The Turkish Antarctic Expedition placed four different PV module types – monocrystalline, polycrystalline, flexible and transparent – outside of their research camp for three months to compare performance, finding that monocrystalline was the clear winner.

Scientists from Turkey’s Firat University, Polar Research Institute and Istanbul Technical University have conducted an experimental investigation of different types of PV panels in Antarctica’s extreme environment.

The experiment took place at the Turkish Scientific Research Camp, located on the Horseshoe Island of Antarctica, during the Antarctic summer, which spans from December to February.

“Seventy-five active research stations operate in Antarctica during the summer months, with a total accommodation capacity limited to four thousand people. All the energy required for heating, lighting, waste management, the operation of scientific equipment, and purification processes at these stations is supplied by electric generators powered by gasoline and diesel fuels,” the academics said. “To fulfill the energy requirements of the Research Camp, PV experiments were conducted during Turkish Antarctic Expedition (TAE) VII in 2022 to harness solar energy.”

The experimental study used four panel types: monocrystalline, polycrystalline, flexible and transparent. Each had a maximum power of 25 W, with the first two modules being made of 36 cells and the others of 20 cells. The panels were fixed at a tilt angle of 54.3◦, which represents the optimal tilt angle for the island’s location on an annual basis.

“The experimental setup is powered by two lead-acid batteries, which are arranged in a parallel configuration,” the group explained. “A dummy load was employed to extract the current generated by the PV panel. The dummy loads are connected in series, ensuring an immediate response to the electrical load. To minimize the influence of ambient air, the dummy loads were placed inside a specially insulated secondary closed panel within the experimental setup.”

Twelve parameters – including meteorological factors such as temperature, humidity, wind speed, and solar radiation – in addition to the surface temperature and instantaneous power output were recorded at a 30-second interval throughout the summer, excluding days with full snow coverage. That resulted in 34,560 data points for each type of panel. The experiments were performed at an average temperature of 3.2 C, a humidity of 69%, a wind speed of 1.6 m/s, and a radiation level of 476 W/m2.

“The average surface temperatures of PV were recorded as 12.07 C for monocrystalline, 11.1 C for polycrystalline, 11.104 C for flexible, and 10.5 C for transparent types, respectively,” the results showed. “Notwithstanding this, the average PV efficiency of 20.5% is attributed to monocrystalline technology. The remaining values are 18.95%, 18.9%, and 14.51%. The exergy efficiencies were determined to be 11.53%, 11.4%, 11.29%, and 9.42%.”

The tests showed that the monocrystalline panel yielded a power output of 13.27 W, polycrystalline had 12.30 W, the flexible was measured at 12.13 W and the transparent at 8.32 W. Each panel reduced annual CO2 emissions by 3.15 tons, 2.92 tons, 2.95 tons and 1.97 tons, respectively. Those have a monetary value of $45.66, $42.34, $42.76 and $28.62 per year, respectively.

“The adoption of renewable energy in Antarctica reduces reliance on fossil fuels, supports environmental sustainability, and helps preserve the ecosystem,” the team concluded. “Additionally, it promotes international collaboration, enhances energy security for research stations, and lowers logistical costs.”

The researchers presented their findings in “Evaluating the performance of four types of photovoltaic panels in Antarctica’s extreme environment,” published in Case Studies in Thermal Engineering.