Renewable Energy Focus 46 (2023) 1–15

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Renewable Energy Focus

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/ref

Study on reducing the grid dependency of urban housing in Nordic

climate by hybrid renewable energy systems
Kari Alanne
Department of Mechanical Engineering, School of Engineering, Aalto University, PO Box 14400, FI-00076 Aalto, Finland

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: Volatile energy prices and the pursuit of energy resilience drive households and housing cooperatives to
Received 3 March 2023 invest in renewable energy generation (REG) with an aim to reduce grid dependency (GD). The optimal
Revised 19 May 2023 sizing of hybrid renewable energy systems (HRES) calls for minimizing both imported and exported
Accepted 19 May 2023
energy plus non-exportable energy dump on site. The Total Energy Transfer Index (TETI) is a novel indi-
Available online 21 May 2023
cator to quantify energy transfer between buildings and the grid. However, the TETI does not specify the
on-site energy dump. The present study introduces another indicator, the Weighted Energy Transfer
Keywords:
Index (WETI), which is the weighted average of imported energy fraction, exported energy fraction
Grid-connected Systems
Grid Dependency
and energy dump factor. The results of a computational study involving a conceptual Finnish townhouse
Total Energy Transfer suggest that using the TETI as a design criterion still allows oversizing the HRES. On the other hand, the
Grid Parity results imply that a realistic target level of grid dependency for an HRES from energy prosumers’ perspec-
Residential Buildings tive is TETI < 1. The economic viability of an HRES presumes that the levelized cost of energy (LCOE) does
not exceed the price of imported energy. The computational results suggest that in Finland, the grid par-
ity of an HRES is obtained at the electricity prices between 17. . .29 €c/kWh, including transfer charges
and taxes.
Ó 2023 The Author. Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY license (http://
creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).

Introduction scale wind turbines provide an option to improve the matching

The Renewable Energy Directive 2018/2001/EU established a
renewable energy target of at least 32% for the European Union
for 2030 and updated it to at least 40% [1]. In 2022, the REPowerEU
plan was published with an aim to reduce the dependence on Rus-
sian fossil fuels and to increase the renewable energy target to 45%
by 2030 [2]. The building sector accounts for 40 % of the energy
consumption [3]. Besides eliminating the dependency on fossil
fuels, renewable energy generation (REG) in buildings has a signif-
icant potential to reduce the grid dependency and to increase the
resilience of the energy system.
Particularly, solar photovoltaic (PV) panels have gained attrac-
tion in residential applications, since their installed costs have fal-
len [4,5]. In Nordic climates, however, renewable energy
generation in buildings is challenged by several reasons [6]. First,
commercial residential solar PV systems typically only yield a
renewable fraction (RF) around 20 % of the buildings’ total con-
sumption [7]. Second, the increasing penetration of PV systems
would result in increasing amount of energy to be wasted in sum-
mer, since energy storage capacity is expensive, and the energy
export is limited due to issues such as grid stability [8]. Small-
between generation and load, albeit their implementation in urban
housing is yet limited due to their high capital costs, aesthetical
issues, noise, and social acceptability issues [9,10]. A potential
solution would be a hybrid renewable energy system (HRES), i.e.,
a combination of PV power generation, vertical, roof-mounted
wind turbine(s), and an electrical energy storage (EES).
The optimal sizing of buildings’ REG systems has been
addressed in several studies [9,11,12,13,14,15,16,17]. The
published studies typically focus on solar energy, although some
studies indicate a high techno-economic performance for hybrid
renewable energy systems (HRES) [18,19]. Minimizing grid-
dependency (GD) in tandem with life-cycle costs has been
recommended in [20], and recent research efforts to that end have
been reported [21,22,23].
In the literature, the most common metrics for grid dependency
is the imported energy fraction (IEF), which is the fraction of
imported energy in the total demand. When there is a need to
emphasize power rather than energy, the corresponding indicator
is referred to as the loss of power supply probability (LPSP) [20].
The loss of load probability (LOLP) has been proposed to determine
the ratio of grid-dependent hours and the total hours in the

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ref.2023.05.006
1755-0084/Ó 2023 The Author. Published by Elsevier Ltd.
This is an open access article under the CC BY license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
K. Alanne Renewable Energy Focus 46 (2023) 1–15

Nomenclature

C Costs [€] EDF Energy Dump Fraction

E Energy [J] EEF Exported Energy Fraction
f Derating factor [-] EES Electrical Energy Storage
I Incident solar radiation [W/m2] GD Grid Dependency
n Project lifetime [y] GP Grid Parity
P Electrical power [W] GSHP Ground-Source Heat Pump
r Real discount rate [%] HOMER Hybrid Optimization Model for Electric Renewables
T Temperature [°C] HRES Hybrid Renewable Energy System
W Weight factor [-] HVAC Heating, Ventilation and Air-Conditioning
a Temperature coefficient [-] IEF Imported Energy Fraction
q Density [kg/m3] LCC Life-cycle Costs
LCOE Levelized Cost of Energy
Subscripts LIB Lithium-Ion Battery
ann Annualized LOLP Loss Of Load Probability
c Cell (PV) LPSP Loss of Power Supply Probability
d Dumped MPPT Maximum Power Point Tracker
dem Demand NOCT Nominal Cell Temperature
e Exported NPC Net Present Costs
i Imported NREL National Renewable Energy Laboratory
t Time step O&M Operation and Management
tot Total PV Photo-Voltaic
REG Renewable Energy Generation
Abbreviations RF Renewable Fraction
AC Alternating Current STC Standard Test Conditions
AHU Air Handling Unit STP Standard Temperature and Pressure
TET Total Energy Transfer
ASC Annualized System Costs
CAV Constant Air Volume TETI Total Energy Transfer Index
COE Cost of Energy TRY Test Reference Year
WETI Weighted Energy Transfer Index
COP Coefficient Of Performance
DC Direct Current WT Wind Turbine
DHW Domestic Hot Water

analysis period particularly in applications, where the GD is
assigned to systemic reliability [24]. All these fractions vary
between zero and unity, where zero refers to a standalone system.
Relying on the IEF (LPSP) alone would provide a biased guide-
line for the design of hybrid renewable energy systems (HRES)
since it allows oversizing, posing a burden (and a potential stability
problem) to the grid due to the exported energy [22]. Hence, other
performance indicators have been proposed. The on-site energy
matching index (OEM) has been defined as the ratio of locally used
and locally generated energy so that the on-site system boundary
is at the grid interface [25]. The OEM has been developed to quan-
tify energy matching rather than the GD, however, wherefore its
unity (instead of zero) represents the standalone system. The novel
total energy transfer index (TETI) is defined as the ratio of total
energy transfer including import and export and the local energy
generation [21]. The TETI is a descriptive indicator for the GD but
given that it only considers the grid interaction without explicating
the system’s internal power management ability (e.g., unmanage-
able power due to undersized inverter), the conception of the sys-
tem performance may remain biased. For example, the TETI may
obtain the value zero (both import and export are zero), although
energy dump exists. Since the energy dump is an undesired effect,
an HRES with poorly designed on-site power management is still
indirectly grid dependent.
Earlier studies have commonly addressed the issue of grid
dependency by considering the design of HRES as an optimization
problem with an aim to co-minimize the GD and cost functions
such as cost of energy (COE), annualized system cost (ASC),
levelized cost of energy (LCOE), or life cycle cost (LCC) [21]. The
2
problem is subjected to a balance constraint that ensures the
equality between energy supply and demand. However, a cost con-
straint is necessary to ensure the economic viability of the HRES for
the prosumer in comparison with the market price of energy. On
the other hand, the LCOE is commonly regarded as a metrics for
a comparison between the energy costs of HRES and the price of
grid energy, assuming a fixed or variable profile for the price of grid
energy. In terms of grid-connected systems, however, the LCOE
depends on the price of grid energy. To that end, grid parity anal-
ysis has been used as a method to evaluate the economic viability,
albeit so far mainly at large scale (national energy system) rather
than small scale (single prosumers) [26]. The prosumer’s grid par-
ity is hard to reach in countries like Finland, where the market
price of electricity has conventionally been low. Thus, the energy
transition calls for realistic target levels of GD to yet maintain
the economic viability of grid connected HRES.
In the present study, both the total energy transfer and grid par-
ity analyses are implemented in a conceptual townhouse located in
Finland with an aim to recognize a technically and economically
viable level of grid dependency that can be obtained using grid
connected HRES in Nordic climate. Two indicators are imple-
mented to determine the GD and their implications for the system
sizing are discussed, namely, the Total Energy Transfer Index (TETI)
introduced in [21] and the Weighted Energy Transfer Index (WETI),
which is the weighted average of imported energy fraction (IEF),
exported energy fraction (EEF) and energy dump factor (EDF). To
find out the relation between GD and the prosumer’s grid parity,
break-even price of energy is determined for various design
options. This study is parametric analysis in essence, rather than
K. Alanne
optimization. All the research data are acquired from simulations
using the whole-building simulation tool IDA-ICE and the HOMER
Pro design tool.
The research methodology and data are described in Section 2.
The results of the study are presented with discussion in Section 3.
The findings are expected to be useful for researchers, engineers,
and policy makers who seek mechanisms to support the appropri-
ate design and implementation of HRES in buildings and thus
energy resilience.
Materials and methods
Research methodology
Total energy transfer analysis
In the present study, it is acknowledged that minimizing grid
dependency (GD) calls for the minimization of both imported
and exported energy. Therefore, the total energy transfer (TET)
between the building and the grid has been chosen as the key per-
formance metrics for the GD assessment.
The TET is defined as the sum of imported and exported energy
ETET;t ¼ Eexp;t þ Eimp;t
where Eexp;t is the energy exported to grid, Eimp;t is the energy
imported from grid and ETET;t is the total energy transfer at t-th
hour.
The novel total energy transfer index (TETI) introduced in [21]
represents the ratio of the total energy (the sum of energy exported
to the grid and energy imported from the grid over a year) and the
total renewable energy generation (PV, wind) over a year. It is
defined as
P8760
t¼1 ETET;t
TETI ¼ P8760
t¼1 EREG;t
where EREG;t is the total renewable energy generation at t-th
hour.
In the present study, it is argued that the energy export is con-
strained. Therefore, oversizing the HRES would easily result in
energy dump. Thus, the energy surplus is further classified into
exported energy (Eexp;t ) and excess energy (Edump;t ) that cannot be
utilized (for technical reasons related to the system’s internal
power management ability, such as power constraints of the bat-
tery or the grid interface) and must be dumped.
The relationship between load and generation over time is illus-
trated in Fig. 1 as a reproduction of Fig. 2 in [25]. In Fig. 1, energy
Figure 1. Relationship between load and generation over time [25].
Renewable Energy Focus 46 (2023) 1–15
P Dt1 P
import ( t1þ Eimp;t þ t2
t1 t2Dt2 Eimp;t ) is visualized as the area ‘‘I‘‘
between load and generation curves, whereas the area ‘‘IIa” repre-
Pt2Dt2
sents energy export ( t1þ Dt1 Eexp;t ) and area ‘‘Iib” (on top of the hill
shaped by the energy generation curve) dumped energy
P
( t Edump;t ).
To address the suitability of the total energy transfer analysis as
a sizing method of the HRES, an alternative method is proposed in
the present study to quantify the grid dependency. To that end, the
following three indicators are introduced. The imported energy
fraction (IEF) is the fraction of imported energy in the total
demand, and it is defined as
P8760
t¼1 Eimp;t
IEF ¼ P8760 ð3Þ
t¼1 Edem;t
where Edem;t is the total energy consumption (load) at t-th hour.
The exported energy fraction (EEF) is the fraction of exported
energy in the total renewable energy generation
P8760
t¼1 Eexp;t
EEF ¼ P8760 ð4Þ
t¼1 EREG;t
The energy dump fraction (EDF) is
ð1Þ P8760
Edump;t
EDF ¼ Pt¼1
8760
ð5Þ
t¼1 EREG;t
The three indicators defined by Eqs. (3)-(5) are aggregated to a
single number by calculating their weighted average.
WETI ¼ W IEF IEF þ W EEF EEF þ W EDF EDF ð6Þ
where WIFE, WEEF, and WEDF are individual weight factors for
IEF, EEF, and EDF, respectively. All the indices are normalized to
vary between zero and unity. Thus, the weighted average is also
normalized, which requires that WIFE + WEEF + WEDF = 1. In contrast
ð2Þ
to TETI, the variation between 0 and 1 only is possible. The
response of the WETI to oversizing can be adjusted easily by way
of the weight factors.
In the WETI method, the condition WETI = 0 refers explicitly to
full grid-independency and perfect on-site power management
ability (no need of energy dump). On the other hand, IEF, EEF
and EDF are contradictory indicators, because energy export and
dump tend to increase in tandem with oversizing, whereas energy
import decreases. Therefore, the condition WETI = 1 can be only
obtained in a theoretical scenario, where all the weight (W = 1)
is targeted to one of the energy fractions (IEF, EEF or EDF).
Grid parity analysis
An HRES can be considered economically viable (and thus
attractive to the prosumer) if the levelized cost of energy (LCOE)
remains equal or lower than the price of imported (grid) energy,
including energy and transmission charges and taxes. Correspond-
ingly, if the LCOE exceeds the price of grid energy, the system may
not be considered economically feasible in comparison with
importing all the energy from the grid. The condition of equality
between the LCOE and the price of imported energy is known as
the grid parity (GP) [26]. In the computational study, a break-
even price is found for each alternative REG system design to
determine the system-specific grid parity.
The LCOE is calculated from
C ann;tot
LCOE ¼ ð7Þ
Etot
where Cann,tot is the total annualized system cost [€/y] and Etot is
the total amount of energy including the building’s and its systems’
electricity consumption and the amount of energy exported to the
grid during one year [27].
3
K. Alanne
Figure 2. Implementation of the computational study.
The total annualized system cost is
 
r ð1 þ r Þn
C ann;tot ¼ n  C NPC;tot ð8Þ
ð1 þ rÞ  1
where r is the real discount rate, n is the project lifetime, and
CNPC,tot is the net present value of all the costs and revenues over
the project lifetime. In the computational study, capital costs,
replacement costs, O&M costs, and the costs of importing electric-
ity from the grid are included. Revenues include salvage value and
grid sales. Since Eqs. (7) and (8) include both the energy costs and
energy exchange (import/export) between the grid and building,
the dependency between the price of grid energy and LCOE is
apparent. Consequently, the break-even price is calculated individ-
ually for each HRES configuration in the grid parity analysis.
Simulation
The total energy transfer analysis presumes that the building’s
energy demand and renewable energy generation from solar and
wind resources are known on hourly basis. Moreover, the
4
Renewable Energy Focus 46 (2023) 1–15
imported, stored, exported, and dumped energy are to be specified
in the annual energy balance (kWh/y). In the computational study,
all data are acquired from computer simulation of the whole sys-
tem. Measured data from physical systems are not involved.
The simulation includes two phases. First, a target building is
modelled and simulated using the whole-building simulation tool
(IDA-ICE). The IDA-ICE whole-building simulation software has
been developed by the Division of Building Services Engineering,
Royal Institute of Technology (KTH) and validated in several stud-
ies with good agreement [28,29,30,31,32]. The IDA-ICE software
entails multi-zone buildings, HVAC systems, internal loads, out-
door climate, etc. among others, and provides the dynamic simula-
tion of heat and air flows with a variable time-step, allowing a
valid estimate for the building’s hourly energy demand. A detailed
description of the theoretical principles of the tool is presented in
the IDA-ICE user manual [28].
In the second phase, the simulated hourly demand profile, as
well as the hourly climate file used in the first phase, is imported
to the Hybrid Optimization Model for Electric Renewables (HOMER
Pro) tool, which has been designed by the National Renewable
K. Alanne
Energy Laboratory (NREL) and widely used in the design of residen-
tial and communal renewable energy generation systems [33,34].
The HOMER Pro design tool provides down- or upscaling of the
demand profile using a scaling factor. As an output, the tool pro-
vides the cost-optimal configurations and capacities of the REG
system and calculates the levelized cost of energy (LCOE) as
depicted in Section 2.1.2.
The HOMER Pro tool includes specific models for various REG
and electrical energy storage (EES) options that can be included
in a micro-grid to match the annual energy supply and demand.
Specifically, the electrical output of the PV array (P PV ) is calculated
from
 
IT
PPV ¼ P PV;STC f PV ½1 þ aP ðT c  T c;STC Þ
IT;STC
where P PV;STC is the rated capacity of the PV array under stan-
dard test conditions (STC), f PV is the derating factor that accounts
for losses due to issues such as shading, snow covering, and degra-
dation, IT and IT;STC are the incident solar irradiations on the PV
array in the current time step and in standard test conditions,
respectively, aP is the temperature coefficient, and T c and T c;STC
are the PV cell temperatures in the current time step and in stan-
dard test conditions, respectively [27]. The power output of a wind
turbine is calculated using a turbine-specific power curve that is an
expression of the power output as a function of wind speed at the
hub height under conditions of standard temperature and pressure
(STP). To obtain the wind turbine’s power output in actual condi-
tions (P WT ), the specific power output (STP) is corrected using the
equation
 
q
PWT ¼ PWT;STP
qSTP
where PWT;STP is the power output at STP, q is the actual air den-
sity in the current time step, and qSTP is the air density at standard
temperature and pressure (1.225 kg/m3). In this model, the hub
height wind speed is calculated from the wind speed acquired from
weather file by way of either a logarithmic or a power law.
For more details on the computational principles, the reader is
referred to the HOMER Pro user manual [27]. The implementation
of the computational study including the two-phase simulation is
summarized in Fig. 2.
Research data
Target building
The target building (located in Helsinki area, 60°N, 25°E) is a
259.6 m2 (heated area) three-storey conceptual townhouse, the
architecture and geometry of which is based on German town-
house design tradition [35,36]. The internal height of each floor
is 2.6 m, and the storeys are connected by a staircase. The building
is of a rectangular shape (7.5 m x 11.5 m).
The energy performance levels of the building envelope and
building systems satisfy the requirements of the Finnish Building
Code D3 2012, wherefore the building represents energy-efficient
Table 1
Building envelope specifications.
Description Thickness (m) U-value (W/m2 K)
External wall 0.48 0.16
Internal wall 0.09 3.35
Roof 0.67 0.09
External Floor 0.29 0.17
Party wall 0.50 0.43
Renewable Energy Focus 46 (2023) 1–15
construction in Finland [37]. The total glazing area is about 18 %
of the floor area, and its U-value is 1.0 W/m2K. The building envel-
ope has air tightness (n50) of 2 1/h, where n50 is the number of air
changes per hour equivalent to an air-leakage rate, with a 50 Pa
pressure difference between indoor and outdoor. The parameters
of the building envelope are shown in Table 1.
Climate file
The hourly climate file of Helsinki-Vantaa (TRY 2012) is used
[38]. This is a weather data for dynamic simulations, and it repre-
sents the Finnish Test Reference Year (TRY), which is an hourly
data series of external temperatures, relative humidity, wind
ð9Þ velocities, and solar direction, and radiation describing the current
climatic conditions of Southern Finland. The data have been accu-
mulated and computed by recording a 30-year period (1980–2009)
in Helsinki region.
Demand profiles
The domestic hot water (DHW) demand profile is based on
measurements from 15 district-heated houses in Helsinki [39].
The power demand of lighting, appliances, occupants, etc., is based
on statistical information gathered trough questionnaires and one
year hourly measured kWh consumption of 1630 Finnish houses
over a year [40]. Fig. 3 presents the hourly load profiles for a 24-
hour period with a depiction of domestic hot water heating assum-
ing an electric heating system with two coefficients of performance
(COP), i.e., COP = 1 (direct electric heating) and COP = 3 (heat
pump).
ð10Þ
HVAC systems
In the computational study, the spaces and domestic hot water
are heated by a generic ground-source heat pump system with sea-
sonal COP = 3, including the energy use of the compressor and the
auxiliary system of the heat pump. The set-point temperature is
21°C for heating.
The house is ventilated by a centralized constant air volume
(CAV) mechanical supply and exhaust ventilation system with heat
recovery control. The average air exchange rate is equal to 0.65 air
changes per hour (1/h), and the temperature efficiency of the heat
recovery system is 60%. For air-handling unit (AHU), the supply air
set-point temperature is 18°C. There is no cooling.
Renewable energy integration strategies
The considered PV system consists of roof-mounted, generic flat
plate panels with the rated power of 400 W and dimensions of (1.2
m x 1.8 m). The service marginal on the roof for all directions is to
be at least 0.4 m. Hence, 24 panels at maximum can be installed on
the roof, the specific power of the entire system being 9.5 kW (at
maximum). The generic flat plate panel has the conversion effi-
ciency of 19%. The nominal cell temperature (NOCT) is 47 °C, and
the temperature-dependent power coefficient is 0.5%/°C. The
panels have a fixed installation on the roof without a tracking sys-
tem. The tilt angle is set as 40° and the panels are directed to the
south. The derating factor is 80%.
The wind turbine models used in the computational study are
the HOMER Pro generic wind turbine model and an ‘‘Aeolos” verti-
cal turbine model, both connected to the AC bus. The hub heights
for the 1 kW and 3 kW modules are 17 m and for the 10 kW-
module it is 24 m. The hub height of the ‘‘Aeolos” vertical turbine
model is 10 m.
Electrical energy storage (EES) is one of the critical components
of the REG system due to the intermittent nature of renewable
5
K. Alanne
Figure 3. Hourly load of lighting, appliances, and occupants (A) Hourly load of DHW heating (B).
power generation. Lithium-ion battery (LIB) technology has been
realized as a cost-effective and mature technology for residential
applications [11]. The proposed renewable energy integration
strategy relies on the technical specifications of the commercial
LIB Tesla Powerwall provided by HOMER Pro. The round-trip effi-
ciency is 89%, the nominal voltage is 220 V, the nominal capacity
is 13.2 kWh, and the maximum charge/discharge current is 31.8
A. The state-of-charge (SOC) at the beginning of a simulation per-
iod is assumed to be 50%.
A functional system also includes a ‘converter’, which is a power
management unit consisting of an inverter, a maximum power
point tracker (MPPT), and a rectifier. The inverter makes the DC
power generated by the PV panels to fulfil the AC loads and to
ensure the power quality for grid export. The MPPT matches the
PV to the DC bus voltage. The rectifier converts the AC to DC to
charge batteries. The efficiency of the converter (inverter and rec-
tifier) is assumed to be 95%.
The building is connected to a 0.4 kV (AC) power grid via a bi-
directional interface. The main fuse is 3x25 A, allowing a 17 kW-
grid interface (both directions). In such a system, the inverter size
is restrained to 15 kW at maximum [40].
6
Renewable Energy Focus 46 (2023) 1–15
Economic data
The installed PV system costs are estimated via the on-line ser-
vice ‘virtane.fi’. The service seeks the best prices for small (3 kW),
medium (5 kW), large (7 kW), very large (10 kW), and communal
PV systems. For example, the suggested installed capacities for
communities of 5, 10, and 15 townhouses are 23 kW, 46 kW, and
67 kW, respectively. The operation and management (O&M) costs
are estimated to be 10 €/y and the module lifespan is 25 years [12].
The cost estimate for wind power is acquired from the latest
Cost of Wind Energy Review by the National Renewable Energy
Laboratory [41]. For the rated power of 20 kW, 100 kW and 2.8
MW, the estimated installed costs are 5675, 4300, and 1462 $/
kW, respectively. The O&M costs for the systems below 100 kW
are 35 $/kW,y. The currency conversion rate for US dollar to euro
has been chosen as 0.883 €/$, which represents the average con-
version rate between 2017 and 2022. For the roof-mounted
‘‘Aeolos” turbine model, the baseline is set to the price suggested
for a 1 kW turbine by HOMER Pro (i.e., 5320 $), which is 65% of
the price suggested by NREL for free-standing (pole-mounted) tur-
bines. The lifespan is assumed to be 20 years.
K. Alanne Renewable Energy Focus 46 (2023) 1–15

The installed costs of energy storage are estimated using the [43]. According to the latter data source, one Powerwall module
price estimates for Tesla product series by the websites (rated capacity 13.5 kWh) costs 11500 $, whereas the value of
‘‘Solarquotes.com.au” [42] and the ‘‘Architectural Digest Review” the package of ten modules (135 kWh) is 80500 $. In Wikipedia,

Figure 4. Price estimates for solar PV (A), wind (B) and battery energy storage systems (C).

7
K. Alanne
the published price of a larger, Tesla Powerpack module (capacity
200 kWh) is 350 $/kWh, whereas Electrec.co predicts Tesla to push
the price of Tesla Megapack (3.9 MWh) to 328 $/kWh. The lifespan
of the LIB is assumed to be 15 years.
The installed price estimates for each technology are shown in
Fig. 4.
The average cost in Fig. 4 is set as the baseline, but due to the
large gap between the minimum and maximum prices, the result
is exposed to sensitivity analysis. The installed costs of micro-
wind power plants depend on whether the turbine is free-
standing (pole-mounted) or roof-mounted. The price estimate for
roof-mounted vertical turbines suffers from the early stage of their
commercialization. Therefore, a sensitivity analysis is conducted in
the simulation study for wind turbines, as well. The cost of the
power management unit is included in the cost estimate of the
PV and/or the LIB system. Hence, no separate cost data are applied
to the converter unit.
The present study is to find a break-even price for various REG
systems. Therefore, data on electricity prices is needed for compar-
isons only. The price of grid electricity is assumed to include
energy and transmission fees plus taxes. According to Statistics
Finland, the total average price of grid electricity over the recent
years has been around 18 €c/kWh for typical single-family house-
holds (types K1, L1 and L2). In the Eurostat, the price for household
customers for the first half of 2022 was 19.45 €c/kWh [44]. In [11],
the baseline was set to 12.3 €c/kWh, as the average spot price for
2019 was 4.4 €c/kWh, combined a value-added tax of 24 %, a flat
distribution fee of 5.51 €/month and a distribution rate of 4.1 €c/
kWh in the Helsinki region. The future prices provided by Nasdaq
OMX (October 2022) predict, however, that prices as high as 50 €c/
kWh may be seen in Europe in the conditions of energy crisis.
In the literature, electrical utilities are commonly assumed to
pay one third (33%) of the import price for each kWh of electricity
exported into the grid (e.g., [11]). On the other hand, the increasing
penetration of on-site REG systems has pushed the feed-in-tariffs
down [8]. The computational study examines the scenarios of no
monetary compensation (sellback = 0) and 33% compensation (sell-
back = 1/3 of the energy price) for the exported electricity. The pro-
ject lifetime is chosen as 25 years, and the real discount rate is
2.94% (nominal discount rate 5 % with expected inflation 2%
detracted), which is a typical discount rate for long-term energy
investments in buildings. The discount rate is exposed to sensitiv-
ity analysis.
Figure 5. The values of energy transfer indices for various PV (A) and storage sizes (B).
8
Renewable Energy Focus 46 (2023) 1–15
Results and discussion
Energy consumption of the target building
The dynamic building energy simulation of the target building
was carried out in the previous work [45]. The simulated annual
thermal energy consumption of the space heating is 29292 kWh/
y (113 kWh/m2,y), and that of the DHW heating is 5954 kWh/y
(23 kWh/m2,y). The electrical consumption of lighting and appli-
ances is 8939 kWh/y (34 kWh/m2,y). The heating electricity con-
sumption is 11749 kWh/y (43 kWh/m2,y), and the total
electricity consumption is 20688 kWh/y (80 kWh/m2,y). The aver-
age daily consumption is 56.68 kWh/d, whereas the hourly peak
demand is 4.96 kW.
Perceptions on sizing HRES with an aim to reduce grid dependency
The annual PV generation for the chosen tilt angle (40°) is close
to optimal, which results in the annual PV generation of 8420 kWh/
y for a 9.5 kW system. This is the largest recommendable system
for the target building, theoretically covering 41% of the house’s
annual consumption. Correspondingly, the lowest theoretical
imported energy fraction (IEF) is 0.59 presuming that internal
losses and restraints related to the power conversion and storage
are neglected. In practice, excess energy cannot be avoided.
In the second phase of the simulation, HOMER Pro was set to
optimize the size of the inverter. At the sellback price zero (no
monetary compensation for exported electricity), the optimization
ends up with an inverter of 4 kW for a 9.5 kW solar PV system. In
that case, the inverter losses are 398 kWh/y, the imported energy
is16354 kWh/y, the exported energy is 2569 kW/y, and the energy
dump is 1153 kWh/y. The IEF (without battery) is 0.78. The energy
transfer indices (TETI, WETI), calculated as described in Sec-
tion 2.1.1, are shown in Figs. 5A and 5B for varying of PV and
energy storage capacities, respectively.
In Fig. 5, the value of the weighted energy transfer index (WETI)
has been calculated by assigning an equal weight (0.33) for
imported, exported, and dumped energy fractions. Moreover, the
total energy transfer index (TETI) has been calculated by adding
the energy dump in the definition of the total energy transfer
according to the equation
ETET;t ¼ Eexp;t þ Eimp;t þ Edump;t ð11Þ
K. Alanne
The graph in Fig. 5A shows that the TETI remains above unity,
which can be interpreted so that the present REG system configu-
ration (9.5 kW PV) is not even close to offer grid-independency.
The impact of energy dump (dashed line) is not significant in the
TETI assessment. Again, the TETI does not give a sign of oversizing,
but suggests that PV systems larger than 9.5 kW would be pre-
ferred to pursue grid-independency. Instead, the WETI starts to
grow steeply when the installed PV capacity exceeds 3 kW. Given
that equal weights have been assigned for all the energy fractions,
the WETI method penalizes the oversizing strictly. By assigning
more weight on the imported energy (and by reducing the weights
on exported and dumped energy), the WETI method would prefer
either small systems (< 3 kW) or large systems (> 7 kW). This is
because the IEF drops steeply when even a small PV capacity is
installed, whereas large systems provide the highest level of
energy self-sufficiency.
By equipping the 9.5 kW PV system with a short-term storage,
the imported energy fraction (IEF) can be reduced to 0.64, whereas
it is also possible to get rid of exported and dumped energy. On the
other hand, increasing the storage capacity beyond 30 kWh (2
Tesla Powerwall modules) does not help reducing the IEF anymore,
i.e., the energy import is saturated. The saturation is also indicated
in Fig. 5B by both TETI and WETI. Both indices reach a plateau at
storage capacities beyond 30 kWh. Due to the saturation effect,
the largest useful storage capacity is easy to recognize.
Further reduction of grid dependency requires HRES, i.e., adding
a wind turbine into the system configuration. The annual power
generation potential of the roof mounted ‘‘Aeolos” turbine model
by rated power is in Table 2.
Table 2
Annual wind power generation potential for the vertical turbine (‘‘Aeolos”) by size.
Rated power [kW] Production kWh/y
1 1205
3 3615
5 6025
10 12050
Figure 6. The values of energy transfer indices as a function of installed wind turbine capacity.
9
Renewable Energy Focus 46 (2023) 1–15
The annual generation of 12268 kWh (besides 8420 kWh/y of
the 9.5 kW PV system) would be sufficient to satisfy the remaining
annual electrical consumption (20688 kWh/y). A roof-mounted
(vertical) 10 kW Aeolos wind turbine system with the hub height
of 10 m would be close to fulfilling the shortage. The graphs in
Fig. 6 show the impact of roof-mounted wind-turbine capacity
on the energy transfer indices in a hybrid renewable energy sys-
tem, where the wind turbine supports the installed PV capacity
of 9.5 kW and two (2) battery modules.
The data in Fig.6 indicate that the minimum WETI (= 0.2) equals
to the condition TETI = 1. Here, the WETI has been determined
using equal weights (0.33) for imported, exported, and dumped
energy fractions. This is obtained when the installed wind turbine
capacity (besides 9.5 kW PV) is around 7.5 kW. On the other hand,
the TETI yet keeps on reducing with wind turbines larger than 10
kW. For wind turbines larger than 8 kW, the WETI shows an
increasing trend, suggesting that the system is oversized. This
result implies that a realistic target value for sizing the HRES in
the given context would be TETI = 1. On the other hand, the mini-
mization of WETI would provide a useful objective function to pre-
vent oversizing without a need to implement cost constraints.
In [21], the aim of sizing was to obtain a net-zero energy build-
ing. Hence, the sizing problem was subjected to two balance con-
straints to ensure a sufficient renewable energy generation. It
was required that the annual REG should be equal to or greater
than the energy demand of the building, and the annual energy
exported to the grid should be equal to or greater than the annual
energy imported from the grid. Furthermore, the loss of power sup-
ply probability (LPSP) was added as an objective function besides
the annualized costs with an aim to reduce the energy import.
The poor availability of sunlight during the winter period makes
a fully independent HRES hard to realize in Nordic climates such as
Finland. Given that fuel-powered systems are not an option in this
context, an HRES equipped with a long-term storage is needed to
reduce grid dependency. The graphs in Fig. 7 describe a possible
pathway towards full grid independency by way of an HRES config-
uration with the PV system of 9.5 kW and a pole-mounted micro-
wind turbine of 15 kW (hub 18 m), which can satisfy the whole
annual energy demand (20688 kWh/y). The graph is a function of
K. Alanne
Figure 7. The total energy transfer index as a function of long-term storage capacity.
installed storage capacity, and the total energy transfer index is
used as an indicator of grid-dependency.
In Fig.7, the receding descent of TETI curve on the left half of the
graph implies that the potential of short-term storage will be
entirely utilized when the storage capacity is increased up to 660
kWh (50 Tesla Powerwall modules). When the storage capacity
exceeds 660 kWh, a short saturation is seen first, followed by a
gradual descent, i.e., the transition from short-term to the long-
term storage.
The conclusion regarding the sizing is that obtaining the full
grid independency would require the storage capacity of close to
5 MWh, which is more than the capacity of one (1) utility-scale
Tesla Megapack unit (3.9 MWh).
Perceptions on sizing HRES with an aim to obtain grid parity
In the work of Niveditha & Singaravel [21], sizing an HRES was
considered a multi-objective optimization problem, where the
annualized system costs (ACS) were minimized in concert with
the total energy transfer index (TETI) and the loss of power supply
probability (LPSP) subject to the energy balance constraints. With
no economic constraints, however, this kind of an approach may
result in recommendations where the levelized cost of energy
(LCOE) remains higher than the total price of grid energy. On the
other hand, a fixed or variable price schedule for the grid energy
is used, which may result in biased conclusions on the economic
viability of the optimized HRES. Hence, a different approach is
taken in the present study. Here, such a break-even price is found
that equalizes the price of grid energy and the LCOE of a given REG
system configuration (i.e., grid parity). This is also considered a
boundary condition for economic viability.
10
Renewable Energy Focus 46 (2023) 1–15
The HOMER Pro tool calculates the LCOE for any system config-
uration. To that end, the net present value of capital, replacement,
operational and management (O&M) costs and the salvage value
are determined. The cost structure for a 9.5 kW PV system
equipped with two electrical energy storage modules is in Table 3.
In Table 3, the salvage value is a fraction of the replacement
costs, and it is directly proportional to the component’s remaining
life. The lifespan of the PV panel is equal to the analysis period
(project lifetime), wherefore the salvage value is zero. The grid
interface is the same for all the configurations. Thus, the only
grid-related cost is the net present value of imported energy.
Since the LCOE depends on the price of grid energy, the grid par-
ity was found by way of an iterative method (‘‘bifurcation”). First, a
break-even price was guessed. Secondly, the LCOE was calculated
and compared with that price. If the LCOE deviated from the
guessed price, the simulation was initialized with a new guess.
The procedure was repeated until equality between the guessed
break-even price and the LCOE (the grid parity) was found. Typi-
cally, 20-30 simulations were required to optimize the converter,
whereas and 3-10 trials were needed to fix the break-even price
for a single system configuration. The grid parity for a 9.5 kW PV
system (no energy storage) is illustrated in Fig 8A.
In Fig. 8A, the break-even price (10 €c/kWh) is marked by a
black triangle. The green line indicates the condition, where the
investment in a 9.5 kW system is economically viable (i.e., the elec-
tricity price is greater than the LCOE).
The dependence between the grid parity and the sellback price
is shown in Fig 8B for various capacities of the PV system. The low-
est break-even prices are associated with large (7 kW or more) PV
systems. With the zero-sellback rate, the break-even price is satu-
rated to the level of around 10 €c/kWh, but with the sellback rate
K. Alanne Renewable Energy Focus 46 (2023) 1–15

Table 3
Cost structure for a PV system (9.5 kW) calculated by HOMER Pro.

System Capital [€] Replacement [€] O&M [€] Salvage [€] Total [€]
PV panel 11792 0 175 0 11967
Grid 0 0 65142A 0 65142
Battery 16336 10576 175 – 2638 24449
TOTAL 28128 10576 65492 – 2638 101558
A
The net present value of imported energy.

Figure 8. Visualization of the grid parity (A) and grid parity for PV systems by size (B).

of 33% of the electricity price it continues to decrease for systems
of larger than 9.5 kW.
The grid parity analysis was conducted for the 14 HRES config-
urations shown in Table 4. For each of the listed configurations, the
converter was optimized with the sellback rate of 0 €c/kWh with
an aim to discourage the energy export to the grid. This means that
a small converter is preferred by the optimizer over large one, since
the algorithm concludes that it is more affordable to dump energy
than to export the surplus electricity to the grid without monetary
compensation. The converter losses vary between 363 kWh/y and
442 kWh/y depending on the system size.
The graphs in Fig. 9 are to depict the configuration-specific
energy transfer indices (A) and the correlation between energy
transfer indices and grid parity (B) with varying sellback rates.
Besides the sellback rates 0% and 33% of the electricity price, an
optimistic scenario of 50% sellback rate is presented.
The graphs in Fig. 9 reveal that the lowest TETI value (0.6) is
obtained with configuration 14, which includes a roof-mounted
10 kW wind turbine, PV panels with the rated power of 9.5 kW
and two Tesla Powerwall battery modules. The break-even price
varies between 24-28 €c/kWh depending on the sellback rate. It
can be also concluded that fulfilling the condition TETI < 1 neces-
sarily requires a wind turbine to be included in the system (config-
urations 5, 9-11, 13-14). The lowest break-even prices (17-22 €c/
kWh) are obtained with configuration 11 (a roof-mounted 10 kW
wind turbine, PV panels with the rated power of 9.5 kW, no energy
storage).
The key message of the graph in Fig. 9A is that not depending on
the used energy transfer index (IEF, TETI, WETI), the recommenda-
tion concerning the system configuration is akin. All the indicators
prefer the configurations 5, 10 and 14. On the other hand, the WETI
method also favours the configurations 3 and 4. This is partly
because the equal weighting for all the energy fractions (IEF, EEF,
EDF) puts higher value on short-term energy storage capability
than the TETI method does. It can be also concluded from the data
in Fig. 9 that establishing sizing recommendations always should
include an economic analysis. For example, the configuration 5 is
preferred if the recommendation is merely based on energy trans-
fer indices, although its break-even price is relatively high (30-40
€c/kWh).

Table 4
Descriptions and annual energy transfer for the 14 analysed system configurations.

Gonfig. PV [kW] Storage Wind [kW] Turbine Hub [m] Converter Production Import Export Dump
[modules] type [kW] [kWh/y] [kWh/y] [kWh/y] [kWh/y]
1 9.5 0 0 - - 4 8419 16354 2569 1153
2 9.5 1 0 - - 4 8419 14405 1045 466
3 9.5 2 0 - - 4 8419 13503 385 107
4 9.5 2 5 Horizontal 18 4 11049 11547 910 208
5 9.5 2 10 Horizontal 18 5.33 13678 10151 2199 78
6 9.5 0 1 Vertical 10 4 9624 15493 2912 1153
7 9.5 0 3 Vertical 10 4 12034 13935 3764 1153
8 9.5 0 5 Vertical 10 4 14444 12652 4892 1153
9 9.5 1 5 Vertical 10 4 14444 10395 2816 647
10 9.5 2 5 Vertical 10 5.33 14444 9386 2202 90
11 9.5 0 10 Vertical 10 4 20469 10354 8618 1154
12 0 0 10 Vertical 10 - 12050 12598 3960 0
13 9.5 1 10 Vertical 10 4 20469 7900 6185 749
14 9.5 2 10 Vertical 10 5.33 20469 6855 5560 139

11
K. Alanne Renewable Energy Focus 46 (2023) 1–15

Figure 9. The configuration-specific energy transfer indices (A) and correlation with grid parity (B).

Figure 10. The break-even price as a function of long-term storage capacity.

The multi-objective optimization in [21] resulted in system
configurations with the TETI values close to zero. In the context
of the present study, corresponding results can be only obtained
by including a long-term energy storage in the HRES. To show
the challenge to design such a system in the Nordic conditions,
the grid parity analysis was conducted for a system configuration
including 9.5 kW PV and 10 kW wind turbine to reveal an econom-
ically viable pathway to full grid independency. The break-even
prices as a function of TETI for various energy storage capacities
(number of Tesla Powerwall modules) are in Fig. 10.
The graph indicates that the TETI values less than 0.1 cannot be
obtained with break-even prices below 4.00 €/kWh. The break-
even price starts to rise steeply when the storage capacity exceeds
12
100 kWh. Therefore, affordable megawatt-hour-scale energy stor-
age solutions would be a necessity to make grid-independency
economically viable for residential-scale energy prosumers.
Sensitivity analysis
In the computational study, the energy simulation was con-
ducted for conceptual system configurations using validated simu-
lation tools. On the other hand, the simulation results constitute a
baseline to determine energy transfer indices for comparison
between various HRES configurations. Hence, issues such as simu-
lation or measurement errors were omitted in the sensitivity anal-
ysis. Instead, the grid parity analysis is exposed to several
K. Alanne
Figure 11. Sensitivity of the break-even price for the configuration 14.
uncertainties in economic parameters. Thus, the sensitivity of the
break-even price to five (5) parameters was examined for the sys-
tem configuration 14. The five parameters are i) the installed cost
of PV, ii) the installed cost of electrical energy storage (EES), iii),
the installed cost of wind turbine, iv) the lifespan of the wind tur-
bine, and v) the discount rate.
The minimum and maximum installed PV costs as depicted in
Fig. 4A define the lower and the upper bounds of the installed PV
prices. The lower and the upper bounds of the energy storage
prices follow the same proportions in a scenario called
‘‘business-as-usual”. For the EES, an optimistic scenario referred
to as ‘‘favourable development” was introduced. Here, it was
assumed that new technologies based on abundant or recycled bat-
tery materials are commercialized, the market development of sta-
tic energy storages reaches the level of mass production, or the EES
investments are incentivized. In the ‘‘favourable development” sce-
nario, the price of EES is 150 €/kWh, which is of the same magni-
tude as the Bloomberg estimate for vehicle batteries.
A noteworthy uncertainty is included in the installed costs of
roof-mounted wind power plants, which is presumably lower than
the cost estimate for the plants consisting of pole-mounted tur-
bines. Thus, the upper bound of the installed cost of the roof-
mounted wind turbine was set equal to the NREL estimate
(Fig. 4B) and the lower bound at the level of 50% of the NREL esti-
mate, the baseline being at 65%. For wind turbines, the ‘‘favourable
development” scenario was also introduced, including the lifespan
extension from 20 to 25 years. The lower bound of the discount
rate was set to 0% and the upper bound to 5%.
The sensitivity analysis was conducted both parameter by
parameter (keeping the rest of parameters constant) and consider-
ing the aggregated effect of all the five parameters. To that end, the
‘‘utopia” scenario was defined to represent the combination of the
most favourable parameter values, whereas the ‘‘dystopia” sce-
nario included the most unfavourable ones. The results of the sen-
sitivity analysis are summarized in Fig 11.
13
Renewable Energy Focus 46 (2023) 1–15
The lengths of the bars in Fig. 11 describe the sensitivity of the
break-even price to the five parameters. The most significant
parameters are the wind turbine price and the real discount rate,
which are represented by the longest bars. The baseline refers to
the break-even price of the configuration 14 without a monetary
compensation for exported energy, i.e., 28 €c/kWh at sellback rate
= 0. Increasing the sellback rate to 50% of the total energy price
would reduce the break-even price by 4 €c/kWh, to 24 €c/kWh. If
there is an abundance of REG in the market, however, that high a
sellback rate is not realistic.
In the ‘‘utopistic” scenario, the break-even price reduces by 10
€c/kWh to 18 €c/kWh at the discount rate of 2.97%. This is of a sim-
ilar magnitude as the electricity price for household customers for
the first half of 2022 according to the Eurostat, i.e., 19.45 €c/kWh
[45], yet high, when compared with the Finnish baseline set in
[11], i.e., 12.3 €c/kWh.
Overall, the grid parity of a residential-scale HRES is challenging
to obtain in the Finnish energy market, given that the energy prices
will reach the pre-COVID-19 level. However, if the technology price
can be still brought down, an HRES provides an attractive enough
option due to its assets in reducing grid dependency.
Conclusions
This study was to find out the technically and economically
viable level of grid dependency for urban housing in Nordic climate
through on-site renewable energy generation. To that end, two
methodological approaches were implemented, namely, energy
transfer analysis and grid parity analysis. The Total Energy Transfer
Index (TETI) and the Weighted Energy Transfer Index (WETI) were
introduced to quantify the grid dependency and their implications
sizing a hybrid renewable energy system (HRES). The prosumer’s
grid parity was determined in a computational study for various
design options by finding a break-even price, i.e., price of grid
K. Alanne
energy equal to the system-specific levelized cost of energy. The
results concern a conceptual townhouse located in Finland.
The conclusion is that both TETI and WETI are useful in quanti-
fying the grid dependency. However, the TETI, which has been
recently developed and implemented to assist the design of net
zero-energy buildings, may encourage oversizing the REG systems
in Nordic climates such as Finland if the optimization problem is
not particularly subjected to a cost constraint. The WETI is more
rigorous a performance indicator with respect to oversizing since
it explicitly penalizes poorly designed on-site power management.
On the other hand, it is flexible in the sense that the level of
rewarding and penalizing energy import, export and dump can
be adjusted by weight factors.
A conclusion can be drawn from the simulation results that a
realistic target value for the TETI when sizing a hybrid renewable
energy system (HRES) for a Finnish urban residential building is
TETI = 1. It is also concluded that the condition TETI = 1 requires
a wind turbine to be installed into the system configuration. To ful-
fil this condition, the computational study for a Finnish townhouse
concept suggested an HRES including the roof area covered by PV
panels to the maximum available extent (rated power 9.5 kW),
an inclusion of two short-term electrical energy storage modules
(total capacity 26.4 kWh) and a roof-mounted wind turbine (rated
power 7.5 kW).
A grid parity analysis was applied to 14 system configurations
in total. For hybrid energy systems with TETI < 1, the lowest
break-even prices (17-22 €c/kWh depending on the sell-back rate)
were achieved with a system configuration including a roof-
mounted 10 kW wind turbine and PV panels with the rated power
of 9.5 kW. By including electrical energy storage (capacity 26.4
kWh), the TETI was reduced to 0.6, but at the cost of higher
break-even price (24-28 €c/kWh). Assuming that the technology
prices can be brought down, however, the HRES would provide
an attractive energy supply option for urban housing due to its
assets in reducing grid dependency.
The study concludes that the energy transfer analysis is useful
in quantifying grid dependency, and it can be generalized as a
methodology. However, the case-specific limitations must be con-
sidered to end up with appropriate system sizing. The results of the
energy transfer analysis derived from the energy simulations can
be generalized to similar building types located in similar climates.
The results of the grid parity analysis as well as the proposed sys-
tem sizes are case-specific. Moreover, the economic variables are
prone, particularly, to uncertainty related to the price of roof-
mounted wind turbines. Hence, they cannot be generalized.
In the future, similar studies are recommended for other build-
ing types and user profiles in various operational conditions. The
principles of energy transfer and grid parity analyses could be
implemented in the design and optimization tools. The results of
this paper can be considered useful for research focusing on the
impacts of financial support or electricity market mechanisms.
Data availability
Data will be made available on request.
Declaration of Competing Interest
The authors declare that they have no known competing finan-
cial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared
to influence the work reported in this paper.
Acknowledgements
This research did not receive any specific grant from funding
agencies in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.
14
Renewable Energy Focus 46 (2023) 1–15
References
[1] European Commission, Renewable energy directive, 2021 Revision of the EU
Renewable Energy Directive, https://ec.europa.eu/info/sites/default/files/
amendment-renewable-energy-directive-2030-climate-target-with-
annexes_en.pdf; 2021 (accessed 14 October 2022).
[2] European Commission, Communication From The Commission To The
European Parliament, The European Council, The Council, The European
Economic And Social Committee And The Committee Of The Regions
REPowerEU Plan, Document 52022DC0230, COM/2022/230 final.
[3] European Commission, Energy efficiency in buildings, https://ec.europeu/info/
news/focus-energy-efficiency-buildings-2020-feb-17_en; 2020 (accessed 14
October 2022).
[4] International Energy Agency (IEA), Global Energy Review 2021, http://www.
iea.org/t&c/; 2021 (accessed 14 October 2022).
[5] International Energy Agency (IEA), World Energy Outlook 2020, http://www.
iea.org/weo; 2020 (accessed 14 October 2022).
[6] Statistics Finland, Renewable energy surpassed fossil fuels and peat in total
energy consumption in 2020, Energy Supply and Consumption, https://
www.stat.fi/til/ehk/2020/04/ehk_2020_04_2021-04-16_tie_001_en.html;
2021 (accessed 14th October 2022).
[7] Caruna Oy, Solar panel price comparison tool for detached houses, Virtane
Webpage. (n.d.), https://www.virtane.fi/aurinkopaneelit/omakotitalo/
kilpailuta/ (accessed 14 October 2022).
[8] M.A. Hayat, F. Shahnia, G.M. Shafiullah, Replacing flat rate feed-in tariffs for
rooftop photovoltaic systems with a dynamic one to consider technical,
environmental, social, and geographical factors, IEEE Trans. Ind. Inf. 15 (2019)
3831–3844.
[9] H. Ur Rehman, A. Hasan, F. Reda, Challenges in reaching positive energy
building level in apartment buildings in the Nordic climate: A techno-
economic analysis, Energ. Buildings 262 (2022).
[10] S. Marmutova, Performance of a Savonius wind turbine in urban sites using
CFD analysis, University of Vaasa, Vaasa, 2016, Doctoral thesis,.
[11] J. Hyvönen, A. Santasalo-Aarnio, S. Syri, M. Lehtonen, Feasibility study of
energy storage options for photovoltaic electricity generation in detached
houses in Nordic climates, J. Storage Mater. 54 (2022).
[12] A. Simola, A. Kosonen, T. Ahonen, J. Ahola, M. Korhonen, T. Hannula, Optimal
dimensioning of a solar PV plant with measured electrical load curves in
Finland, Sol. Energy 170 (2018) 113–123.
[13] J. Väisänen, A. Kosonen, J. Ahola, T. Sallinen, T. Hannula, Optimal sizing ratio of
a solar PV inverter for minimizing the levelized cost of electricity in Finnish
irradiation conditions, Sol. Energy 185 (2019) 350–362.
[14] T.V. Christiaanse, R.C.G.M. Loonen, R. Evins, Techno-economic optimization for
grid-friendly rooftop PV systems – A case study of commercial buildings in
British Columbia, Sustainable Energy Technol. Assess. 47 (2021).
[15] P. Sharma, M. Kolhe, A. Sharma, Economic performance assessment of building
integrated photovoltaic system with battery energy storage under grid
constraints, Renew. Energy 145 (2020) 1901–1909.
[16] J. Hirvonen, G. Kayo, A. Hasan, K. Sirén, Zero energy level and economic
potential of small-scale building-integrated PV with different heating systems
in Nordic conditions, Appl. Energy 167 (2016) 255–269.
[17] J. Hirvonen, G. Kayo, S. Cao, A. Hasan, K. Sirén, Renewable energy production
support schemes for residential-scale solar photovoltaic systems in Nordic
conditions, Energy Policy 79 (2015) 72–86.
[18] D. Mazzeo, N. Matera, P. De Luca, C. Baglivo, P.M. Congedo, G. Oliveti,
Worldwide geographical mapping and optimization of stand-alone and grid-
connected hybrid renewable system techno-economic performance across
Köppen-Geiger climates, Appl. Energy 276 (2020).
[19] C. Li, X. Ge, Y. Zheng, C. Xu, Y. Ren, C. Song, C. Yang, Techno-economic
feasibility study of autonomous hybrid wind/PV/battery power system for a
household in Urumqi, China, Energy 55 (2013) 263–272.
[20] R. Khezri, A. Mahmoudi, H. Aki, Optimal planning of solar photovoltaic and
battery storage systems for grid-connected residential sector: Review,
challenges and new perspectives, Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 153 (2022).
[21] N. Niveditha, M.M. Rajan Singaravel, Optimal sizing of hybrid PV–Wind–
Battery storage system for Net Zero Energy Buildings to reduce grid burden,
Appl. Energy 324 (2022).
[22] S. Barakat, H. Ibrahim, A.A. Elbaset, Multi-objective optimization of grid-
connected PV-wind hybrid system considering reliability, cost, and
environmental aspects, Sustain. Cities Soc. 60 (2020).
[23] H. Yi, X. Yang, A metaheuristic algorithm based on simulated annealing for
optimal sizing and techno-economic analysis of PV systems with multi-type of
battery energy storage, Sustainable Energy Technol. Assess. 53 (Part C) (2022).
[24] S.S. Raghuwanshi, R. Arya, Reliability evaluation of stand-alone hybrid
photovoltaic energy system for rural healthcare centre, Sustainable Energy
Technol. Assess. 37 (2020).
[25] S. Cao, A. Hasan, K. Sirén, On-site energy matching indices for buildings with
energy conversion, storage and hybrid grid connections, Energ. Buildings 64
(2013) 423–438.
[26] L.M. Putranto, T. Widodo, H. Indrawan, Md.A. Imron, S.A. Rosyadi, Grid parity
analysis: The present state of PV rooftop in Indonesia, Renewable Energy Focus
40 (2022) 23–38.
[27] HOMER Energy, HOMER Pro 3.15 User Manual, https://www.
homerenergy.com/products/pro/docs/latest/index.html; 2020 (accessed 17
November 2022).
K. Alanne
[28] EQUA, IDA Indoor Climate and Energy 4.8 User manual, http://www.
equaonline.com/iceuser/new_index.html; 2020 (accessed 17 November 2022).
[29] P. Sahlin, Modeling and Simulation methods for Modular continuous System in
Buildings, Royal Institute of Technology (KTH), Stockholm, Sweden, 1996, PhD
thesis.
[30] S. Kropf, G. Zweifel G, Validation of the building simulation program IDA-ICE
according to CEN 13791 Thermal performance of buildings - Calculation of
internal temperatures of a room in summer without mechanical cooling -
General criteria and validation procedure, Hochschule für Technik +
Architektur, Luzern, Switzerland, 2001.
[31] EN ISO 13791, Thermal performance of buildings, Calculation of internal of a
room in summer without mecahanical cooling, General criteria and validation
procedures, 2004.
[32] J. Travesi, G. Maxwell, C. Klaassen, M. Holtz, Empirical Validation of Iowa
Energy Resource Station Building Energy analysis simulation models, IEA,
2001.
[33] P. Lilienthal, L. Flowers, C. Rossmann, HOMER: The Hybrid Optimization Model
for Electric Renewable American Wind Energy Association, DC (United States),
Washington, 1995.
[34] S. Bahramara, M.P. Moghaddam, M.R. Haghifam, Optimal planning of hybrid
renewable energy systems using HOMER: A review, Renew. Sustain. Energy
Rev. 62 (2016) 609–620.
[35] K. Alanne, M.Z. Degefa, E. Doroudchi, S. Pal, Renewable energy and energy
storage (In Finnish: Uusiutuva energia ja sen varastointi), in: M. Kuittinen
(Ed.), Nollaa parempi – Townhouse energiatehokkaassa asuinrakentamisessa,
Aalto University, Department of Architecture, Espoo, Finland, 2015, pp. 53–67.
[36] T. Ullrich, Townhouse Helsinki, Aalto University, Department of Architecture,
Housing design studio, Espoo, Finland, 2013.
15
Renewable Energy Focus 46 (2023) 1–15
[37] D3 Finnish Code of Building Regulation, Energy efficiency of buildings,
Regulations and guidelines 2012, Helsinki, Finland, 2011.
[38] T. Kalamees, K. Jylhä, H. Tietavainen, J. Jokisalo, S. Illomets, R. Hyvönen, S. Saku,
Development of weighting factors for climate variables for selecting the
energy reference year according to the EN ISO 15927–4 standard, Energ.
Buildings 47 (2012) 53–60.
[39] J. Koivuniemi, Dimensioning standards of domestic hot water flow and
temperature criteria according to microbiological state of the water in
district heated houses, Helsinki University of Technology, Department of
Mechanical Engineering, Espoo, Finland, 2005.
[40] Aurinkovirta Website, https://www.aurinkovirta.fi/artikkelit/jakeluverkot/
sahkoliittyman-vaikutus-aurinkosahkon-hankintaan/ (accessed 17 November
2022).
[41] T. Stehly, P. Duffy, 2020 Cost of Wind Energy Review, Technical Report NREL/
TP-5000-81209, National Renewable Energy Laboratory, Golden, CO (USA),
2022.
[42] Solarquotes Website, https://www.solarquotes.com.au/battery-storage/
comparison-table/ (accessed 17 November 2022).
[43] Architectural Digest Website, https://www.architecturaldigest.com/reviews/
home-improvement/tesla-powerwall-cost (accessed 17 November 2022).
[44] Eurostat European Commission, Electricity Price Statistics, http://ec.europa.
eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/index.php/Electricity_price_statistics; 2022
(accessed 9 November 2022).
[45] S.K. Pal, K. Alanne, J. Jokisalo, K. Siren, Energy performance and economic
viability of advanced window technologies for a new Finnish townhouse
concept, Appl. Energy 162 (2016) 11–20.