ C to ◦ C on clear days and rises the relative humidity by approximately 12% • The crop transpiration flux is also influenced by the integrated photovoltaic roof It is observed that the higher values of the crop transpiration flux during summer day was about 340 w/m2 recorded in the un-shading PV greenhouse and the lowest transpiration flux was about 111 w/m2 observed in the shading greenhouse The photovoltaic panels protect the crop from intense solar radiation in summer as they play the role of shading screens • PV insignificantly affected the growth of tomato and the temperature difference between the two compared greenhouses was only 1.6 ◦ C The homogeneity of the climate in greenhouse provides suitable conditions for growing plants • The realization of photovoltaic panels mounted in greenhouses al lows the development of strategies for the sustainability of the pro tected crop Further works will be focusing other panel photovoltaic occupancy rates, evaluating the electrical energy reproduction of a photovoltaic greenhouse with different arrangements, and testing the degree 11 H Ben Amara et al Sustainable Energy Technologies and Assessments 45 (2021) 101100 [34] Ali HB, Bournet P, Cannavo P, Chantoiseau E Development of a CFD crop submodel for simulating microclimate and transpiration of ornamental plants grown in a greenhouse under water restriction Comput Electron Agric 2017 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compag.2017.06.021 [35] Goudriaan J Crop micrometeorology : a simulation study 2016 [36] Qiu R, Kang S, Du T, Tong L, Hao X, Chen R, et al Scientia Horticulturae Effect of convection on the Penman – Monteith model estimates of transpiration of hot pepper grown in solar greenhouse Sci Hortic (Amsterdam) 2013;160:163–71 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scienta.2013.05.043 [37] Boulard T, Baille a., Mermier M, Villette F Mesures et mod´ elisation de la r´esistance stomatique foliaire et de la transpiration d’un couvert de tomates de serre Agronomie 1991;11:259–74 10.1051/agro:19910403 [38] Boulard T, Wang S Greenhouse crop transpiration simulation from external climate conditions Agric For Meteorol 2000;100:25–34 https://doi.org/10.1016/ S0168-1923(99)00082-9 [39] Fatnassi H, Boulard T, Bouirden L Simulation of climatic conditions in full-scale greenhouse fitted with insect-proof screens 2003;118:97–111 10.1016/S01681923(03)00071-6 [40] Majdoubi H, Boulard T, Fatnassi H, Bouirden L Agricultural and Forest Meteorology Airflow and microclimate patterns in a one-hectare Canary type greenhouse : An experimental and CFD assisted study 2009;149:1050–62 10.1016/j.agrformet.2009.01.002 [41] Kruger S, Pretorius L Numerical investigation of natural convection in a monospan greenhouse ASME 2012 11th Bienn Conf Eng Syst Des Anal ESDA 2012 2012; 2:91–100 10.1115/ESDA2012-82365 [24] Bambara J, Athienitis AK Energy and Economic Analysis for the Design of Greenhouses with Semi-Transparent Photovoltaic Cladding Renew Energy 2018 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2018.08.020 [25] Li C, Wang H, Miao H, Ye B The economic and social performance of integrated photovoltaic and agricultural greenhouses systems: Case study in China Appl Energy 2017;190:204–12 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2016.12.121 [26] Yildirim N, Bilir L Evaluation of a hybrid system for a nearly zero energy greenhouse Energy Convers Manag 2017;148:1278–90 https://doi.org/10.1016/ j.enconman.2017.06.068 ´ ´ Greenhouse tomato production with electricity [27] Ure˜ na S R, C., Angel J J, C AC generation by roof-mounted flexible solar panels 2012;2009:233–9 [28] Fatnassi H, Poncet C, Madeleine M, Brun R, Bertin N ScienceDirect A numerical simulation of the photovoltaic greenhouse microclimate Sol ENERGY 2015;120: 575–84 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.solener.2015.07.019 [29] Marucci A, Cappuccini A Dynamic photovoltaic greenhouse : Energy efficiency in clear sky conditions 2016;170:362–76 10.1016/j.apenergy.2016.02.138 [30] Cossu M, Ledda L, Urracci G, Sirigu A, Cossu A, Murgia L, et al An algorithm for the calculation of the light distribution in photovoltaic greenhouses Sol Energy 2017;141:38–48 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.solener.2016.11.024 [31] Amaducci S, Yin X, Colauzzi M Agrivoltaic systems to optimise land use for electric energy production Appl Energy 2019;220:545–61 https://doi.org/10.1016/j apenergy.2018.03.081 [32] P.J Richards RPH Appropriate boundary-conditions for computational wind engineering models using the kappa–epsilon turbulence model J Wind Eng Ind Aerodyn 1993 [33] Grant J, Fallon R, Dodd V Applications of computational fluid dynamics (CFD) in the modelling and design of ventilation systems in the agricultural industry : A review 2007;98:2386–414 10.1016/j.biortech.2006.11.025 12 ... types of greenhouses with a PV roof cover ratio of 50% and a reference green house (without PV) by using CFD tools It assesses the shading effect of panel photovoltaic on the microclimate and. .. growth and yield compared to those of the greenhouse without PV In particular, the large use of greenhouse roofs covered by PV modules requires an environmental load For that purpose, an economic analysis... distributed climate in the reference greenhouse and photovoltaic greenhouse Fig 10 indicates the tem perature distribution at plant level inside greenhouse equipped without (a) and with (b) panel PV