Renewable Energy 220 (2024) 119595

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Renewable Energy
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/renene

Site suitability assessment for solar power plants in Bangladesh: A

GIS-based analytical hierarchy process (AHP) and multi-criteria decision
analysis (MCDA) approach
Md. Rabiul Islam a, *, Md. Tareq Aziz a, Mohammed Alauddin a, b, Zarjes Kader a,
Md. Rakibul Islam a
a
Institute of Water and Environment, Dhaka University of Engineering & Technology, Gazipur, Gazipur-1707, Bangladesh
b
Department of Civil Engineering, Dhaka University of Engineering & Technology, Gazipur, Gazipur -1707, Bangladesh

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Keywords: Solar power plants are important alternatives to fossil fuel-based power plants because they reduce greenhouse
Solar power plant gas emissions and mitigate the effects of climate change. The potential of harnessing solar energy is highly
Geographic information system dependent on selecting the optimal locations for plant installation. This study primarily aims to select optimal
Analytic hierarchy process
sites for solar energy plant installation using the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) of Multi-Criteria Decision
Multiple-criteria decision analysis
Analysis (MCDA) in a Geographic Information System (GIS) environment. In the underlying processing phase, the
Site selection
Renewable energy AHP method was used to calculate the relative weights of the study area’s physiographic, utility, and climate
data. These weights were then used in the MCDA to identify the optimal locations for solar plants. The results of
the MCDA were presented in the form of a solar plant suitability map, which showed that 44.59 % (66506.49
km2) of the study area in the south and southwest of Bangladesh is highly suitable for the development of utility-
scale solar power plants. In contrast, there are substantial areas of about 31.18 % (46507.37 km2) of the country
where the installation of any type of power plant is completely prohibited. This research can help authorities and
stakeholders decide where to invest in solar energy.

1. Introduction
1.1. Background
There is a promising future for the use of sustainable energy resource
technology since these components are widely available, consumable,
endless, and easily accessible, such as photovoltaic system, air currents,
bioenergy, and hydropower. Several nations have established sustain­
able energy resource portfolios that support a comprehensive energy
system in the hope of a secure, environmentally friendly future with
minimal emissions of greenhouse gases. One of the sustainable energy
resource technologies with the fastest global growth is solar photovol­
taic (PV) technology. Recent years have seen a reduction of 80 % in the
cost of producing solar energy, and it is predicted that this trend will
continue in the years ahead due to the possible stability of previous
aspects like steadily decreasing costs of production and the effect of
expansion plans on the reduction of costs [1,2]. Photovoltaic power
generation has a bright future for implementation in huge geographical
regions with high yearly sun irradiation. The complex and unpredictable
sun irradiation, which may differ topographically from place to place, is,
nevertheless, a barrier to the development of solar power. When
choosing a place for such an installation, various factors must be taken
into consideration, such as how well the PV power plant is located and
how to keep project costs as low as possible while maximizing solar
panel production. A critical step toward achieving a cost-effective and
successful solar project is to carry out a thorough examination of the
solar site given that a variety of factors might affect site selection [3,4].
Numerous energy planning projects have used MCDM techniques with
great success [5–7]. provide a good assessment of the literature on the
use of MCDM techniques in RES planning.
The Geographical Information System (GIS) has gained popularity
recently for a variety of site selection studies, especially for energy
planning [8–22]. According to numerous research studies and strategic
companies like the National Renewable Energy Laboratory, the first step
in any strategic process is to evaluate potential locations for PV projects
(NREL) [4,21–25].

* Corresponding author.
E-mail address: rabiul@duet.ac.bd (Md.R. Islam).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2023.119595
Received 27 July 2023; Received in revised form 22 October 2023; Accepted 5 November 2023
Available online 9 November 2023
0960-1481/© 2023 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Md.R. Islam et al.
The following general steps can be used to categorize the site se­
lection decision-making process [14].
• creation of limitation factors and judgment criteria for site selection
research;
• model-based site selection and site prioritization;
• Using sensitivity analysis, you can learn more about how relevant the
selection criteria are.
Solar PV technology is the most advantageous choice when taking
into account 14 parameters, according to an evaluation of renewable
sources in Saudi Arabia [26]. This article suggests a decision model that
incorporates AHP as an MCDM approach with information on sites from
the GIS to make site selection for utility-scale grid-connected solar PV
projects easier. This combination technique will give decision makers
(DMs) a deeper understanding of many user - defined and contradicting
elements, which might assist them in the site selection decision.
The principal implications of this research include the following:
The use of real atmospheric sensor data to create criterion layers for
the utility size of solar power plant siting using GIS tools is a unique
method that is suggested. The AHP technique was enhanced by the air
temperature and sun irradiation criteria, which were generated using
ArcGIS software.
• In recent years, a growing number of articles have been published on
the use of the GIS-based AHP approach for solar plant site suitability
evaluation, with studies conducted at various spatial scales, such as
cities, districts, and other administrative areas [12,20,22,26–28].
However, it is relatively uncommon to consider the entire territory of
a country as the study area for this purpose. This manuscript presents
a comprehensive review of the GIS-based AHP approach for solar
plant site suitability evaluation, with a focus on studies conducted at
the national level. In addition to the site suitability evaluation, in
light of the literature review, this manuscript additionally covered
typical cost analyses for two different PV installation modes, the
economic feasibility and cost-effectiveness of installing solar power
plants, the potential environmental impacts that may arise during
the construction, operation, and maintenance phases of solar power
plants, and their mitigation measures.
• To the best of the authors’ knowledge, there is no published research
based on GIS-MCDM for solar farm site selection in Bangladesh till
date; this manuscript was initially submitted. This study is the first to
contribute to this methodology in this country.
The following segments of the paper are discussed in this section: The
fundamental concepts of AHP and GIS are addressed in Section 1.2’s
overview of the literature.
1.2. Literature review
Solar energy development techniques research has made significant
progress in recent years, with a focus on increasing efficiency, reducing
costs, and improving reliability [17]. Determining whether a region of
land is suitable for installing solar panels is a complex task that must
consider a variety of factors, including solar radiation, slope, orienta­
tion, land use, and environmental constraints. By carefully assessing the
suitability of a site, PV project developers can minimize the risks asso­
ciated with their projects and maximize the potential benefits, such as
energy production, cost savings, and environmental protection [3,4]. A
review of the literature shows that a wide range of decision-making
strategies have been used for solar panel suitability analysis, including
cost analysis, environmental impact assessment, and optimal location
selection. These strategies can be tailored to the specific needs of a given
project and the unique characteristics of the region under consideration
[17].
Researchers have studied a variety of factors that influence the
2
Renewable Energy 220 (2024) 119595
efficiency of PV plants, including land use and land cover (LULC)
changes, particle properties, near-field radiation effects, and weather
conditions. One recent study by Dirk Jan (2021) used the Global Change
Assessment Model (GCAM) to estimate how much land might be used for
solar energy generation in Europe, Asia, and Oceania, as well as how
much pollution would result from any resulting changes in land use. The
study concluded that greenhouse gas emissions from changing land use
to accommodate growing solar power might be anywhere from 0 to 50 g
CO2/kWh. The specific value will be determined by variables including
location, solar project size, solar technology performance, and land
management practices in solar parks [19]. Another study by Ahmed
Amine Hachicha (2021) found that dust accumulation on PV modules
can lead to significant efficiency losses. After 5 months of exposure, the
PV modules in the study lost 12.7 % efficiency, with a 5.44 g/m2 in­
crease in dust accumulation. Weather conditions, such as humidity,
rainfall, and wind, played a role in the rate of dust accumulation [29].
Numerous researchers have calculated the range of PV solar power
plant costs and efficiency ratios depending on the size of the plant.
However, some studies have underestimated the trend of rapid cost
declines in solar technologies, leading to an underestimation of their
future role and deployment [30]. For example, a study by Mengzhu Xiao
(2021) found that energy scenario analyses have structurally under­
estimated the trend of rapid cost declines in solar technologies. This is
because many energy scenario analyses are based on historical data,
which does not fully capture the rapid pace of innovation in the solar
industry. Despite the underestimation of future cost declines, solar
power is already a competitive and cost-effective source of electricity in
many parts of the world. A study by Suzan Abdelhady (2020) found that
a 50 MW solar power plant in Egypt has an estimated levelized cost of
electricity (LCOE) of 13.38 ¢/kWh. This is comparable to the LCOE of
other forms of electricity generation, such as coal and natural gas [31].
On the other hand, a large number of studies have been conducted in
which researchers have used a Geographic Information System (GIS)
integrated with the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) to assess the
suitability of land for PV solar plants [32]. The researchers have con­
ducted an analysis of many multi-criterion Decision Making (MCDM)
approaches that explore the inter-correlation and effect of criterion
weights in the context of site selection. However, a number of studies
concurred on a number of crucial factors, including temperatures, ra­
diation from the sun, and other variables that have a discernible impact
on this matter’s decision-making processes [31–34]. In 2019, Saman
Nadizadeh Shorabeh utilized a combination of GIS and MCDM to assess
and choose the most suitable solar power facilities across various
climate-scarce provinces in Iran, in accordance with a sufficient number
of criteria and constraints. According to the findings of this study,
provinces with desert climates, such as Yazd, have a more favorable
region for solar power plants than provinces with wet climates [20]. In
another study, Hasan Eroğlu (2021) employed a GIS-based Fuzzy Ana­
lytic Hierarchy Process (FAHP) methodology to assess the appropriate­
ness of several areas in Turkey for the implementation of wind farms.
The study used a comprehensive set of 17 major criteria and 81 sub-
criteria to enhance the development of environmental, economic, and
social initiatives through the FAHP model and GIS technologies [8].
Likewise, Robert Rios (2021) used multi-criteria analysis (MCA) and the
Geographic Information System (GIS) framework to identify the optimal
location for a solar plant in Peru. The findings of the study revealed that
0.09 % of the area of entire Peru, i.e., 347.89 km2, was ’highly adequate,
’ and a significantly larger portion, 21,908.97 km2, equivalent to 5.55 %,
falls under the classification of ’very adequate’’ [14]. In order to choose
potential locations for the development of solar power plants in Ghana,
Ephraim Bonah Agyekum (2021) used a density-based clustering
approach coupled with AHP in the GIS platform. The study identified
smaller clusters of suitable sites for solar power plant installations in
underdeveloped rural areas of Ghana. It suggested that home solar PV
cells could enhance electricity availability in the vicinity of Nandom in
the northwestern region of Ghana [24]. Another research, Jae Heo
Md.R. Islam et al. Renewable Energy 220 (2024) 119595

(2021), provides a technique for optimally choosing locations for PV

power plants utilizing a map-type PV power-estimation model in a GIS
environment and displaying the recommended sites in building infor­
mation model (BIM) settings through the integration with GIS and BIM.
The suggested technique may look for suitable places that meet a variety
of criteria [25].

1.2.1. Decision criterion and restriction factors

The selection criteria for this study were developed based on the
body of prior research, the goal of the study, and the availability of the
geo-referenced database. Large-scale photovoltaic energy production
depends heavily on proper sunlight. High solar energy levels are crucial
for generating more electricity from the available resources. Solar
emission is used as a main possible factor in a wide variety of power
generation suitability evaluations, as Table 1 describes.
When discussing sun irradiation, the term “global horizontal irradi­
ance” is used to refer to the sum of “ground-reflected irradiance,”
“diffuse horizontal irradiance (DHI),” and “direct normal irradiance
(DNI).” In contrast to the DHI, which indicates the presence of sunlight
diffused by clouds and other atmospheric components, the DNI mea­ Fig. 1. Solar radiation elements that the earth’s surface has intercepted [51].
sures the quantity of direct sunlight. However, the irradiation reflected
from the surface is considered less important than the other components
and may be disregarded. While mainly Concentrated solar power (CSP) Table 2
only needs diffuse natural illumination (DNI), photovoltaic (PV) systems Some restriction on the study of solar energy power plant.
may generate electricity when both DNI and DHI are present [50]. Fig. 1 SN Layers of restrictions References
shows the system.
1 Urban lands [11,12,30–33,42,52]
The provision of utilities ensures adequate accessibility and helps 2 Protected land [9,12,15,19,21,23,30,31,52]
prevent the expensive development of large infrastructure that might 3 Cultivated land [10,13,18,19,22,30,31,35,37,52]
have negative environmental effects. Installation costs can be reduced 4 Area with a high landscape [14,15,19,21,23]
by locating the power plant closer to the transmission line. According to 5 Water infrastructure [2,5,8,11,12]
6 Military zones [14–16,20,23,32,53]
several studies [9,11,14], the power plant must be far from urban areas
7 Cattle trails (wildlife areas) [20,22,25,29,32,35,48]
to prevent environmental pollution. However, some studies [34,39] 8 Cultural heritage [4,6,10,12,14,18]
show that locations close to cities offer larger economic benefits, and all 9 Archaeological sites [8,11,16,20,23,25,38,43,45]
of them are shown in Table 2. 10 Paleontological sites [11,32,38]
11 Roads and the railroad network [11,12,25,34,38,48]
12 Dunes [48,49]
2. Materials and methods
13 Natural disasters (Flood Areas etc.) [29,40]
14 Area with higher slope (>5◦ ) [6,9,10,14,29,40]
The goal of this research is to create a system that can classify the 15 Mountains [9,18,24,25,35]
land that is accessible for solar farm projects into different levels ac­ 16 Soft soil [29]
17 Community interest sites [6,8,11,14,20,21]
cording to how well it is suited for such projects. Fig. 2 illustrates the
18 Darns [29,49]
several stages that have been decided upon to achieve this goal. The 19 Flight security [41]
selection of a case study is the first stage in the research process. Next, a 20 Biological significant areas [54]
literature evaluation is carried out to evaluate the extent of the demand 21 Watercourses and streams [27,44,47,55,56]
for projects of this nature and whether or not the suggested site is 22 Special protection area for birds (SPA) [32,40]
23 Coast [38]
appropriate for such projects. Next, choose which features of the land’s
24 Land aspects [40]

Table 1
appropriateness for solar farms are most crucial, taking into account the
Criteria for Solar site suitability.
particulars of the case study and the technical difficulties involved. As a
Criteria Sub-criteria References
result of this study, specific weights are given to each aspect to create an
Environmental Land use [31,33,35–37] index that may assess a piece of land’s appropriateness. These final
Agrological capacity [11,32,38] weights were calculated using the AHP [27–30,34,40–49,52,53,55,
Location Distance to urban areas [9,11,12,23,33–35,38–40]
Distance to substations [10,11,38,39]
57–60]. The final suitability map is then created using GIS, a map that is
Land Cover [9,18] used for spatial analysis, and the incorporation of several elements into
Population density [9,31,32,41] the suggested index to discover places that are not appropriate.
Distance to main roads [9,11,12,16,17,19,21,22]
Distance to power lines [9,11,12,25,29,30,35,41–47]
Distance to historical areas [29,35]
2.1. Data used
Distance to wildlife [34]
designations The criteria were taken from several places, and the reclassification
Economic Land cost [30] criteria were calculated. The slope and land aspect maps were created
Construction cost [31]
using the digital elevation model (DEM), which was applied after the
Climatic Solar irradiation [9,11,12]
Average temperature [11,12,29,36,37,48,49] solar radiation statistics were taken from the NASA website. Data on air
Orography Slope [9,12,13,20,23,34,38,39,42,49] temperature were obtained from the Bangladesh Meteorological
Orientation (aspect angles) [8,9,12,18,20,23,33,34,38,39, Department. The electricity supply line map was digitized from the
42,49] 1320 MW coal-based power plant at Gaibandha-Dinajpur, while the
Plot area [13,16,20,22,24]
highway map was taken from Banglapedia. The data gathering process

3
Md.R. Islam et al. Renewable Energy 220 (2024) 119595

Fig. 2. Flow chart of the proposed methodology.

for the site-selection information is described in full in Table 3.
2.2. Study area
Bangladesh, the study area, is situated in Asia Continental between
the latitudes of 20◦ 34′ N and 88◦ 0′ E and 26◦ 38′ N and 92◦ 41′ E. Also,
India encloses Bangladesh on three sides (the northeast, north, and
west). Its southern boundary lies with the Bay of Bengal, and its
shoreline is more dispersed. Myanmar is situated on its southeast side
(Fig. 3). Bangladesh is an ideal research study area for solar site selection
projects due to its geographical location and climate. The nation is
located in an area with significant solar irradiation, receiving 5–6 h of
direct sunlight on average every day all year. This makes it an attractive
location for solar power generation. Also, it has a diverse landscape with
a varying elevation, ranging from sea level to the Chittagong Hill Tracts,
which can reach up to 1052 m. The climate of Bangladesh is tropical,
characterized by hot, humid summers and cool winters. The hot and
sunny months are April through June, while December and January are
the coolest months. The average temperature is about 26 ◦ C. The country
receives an average annual rainfall of around 2400 mm, with the
monsoon season occurring between June and October. The terrain of
Bangladesh is mostly flat with gentle slopes, making it an ideal location
for solar panel installations. These environmental disasters can have a
lessened impact due to solar energy, which is a steady and robust power
source. When considering elements like solar radiation intensity, land
availability, and regional weather patterns, research in this field might
offer helpful insights on the best locations for solar power facilities in
Bangladesh.
2.3. Methodology
2.3.1. Land suitability evaluation factors
Technical parameters that directly impact the performance of the
solar power plant are used to determine where utility-scale PV projects
should be located. The quantity of solar radiation and the standard for
air temperature are two examples. Economic variables describe how the
location of solar farms affects project costs. These comprise slope,
closeness to the land’s aspect, proximity to roads, proximity to

Table 3
Data sources.
SN Data Type Resolution Source

1 Solar Irradiation Raster data – https://globalwindatlas.Info/(accessed on 10 March 2022)

2 DEM Data Raster data 90 m https://earthexplorer.usgs.gov/(accessed on 10 March 2022)
3 Transmission line JPG – https://www.researchgate.net/publication/322465405_ Site_Screening_Report_for_
map (Digitized) 1320MW_Coal_Based_Power_Plant_In_Gaibandha- Dinajpur/(accessed on 10 March 2022)
4 Urban area Vector data – https://www.naturalearthdata.com/downloads/lOm-cultural - vectors/10 m-urban-area/(accessed on March 10, 2022)
5 Road map JPG – https://en.banglapedia.org/index.php/Road Transport/(accessed on 10 March 2022)
(Digitized)
6 Temperature map Vector data – BMD/https://live3.bmd.gov.bd/(accessed on April 15, 2022)

4
Md.R. Islam et al. Renewable Energy 220 (2024) 119595

Table 4 Table 4 (continued )

All Parameters used in ArcGIS solar analyst tool. SN Parameters used in ArcGlS solar analyst tool.
• Average temperature (C2) (◦ C): The Bangladesh Meteorological De­
partment’s (BMD) temperature (mean) observations from 2010 to 2019 Parameter Value
showed evidence of a shift in temperature. The examination of the mea­ 7 Z units 1
surement data utilized at 35 sites dispersed around the nation is summarized 8 Slope Aspect Input Type DEM
in a research paper [56]. At each location during the research period, the 9 calculations Directions 32
daily temperature is observed along with the annual average calculated from 10 Zenith Divisions 8
24 h of data. This study interpolates the annual average temperature for the 11 Azimuth Number 8
12 Diffuse Model Type Uniform Sky
whole research region based on real observations. Multiple interpolation
13 Diffuse Proportion 0.36
methods are used by ArcGIS 10.8 software to create a surface grid map from
14 Transmissivity 0.65
point data. Natural Neighbors, Trend Approaches, Shapefiles to Raster,
Geostatistical Weight, Linear, and Kriging are some interpolation tech­
niques. In order to reduce overall surface distortion, the spline interpolation
tool provides a formal model to calculate the values very quickly. Perhaps
the best interpolation method for modifying continuous events like tem­
perature is its capacity to anticipate data troughs [24,25]. Higher values for
the weight parameter were obtained using the tension spline type, resulting
in a rougher surface (weight = 10; number of points = 4).
• Slope (C3): Avoiding the high building costs needed in high-slope locations
will be made possible by using flat terrain or somewhat steep slopes [65].
Due to the relative cost analysis, elevated locations are rarely chosen for
large-scale PV farm projects since they require flat topography. The slope
must be less than 5◦ in this research and should be facing south, which is the
best orientation for solar farm locations [66]. Valleys and steep terrain with
higher slopes should be avoided.
• land aspects (C4): The term “land aspect” refers to the slope of the land,
which is a topographical feature. The azimuth angle, which ranges from 0◦ to
360◦ , is used to represent it. East is represented by 90◦ , south by 180◦ , and
west by 270◦ . North is denoted by 0◦ or 360◦ . Slopes that face south are the
best orientation for solar farm locations in nations in the Northern Hemi­
sphere [66]. The survey area’s characteristics have been created using the
DEM. The geographical elements of the site were essential for building the
solar power plant. The area’s state had a significant impact on this area’s
aspect.
• Proximity to urban areas (C5): According to several studies, places farther
from urban areas are better suited for the development of renewable energy
in order to reduce the adverse environmental effects of urban growth and to
overcome NIMBY (not in my back yard) resistance [20,21,25]. On the other
hand, according to some research, locations close to cities offer larger eco­
nomic benefits [4,12]. The demand for power is often much greater in urban
regions compared to rural ones. The reason for this is that cities have a
higher population, which in turn results in a greater number of business and
industries. The growing need for energy may provide some support for the
establishment of solar power facilities in these regions.
• proximity to highways (C6): Better accessibility will result from being near
highways, and this closeness also helps to minimize the expense and nega­
tive environmental effects of building new infrastructure [48]. In terms of
building expenses, proximity to major roadways is crucial. In order to save
on transportation costs, it is preferable for solar power facilities to be located
near highways. These ratings serve as the “distance from roadways” sub­
criteria. The best desirable score in this scenario is 7, while the least desir­
able score is 1. Fig. 3. Map showing the study area of Bangladesh, prepared using ArcGIS.
• proximity to power lines (C7) (m): Power loss in distribution and trans­
mission networks is significant. Maintaining solar photovoltaic (PV) plants
electricity lines, and proximity to metropolitan areas. Fig. 4. Following
near current power lines will decrease transmission loss and eliminate the
need to construct new, expensive power infrastructure [42]. The solar power is a detailed explanation of the two technical and economic feasibility
plants’ close proximity to the energy transmission line offers a benefit in criteria.
terms of efficiency. Energy loss and efficiency will rise if solar power facil­
ities are built close to power lines. The closest places were assigned 8 points, • Solar irradiation (C1) (kWh/m2)The mapping and analysis of sun
while faraway areas received 1 point, in order to estimate an appropriate irradiation for certain locations or points at a particular time are
energy transfer cost. supported by the ArcGIS software’s solar analyst feature. As it takes
SN Parameters used in ArcGlS solar analyst tool. into account local parameters like direction, slope, and weather
conditions, it is suitable for simulating solar irradiation for an area
Parameter Value
with varied topography [61]. The slope and land aspects layers were
1 DEM Resolution of 90 m
created using the digital elevation model (DEM), which is also an
2 Latitude 24.1 (Auto)
3 Sky size 200 (Default) input for the solar analyzer application. The included layers will
4 Time Configuration Whole Year (2022) match perfectly as a result of this. The model internally employed
5 Day interval hour 14 (Default) three map layers to determine solar irradiation. These include a map
6 Hou r interval 0.5 (Default) of remotely sensed data, a map of the sky, and a map of the sun. The
diffuse percentage variable has a value between 0 and 1 and higher

5
Md.R. Islam et al. Renewable Energy 220 (2024) 119595

Table 5
The basic scale used in pairwise comparisons [67].
SN Intensity of Definition Explanation
Importance

1 1 Equal importance Two activities contribute

equally to the objective
2 3 Weak importance of one Experience and judgment
over another slightly favor one activity over
another
3 5 Essential or strong Experience and judgment
importance strongly favor one activity over
another
4 7 Demonstrated Activity is strongly favored and
importance its dominance demonstrated in
practice
5 9 Absolute importance The evidence favoring one
activity over another is of the
highest possible order of
affirmation
6 2,4,6,8 Intermediate values When compromise is needed
between two adjacent the
judgments
7 Reciprocals If activity I have one of the above numbers assigned to it
Fig. 4. Decision criteria considered in solar site selection. when compared with activity j, then j has the reciprocal
value when compared with i
values represent a less clear sky [62]. The study’s 1-min GHI and DHI
measurements were used to calculate the diffuse proportion. The
ratio for the comparison matrix is calculated. A matrix must fall below a
ratio of the amount of radiation absorbed by the earth’s atmosphere
certain threshold for the consistency ratio, which measures how many
to that received by its maximum bound is known as transmissivity,
pairwise comparisons include inconsistencies, to be considered consis­
and it ranges from 0 (no transmission) to 1. (complete transmission).
tent. (CR = 0.1) [25]. Otherwise, the ratings for the DMs will need to be
In this analysis, a value of 0.65 is taken into account, which has been
revised. The consistency index (CI), the primary eigenvalue (m) of the
used in previous studies with comparable arid locations [27,63,64].
comparison matrix, and the random index (RI), which depends on the
Table 4 lists the variables used in the ArcGIS solar analysis.
matrix size (n), may all be found in equation (1), which can be used to
determine the correlation coefficient (CR).
2.3.2. Analytical hierarchy process (AHP)-Based multi criteria Decision
Making CI λm − n
CR = , (1)
This Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) has piqued the curiosity of RI n− 1
many people since it is thought to have complex theoretical features and For this ratio, Saaty puts an upper bound of “0.10.” It is assumed that
has been employed in a range of areas [48]. Researchers from many the judgments are sufficiently consistent and that the evaluation can
different disciplines have used the AHP because of its ability to address proceed when the consistency ratio for the assessments is less than 0.10.
issues by applying a variety of factors to decision-making. The AHP gives The judgments are regarded as inconsistent if the consistency ratio ex­
employees the ability to choose the precise weight of the impacting ceeds 0.10. The options in this situation need to be of higher quality.
aspects in a multi-criteria policy issue to get closer to the best answers. Examining the results can help reduce the consistency rate [33]. The
Users can go one step closer to ideal solutions thanks to this. The AHP suitability indices for photovoltaic (PV) installation locations were
technique uses a hierarchical model with strategies, requirements, produced using eight thematic layers integrated into the GIS platform.
sub-criteria, and possible alternatives to explore any problem [24]. The Equation’s weighted overlay approach, which was used to execute this
hierarchy may then be computed after learning how the problem was (2).
formed. A AHP method matrix is created based on the preference scale to
evaluate the parameters between one priority and two priorities ∑ ∑
m n
SI = . Wj × Xi (2)
(Table 5) [67]. For each entry in the pairwise comparison matrix, like w=1 1
n-number, there will be n (n-1)/2 comparisons made.
Here, Xi and Wj are the normalized weights of the ith feature and the
According to the pairwise comparison, the AHP technique applies
jth class of the thematic layer, SI is the suitability index for the locations
the weights of the criteria to the problem-solving process. The pairwise
of solar (PV) farms, m denotes the overall number of themes, and n is the
comparison matrix is first normalized in order to derive the weights.
overall number of classes in a theme.
Prior to producing a “normalized pairwise comparison matrix,” this
normalization is required. To create this matrix, the elements of each
2.3.3. Restrictions for site selection
matrix column are divided by the total of all the matrix columns. The
Aspects including metropolitan regions, protected land, significant
entire value of the row items in the resultant matrix must be divided by
road networks, and water bodies have been chosen as limiting variables
the total number of row components. As a result, a priority or weight
for appropriateness research. In comparable solar site suitability as­
vector is produced. The cumulative sum of the weights for the whole
sessments, these four limitations are frequently utilized. Additionally,
matrix, which vary from 0 to 1, is 1. When using the AHP technique to
these elements served the goal of this research and were accessible as a
conduct pairwise comparisons of criteria, there may be some consistency
dataset for the study region. National parks, industrial cities, holy sites,
difficulties. As a consequence, it is crucial to assess the validity of the
and animal refuges are among the protected locations. According to
justification for pairwise comparisons. To evaluate the consistency of
Protected Planet (OECMs), Bangladesh has 51 wildlife-protected areas
judgments based on paired comparisons, Saaty (1980) created a con­
that promote livelihoods and protect wildlife. The thematic layers of
sistency ratio [21]. The consistency ratio for the comparison matrix is
protected areas were obtained from official organizations; however, the
calculated. A matrix must fall below a certain threshold for the consis­
buffer distances employed in this analysis were gathered from the
tency ratio, which measures how many pairwise comparisons include
literature, as shown in Table 2. Fig. 5 depicts the whole study’s limited
inconsistencies, to be considered consistent (CR = 0.1). The consistency

6
Md.R. Islam et al. Renewable Energy 220 (2024) 119595

the project’s progress is not conceivable.

The initially created layer was classified as areas that one could
potentially exploit. After converting the constraints layer to binary in
Section 3.1, the preliminary adequate site map was created by dividing
the limitations layer by the criteria layer.

2.3.4. GIS processing

This study is the first to use AHP and GIS to analyze how photovoltaic
(PV) plants should be distributed throughout Bangladesh. ArcGIS Soft­
ware 10.8 was used to create the suitability map, and the spatial infor­
mation was obtained from publicly available internet sources. In this
study, eleven constraints that substitute eight evaluation criteria are
used to evaluate the best and worst locations for solar farms. Table 6
demonstrate how both sets of the geospatial analysis model parameters
were selected in accordance with the research region’s characteristics,

Table 6
Weights and suitability categories for each criterion of evaluation.
SN Evaluation Factor Suitability Score Range
Class

1 Solar Irradiation Very low 4 3.92–335,811

Low 5 335,811–895,554
Moderate 6 895,554–1,498,251
Very high 7 1,498,251–2,087,725
2 Temperature Low 2 22.07–22.45
Moderate 4 22.45–22.94
High 6 22.94–24.14
3 Slope Map Very low 1 52.93
Low 2 20.13
Moderate 3 11.83
High 4 5.6
Very high 5 1.66
4 Land Aspect Very low 4 North
Low 5 Northeast, Northwest
Moderate 6 East, West
High 4 Southeast, Southwest
Very high 7 South
Fig. 5. The extent of the restricted locations in the study area. 5 Distance from Urban/ Very low 1 5
Major cities (km) Low 2 10
Moderate 3 20
region. As a forest, the current and prospectively protected areas occupy High 4 30
around 17.08 % of the nation’s total land area. Very high 5 50
Due to limited economic viability, high-slope locations cannot sup­ 6 Distance from Roads (km) Very low 3 10
port solar PV plants. based on data taken from a number of literary Low 4 8
Moderate 5 4
works [32,33,40,48]. Urban regions, highway networks, affluent re­
High 6 2
gions, and major roads were also eliminated from the feasibility study Very high 7 1
due to their high demographic and construction volumes as well as the 7 Distance from Very low 3 5
potential for transportation safety concerns. One layer was created out transmission lines and Low 5 3
of the buffers needed for the restriction layers in Fig. 6. After that, they power grid (km) Moderate 6 2
High 7 1
were assigned a binary scale (1 or 0), where “one” denotes the lack of Very high 8 0.5
imposed restrictions and “zero” denotes their presence, implying that

Fig. 6. Restrictions part of the model.

7
Md.R. Islam et al. Renewable Energy 220 (2024) 119595

professional opinion, and a thorough evaluation. location. DNI values are significant for solar-powered power plants since
these plants rely largely on focusing the sun’s irradiance to heat a me­
2.3.5. The standardized suitability map preparation dium, which is followed by the creation of energy from the medium itself
For each criterion in the suitability map, a categorized map was [62,63]. Since GHI incorporates both direct and indirect irradiance in a
made using GIS software. The maps that appear show the evaluated and single area, it is more useful for power plants that convert energy from
rated parameters. Each map was obtained, processed in raster format direct sunlight to power generation, like photovoltaic systems. In order
with 90 m × 90 m cells, and then classified for each criterion. The digital to create indirect irradiance, direct irradiance must be reflected by
elevation model also served as the foundation for the slope and elevation either atmospheric water molecules or aerosols. Fig. 9 in this article
requirements (DEM). The “Slope” tool in ArcGIS is used to build the displays the solar radiation information obtained for Bangladesh from
slope map. The map is then reclassified using the classification tool. the Global Solar Atlas [68]. The WGS-84 provides this particular dataset.
Using the ArcMap 10.8 reclassification tool, the dispersion map of the in terms of arcseconds (9; nominally 250 m at the equator). Since only
land feature for the total flashing scatter diagram was created using energy conversion systems such as PV systems were permitted for
mapping resampling. consideration in this study, the analysis was limited to the GHI value.
The GHI, which measures irradiance on a unit area in kWh/m2, was
3. Results and discussions used in this study to calculate yearly average values. All light wave­
lengths that go from the sun to the surface of the earth are referred to as
The outcomes of an in-depth analysis utilizing AHP-GIS of the loca­ “solar energy that is absorbed by the earth’s surface,” or “GHI.” DNI
tions of solar energy systems in Bangladesh are presented. This also describes a range of wavelengths that are capable of directly penetrating
includes the integer data for the optimally weighted assessment and the a planet’s surface. The DHI is a kind of wave that travels across space
finalized land suitability map. and eventually makes its way to Earth after colliding with various types
of matter.
3.1. AHP results
GHI = DHI + DNI * cos(z)
The appropriate weights for the seven parameters that impact vari­ Demonstrates the connection between the GHI, DHI, and DNI. Z
ables were determined in this study using the AHP-based MCDM tech­ represents the angle that the sun makes with the zenith. It is feasible to
nique (C1: solar irradiation; C2: air temperature; C3: slope; C4: land attain DNI by using the criteria that were provided, Zelenka model [27,
aspects; C5: proximity to urban areas; C6: distance from highways; C7: 69]. The DHI value can now be measured using the Perez model [63].
proximity to transmission lines). In terms of choosing the locations in the
study area that would be most suited for the building of photovoltaic 3.2.2. Annual average temperature map
(PV) plants, it was discovered that the criterion element C1 had the The solar panel’s temperature is one of a photovoltaic system’s
highest priority weight (35.4%). C2 through C7 are the remaining components. The system must be appropriately developed in order to
criteria components, and each of them has a decreasing priority weight deliver the necessary power. The efficiency of the needed panel is one of
(Table 7). Based on the study’s findings, the consistency ratio was the factors that is taken into consideration while determining its size.
determined to be CR = 0.025, and Fig. 7 shows the criterion’s preference Usually, the temperature of solar panels has an impact on how well they
levels. work, and the temperature of each panel actually depends on the tem­
perature of the surrounding region as well as the strength of the sun’s
3.2. Solar plants site selection criteria maps light. Some locations provide more favorable conditions and are
differentiated by appropriate room temperatures for energy production
3.2.1. Solar irradiation as a result of the various climatic systems prevalent in the region under
When choosing a solar PV location, there are many other factors that inquiry. To enhance the performance of PV systems, lowering air tem­
might cause uncertainty. One of the main causes of uncertainty in peratures is preferred. When temperatures are below 25 ◦ C, a PV system
overall energy output is the assessment of solar irradiation. Accurate performs better, but as the temperature rises, the power production
data collection is essential for applying these strategies in the analysis of decreases by 0.4–0.5% for every 1 ◦ C [70]. This study determined the
solar energy, which boosts confidence in the project’s power estimation annual mean temperature across 35 stations, with the highest and lowest
[61]. Sunlight is a fundamental requirement for large-scale PV solar temperatures being 24.15◦ and 22.7◦ , respectively. The temperature is
power installations. Maximizing the overall quantity of energy output shown in Fig. 10.
from current assets requires the use of solar energy. The quantity of solar
radiation available for selected solar PV site suitability tests is repre­ 3.2.3. Digital elevation model (DEM)
sented in Fig. 8. The water body receives the most solar radiation, which Altitude above sea level is the actual definition of land elevation,
is unfortunate given that it wouldn’t be a smart idea to build infra­ another name for land surface. This is an expanded critical element that
structure there. substantially affects where solar PV plants are situated [20]. The higher
GHI Estimation the elevation, the more difficult the solar PV plant will be to install. For
The PV system converts both diffuse horizontally reflected energy the development of the solar PV site at the higher elevation, extensive
and direct normal irradiation into energy production. The DNI and DHI planning is needed. Fig. 11 shows that since the area’s height is less than
values of a location are combined to provide the GHI value for that 0.5 km, 99.9 % of the land is appropriate for the construction of a solar
PV facility. With a height of more than a kilometer, the hilly terrain area
Table 7 of the site is ruled out as a potential site for solar PV plants.
Comparison table of the selected factors for making decisions.
SN C1 C2 C3 C4 C5 C6 C7 Weightage Average 3.2.4. Slope
The most significant geographic attribute in terms of infrastructure
C1 1 2 3 4 7 6 5 0.35
C2 1/2 1 2 3 6 5 4 0.24 costs is the land slope, which determines whether the location of solar
C3 1/3 1/2 1 2 5 4 3 0.16 PV facilities is sustainable [66]. The installation of photovoltaic (PV)
C4 1/4 1/3 1/2 1 4 3 2 0.10 plants on a steep slope increases the cost of construction. A slope map,
C5 1/7 1/6 1/5 1/4 1 1/2 1/3 0.03 shown in Fig. 12, shows how virtually all of Bangladesh’s land, which
C6 1/6 1/5 1/4 1/3 2 1 1/2 0.04
accounts for 71.52 % of the country’s total land area, can be used to
C7 1/5 1/4 1/3 1/2 3 2 1 0.07

8
Md.R. Islam et al.
Fig. 7. The criteria’s priority weights.
Fig. 8. Solar Irradiation map for Bangladesh.
build photovoltaic (PV) plants on the best parts of the country’s overall
land area.
3.2.5. Land aspects
Placing the solar energy plant on the proper land will maximize the
quantity of solar irradiation it receives. For nations like Bangladesh, the
southerly slope of the northern hemisphere was prioritized by using the
land aspect criteria. Nonetheless, this should not be taken to imply that
everything outside of the southern hemisphere is unimportant. The DEM
data was used to create a 90 m × 90 m directional and topographic
aspect map of the area, which includes 10 directions and a flat terrain
9
Renewable Energy 220 (2024) 119595
layer [51,54]. Although level ground helps keep expenditures low, the
study used the reservoir river’s level surface. Fig. 13 shows the land
aspect map.
3.2.6. Proximity from power lines (TL)
Another critical element that impacts both the construction and
operation of a plant is the separation of the solar electricity (PV) plant
site from the transmission lines. After giving all current and future
transmission lines a thorough study, the optimal course of action for this
circumstance has been chosen. The majority of the total area (31 %) is
situated near the Transport Layer Security (TLS) components that make
up the public grid, as seen by Fig. 14’s depiction of the distance between
TLs across the nation.
3.2.7. Distance from urban areas
The solar photovoltaic power plant cannot be built in nearby urban
or agricultural regions. Otherwise, it might become a nuisance for
people and slow urban development. Therefore, PV power plants should
be located at least 500 m away from urban and commercial areas [4].
However, around 64 % is more than 30–50 km away from a large city.
Solar photovoltaic (PV) energy has great potential for growth in this
region. The development of solar photovoltaic (PV) energy in this area is
very promising. Furthermore, Fig. 15 shows the distance from urban
areas on a map, revealing that 5 % of the land area is located between
0 and 5 km away from large cities or urban areas, and that 8 % of the
land area is located between 5 and 10 km away, both of which are
optimal locations for a solar PV plant.
3.2.8. Proximity from highways and railroads
The construction and operation of photovoltaic (PV) installations are
strongly impacted by how far they are from major roads and railways. In
order to deliver cheaper infrastructure costs, the solar power installation
must be closer to major routes. The solar power plant should thus be
situated as close as feasible to important roads—no more than 500 m
away [14]. The investment would be higher if roads and trains were
located farther apart. Fig. 16 shows that 26 % of the land area is between
0 and 2 km from highways and railroads, which makes it an extremely
excellent site for solar PV plants. Additionally, 48 % of the land area is
located 4–8 km from highways and railroads, making it a mediocre
location for solar energy investments. Comparatively, around 85 % of its
area is deemed appropriate for the implementation of a photovoltaic
(PV) site [47].
3.3. Solar (PV) site suitability categories
The possible suitability map for various photovoltaic (PV) site loca­
tions is shown in Fig. 17. The statistical findings for each suitability class
are shown in Table 8, along with the area and percentage of the total
Md.R. Islam et al. Renewable Energy 220 (2024) 119595

Fig. 9. Bangladesh’s daily DNI (shown on the left) and GHI (shown on the right).

Fig. 10. Temperature-based suitability classifications are shown on this map.

Fig. 11. The elevation-based map upon the suitability classifications.

area assigned to each. The results indicate that of the area under
is moderately acceptable, 4.69 % (7002.87 km2) is low, and 1.01 %
investigation, 19.33 % (28841.75 km2) is very highly appropriate,
(1506.56 km2) is very low. The high and very high suitability areas,
22.25 % (37664.74 km2) is highly appropriate, 18.51 % (27611.47 km2)

10
Md.R. Islam et al.
Fig. 12. A map of the land slopes-based suitability categories.
which are estimated to be about 44.60 % (66,506.49 km2) of the study
area, would be considered candidate zones for solar energy projects,
necessitating industrial production and regulations in these regions.
These regions, i.e., high and very high suitability areas, have been
attributed to be the overall suitable location for solar plant installation,
and their merged extent has been depicted in Fig. 18. According to the
suitability table, the western and central southern regions have the best
terrain. The best locations to construct photovoltaic installations are
also considered to be coastal areas. A number of characteristics that
make it possible to build solar PV sites make these areas particularly
suitable, including the ideal territory curve and topography, solar en­
ergy action, and location near the grid. Transport layer security and
northern airports; distress from urban and rural areas; and little expo­
sure to lightning strikes.
3.4. Validation and comparison
The sustainable and renewable energy development authority
(SREDA), which is housed within the ministry of power, energy, and
mineral resources, has taken the steps to build solar farms in a number of
suitable areas throughout Bangladesh in order to harness solar energy
for the objectives of protecting energy security and reducing carbon
emissions. The 37 solar photovoltaic (PV) applications that have been
authorized and are now being used by SREDA in Bangladesh are listed in
Table 9 with location. However, in order to assess the viability of the
current study, the sites among those works have been placed on the
suitability map, since that is the investigation’s ultimate output. Eight
projects that are now in the planning stage are placed in places that have
a moderate and high degree of appropriateness, while eight projects that
11
Renewable Energy 220 (2024) 119595
Fig. 13. Land Aspects map for Bangladesh.
have finished construction and are operating are situated in locations
with very high and high levels of appropriateness. The feasibility studies
for the remaining 21 projects—10 of which are located in a very high
suitability region, another 7 of which are located in a moderately suit­
ability area, and the other 4 of which are located in areas of low suita­
bility—have been completed, and construction will soon begin on these
projects (Table 9).
4. Discussions
Selecting the optimal sites for a solar power plant project is one of the
most important aspects of PV installation. It is definitely necessary to
specify the factors or criteria that can play a vital role in determining the
best sites for this purpose. The following factors were taken into account
to identify the sites: solar irradiation; air temperature; slope; land as­
pects; proximity to city areas; distance from roads; and proximity to
transmission lines. The weights of the factors were determined using the
comparison matrices and are as follows: 0.35,0.24,0.16,0.10,0.03,0.04,
and 0.07 in the aforementioned order. In this study, solar irradiation was
found to be the most important technical and environmental factor in
the site section process, followed by air temperature, slope, land aspect,
distance from cities, distance from highways, and distance from trans­
mission lines. Thus, the suitable sites for solar photovoltaic projects were
chosen and evaluated with the help of available databases, a thorough
literature review, and the expertise of scholars and professionals. Real-
world decision-making sometimes demands the generation of compli­
cated and imprecise judgments that are laden with ambiguity. The re­
sults of this study thereby provide a plausible structure for further
investigations into the comparative assessment of regions’ solar energy
Md.R. Islam et al.
Fig. 14. Transmission lines proximity suitability categories map.
potential. This outcome of this study finally demonstrated the dispersed
suitability categories for the Solar power plant site. It was found that the
very high, high, moderate, low, and very low suitable areas are 19.33 %
(28841.75 km2), 22.25 % (37664.74 km2), 18.51 % (27611.47 km2),
4.69 % (7002.87 km2), and 1.01 % (1506.56 km2), respectively. This
strategy is found to be applicable in the study area, which suffers from
data shortages, uncertainties, imprecision, and opacity. Although there
have been many other similar studies conducted across the world, sur­
prisingly, no previous study has been conducted on the issue of solar
photovoltaic site selection in Bangladesh. Therefore, in the context of
Bangladesh, the current studies can serve as the underpinning basis for
future studies in this field. Though the right prioritization of solar energy
project locations has become a challenging task, incorporation with the
AHP technique can undoubtedly be handled with a certain level of
confidence, and it has been established in such a way that it could
represent a highly effective technique for selecting and assessing solar
PV sites. However, the suitable locations identified by this study for solar
PV installation have largely coincided with the SERDA-decided locations
for the same purpose. This study is to generate viewpoints and opinions
to aid policymakers and decision-makers in Bangladesh in evaluating
possible areas for solar photovoltaic technology installation.
4.1. Economic feasibility and cost-effectiveness of installing solar power
plants
The economic feasibility and cost-effectiveness of implementing
solar power plants have improved significantly in recent years due to a
number of factors, including decreasing costs of solar panels and other
components, government incentives, and rising electricity prices [1,
71–73]. As a result, solar power plants are now a viable option for
12
Renewable Energy 220 (2024) 119595
Fig. 15. The map showing the suitability levels according to their proximity to
major cities.
generating electricity in many parts of the world [74]. The levelized cost
of electricity (LCOE) for solar PV has fallen below the cost of electricity
from new coal-fired power plants in most countries [75]. Solar power
plants are also cost-effective, as they do not require any fuel and have
very low operating and maintenance costs [76]. The cost-effectiveness
of solar power plants is particularly evident in countries with high
electricity prices. In the context of Bangladesh, households and busi­
nesses can save a significant amount of money on their electricity bills
by installing solar power systems [77]. Therefore, the economic feasi­
bility and cost-effectiveness of implementing solar power plants have
improved significantly in recent years. Solar power plants are now a
viable option for generating electricity in many parts of the world [78].
4.2. Cost analysis for typical solar PV plants
Generally, utility-scale solar power plant installation costs depend on
several important factors, such as the electricity generation capacity of
the proposed plants, the state-of-the art of the equipment employed, and
the location where the plants are going to be installed [79]. Here, the
typical cost analysis for the installation of the PV systems has been
formulated, and the sites that are attributed as “very high and suitable”
in terms of solar panel installation have been primarily considered as
host locations for PV installation. However, it was noted that the “very
high and high” suitable areas are occupied by a variety of land use types,
e.g., water bodies, forests, flooded vegetation, crop land, built areas,
bare ground, and range land, but the predominant land uses are crop
lands and built-up areas. Among the three basic types of solar panel
installation modes: floating, fixed/mounting, and rooftop types, the
Md.R. Islam et al. Renewable Energy 220 (2024) 119595

Fig. 16. Distance from major roads used to identify suitability categories.

Fig. 17. Suitability category map of solar PV plant locations.

latter two are the most viable for croplands and built-up areas, respec­
tively. In the context of Bangladesh, where there is about 4–5 h’ peak
time for solar irradiance [80], the initial PV system installation cost of Table 8
these two different modes is clearly dissimilar, although some items Areas of each suitability class and their percentage to the total land area of
could come out with an identical cost. The detailed cost involved in the Bangladesh.
erection of a mounting and rooftop-type PV power plant for specific
SN Class Map Color Area (km2) Area (%)
generation capacity has been presented in Table 10. Overall, the cost of a
PV power plant can be justified by the long-term savings on energy costs 1 Very low Green 1506.56 1.01
2 Low Antique Gold 7002.87 4.70
and the environmental benefits. However, it is crucial to carefully 3 Moderate Yellow 27,611.47 18.91
consider the costs and benefits, taking into account as many influencing 4 High Cerulean 37,664.74 25.25
factors as possible, prior to building a PV power plant. 5 Very high Blue 28,841.75 19.33
6 Restricted Area Red 46,507.37 31.18

4.3. Environmental impacts of PV systems

4.3.1. Positive impacts
In the power generation sector, greenhouse gas emissions (GHG) are
substantially declining due to the installation of PV systems, and they
range merely between 14 and 73 g CO2-eq/kWh, which is 10–53 times as
low as the emissions reported from the burning of oil (742 g CO2-eq/
kWh from oil) [83]. Moreover, it is optimistic that the carbon footprint
could subsequently be decreased by adopting novel manufacturing
materials and recycling the solar cells in an engineered way. These could
contribute up to a 42 % reduction in greenhouse gas emissions as well
[84]. In addition, a pleasurable thing is that large-scale solar power
plants occupy almost the same or less land area per kW h than coal
power plant life cycles [85]. Although the removal of forests to make
space for solar power causes CO2 emissions as high as 36 g CO2 kW h1, it
is still very low compared to CO2 emissions from coal-based electricity,
which are about 1100 g CO2 kW h1 [86].
Solar power plants require very little water to operate, compared to
other forms of electricity generation, such as coal and nuclear power
[87]. This is important in areas where water is scarce. According to the
National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL), solar power plants use
about 1 gallon of water per megawatt-hour of electricity generated,
compared to 2000 gallons per megawatt-hour for coal and 200 gallons
per megawatt-hour for nuclear power (put here a journal article’s
reference) [84]. Moreover, water sources benefit from PV systems due to
the reduction in toxin emissions in the form of the combustion of fossil
fuels. The equipment of PV systems collectively releases 50 to 1000
times less direct Hg emissions than traditional electricity generation, i.
e., ~0.1 g Hg GWh− 1 as compared to ~15 g Hg GWh− 1 from coal [83,
88]. It was in the US that at least 65 % of the Hg deposited in lakes and
reservoirs originated from burning fossil fuels [89]. Photovoltaics made
with CdTe emit ~0.02 g Cd GWh− 1 when manufactured with clean

13
Md.R. Islam et al. Renewable Energy 220 (2024) 119595

Table 9
The specifics of 37 different solar photovoltaic (PV) site constructions in
Bangladesh.
S/ SID Location Latitude Longitude Status
N

1 127 Gangachara, Rangpur 25.855312 89.222482 I Oa

2 136 Mongla Upazila, Bagerhat 22.650135 89.761117 IO
3 151 Sirajganj Sadar Upazila, 24.386177 89.748409 IO
Sirajgonj
4 137 Shibalaya Upazila, 23.848491 89.913733 IO
Manikganj
5 125 Gauripur, Mymensingh 24.75894 90.59746 IO
6 268 Kaptai Upazila, Rangamati 22.493286 92.218809 IO
7 128 Teknaf Upazila, Cox’s 20.980463 92.252503 IO
Bazar
8 147 Sarishabari Upazila, 24.7714541 89.84341 IO
Jamalpur
9 282 Madarganj Upazila, 24.837778 89.690556 UI
Jamalpur
10 4249 Sirajganj Sadar Upazila, 24.399 89.737 UI
Sirajgonj
11 152 Sonagazi, Feni 22.791058 91.366944 U I
12 132 Tetulia, Panchagarh 26.515609 88.430495 U I
13 126 Dharampasha, Sunamganj 24.901199 91.012169 U I
14 133 Patgram, Lalmonirhat 26.367315 89.00489 U I
15 340 Gowainghat, Sylhet 24.900538 91.863728 U I
16 129 Sundarganj, Gaibandha 25.328795 89.541671 U I
17 969 Sonagazi, Feni 22.790094 91.374722 U P
18 970 Sonagazi, Feni 22.790197 91.385556 U P
19 5185 Gazaria Upazila, 23.51639 90.59841 U P
Munshiganj
20 4165 Sujanagar Upazila, Pabna 23.847086 89.61561 UP
21 4250 Sujanagar Upazila, Pabna 23.825175 89.61069 UP
22 4177 Rangunia Upazila, 22.450371 92.007734 UP
Chittagong
23 4170 Chuadanga-S Upazila, 23.638285 88.859134 UP
Chuadanga
24 4168 Chandpur Sadar, Chandpur 23.225104 90.662033 U P
25 4167 Dhamrai Upazila, Dhaka 23.91362 90.214269 U P
26 4166 Bera Upazila, Pabna 24.07836 89.616043 U P
27 4169 Mirsharai Upazila, 22.892638 91.533863 U P
Fig. 18. The suitable locations for installing a solar power plants. Chittagong
28 4171 NetrakonaS Upazilla, 24.883081 90.727669 UP
Netrokona
electricity, which is 100–300 times smaller than emissions from coal
29 411 Moulvibazar Sadar, 24.503573 91.702012 UP
power generation [83,86,88]. Moulvibazar
30 143 Sonagazi, Feni 22.880625 91.386457 U P
4.3.2. Negative impacts and mitigation measures 31 409 Debiganj, Panchagarh 26.122955 88.753367 U P
A great downside of solar panels is that they require significant land 32 727 Dimla, Nilphamari 26.14073 88.933596 U P
33 341 Panchagarh Sadar, 26.130728 88.708443 U P
area, which can lead to habitat disruption and land use conflicts, espe­ Panchagarh
cially if they are built in ecologically sensitive areas [90]. The con­ 34 145 Gangachara, Rangpur 25.855922 89.221412 UP
struction of solar farms often involves clearing land, which can disrupt 35 351 Pabna Sadar Upazila, 24.013925 89.250483 UP
local ecosystems and wildlife habitats. This can have negative conse­ Pabna
36 283 Boda, Panchagarh 26.2387 88.6877 UP
quences for biodiversity in the area [91]. In some cases, solar farms are
37 923 Madarganj Upazila, 24.837778 89.690556 UP
built on land that was previously used for agriculture. This can lead to Jamalpur
conflicts over land use and potential food production losses [71]. Solar a
(I O–
– In Operation, U I = Under Instalation and Under Planning = U P).
farms can alter the visual landscape, which may not be appreciated by
some communities, particularly in scenic or rural areas. The installation
and maintenance of solar panels and associated infrastructure can lead the manufacturing of solar panels, numerous PV solar plants use water
to soil compaction, which can affect soil quality and water infiltration for cooling purposes to maintain the efficiency of solar panels. This can
[72]. Apart from the Eco-physiological alteration that occurred at PV lead to significant water consumption, especially in regions with water
system installation, the production and disposal of solar panels involve scarcity, which may exacerbate local water stress [93]. In areas where
energy- and resource-intensive processes. It subsequently contributes to water is already in high demand for agriculture, industry, or residential
pollution and waste if not managed properly [73]. Solar panel use, the additional water requirements of large-scale solar farms can
manufacturing processes require water, which can be a scarce resource strain local water resources and lead to conflicts over water allocation
in many regions. For example, the production of polysilicon, a key [92]. Drawing water from local sources, such as rivers or aquifers, can
ingredient in solar panels, requires a large amount of water [92]. The have adverse effects on local ecosystems by reducing water availability
manufacturing of solar panels can involve the use of toxic chemicals, for wildlife and plant species, potentially disrupting aquatic habitats
such as lead, cadmium, and arsenic, that can pollute the air, water, and [93]. The discharge of heated water back into natural water bodies after
soil if proper management of them is not ensured. More importantly, being used for cooling can lead to thermal pollution, negatively
solar panels have a finite lifespan and eventually need to be replaced, impacting aquatic ecosystems [94].
and disposing of expired solar panels can contribute to electronic waste, Numerous environmental effects may result from the development
which can be challenging to manage sustainably [71,91]. In addition to and maintenance of utility-scale solar power plants. These effects can be

14
Md.R. Islam et al. Renewable Energy 220 (2024) 119595

Table 10 all of the factors that had been weighted and converted into raster
Cost estimation for 100 MW solar PV power plant. format. The outcome of this study suggests that Bangladesh has great
PV Materials Cost in Total Cost per kWh potential for harnessing solar energy. Particularly, about 19.33 %, i.e.,
installation thousands cost in electricity 28,841.75 km2 area, is found to be “very high” suitable, and this area is
mode (USD) million generation opportunely dispersed throughout the country instead of being
(USD)
concentrated in a single location. Its dispersed nature suggests the
Fixed/ PV Module 22,430 52.430 US 10 cent possibility for any region to develop utility-scale solar farms in order to
mounting Mounting systems 8000 (approximately) transition to green energy. In addition, it could result in a large reduc­
type [81] Inverter and 5270
Transformer
tion in investment in roads and transmission lines, thereby making
station initial expenses much cheaper. In contrast, this study explored about
Combiner boxes, 1320 31.18 %, i.e., 46507.37 km2 restricted area in the country in which the
DC/AC cables setting up of any power plants is entirely forbidden.
Civil works 1500
This study could lead to the identification of a workable solution to
Electrical 5190
installation Bangladesh’s convoluted renewable energy decision-making process.
Site approach road 70 Although numerous crucial factors associated with the geological
constructions properties of the study region have a significant impact on site selection,
Cost for land lease 3670 they have not been considered in this research. The ability of lithology
Other (site 4980
facilities,
layers to support weight (such as soft subsoil and liquefaction layers),
engineering, the allocation of faults or cracks near the area, geo-hazards (such as
experts, logistics, landslides, seismic activity, collapses, soil tombs, and geological caves),
services, margin, and the dissolved salts of groundwater are a few examples of these
miscellaneous)
characteristics. The complexity of site planning and construction for the
Rooftop PV Module 2472 4.311 US 5 cent
type [82] Battery 1127.64 (approximately) proposed solar farms, as well as their post-construction safety and sur­
a
Inverter 580.80 vivability, are all significant considerations. This work therefore rec­
Miscellaneous cost 130.650 ommends further investigation, taking into account the unique
a
Land Required for this project approximately 11556.7 m2. geological characteristics. Policymakers and stakeholders can benefit
from the outcome of this study in their own ways. Developing policies
and regulations that enhance the efficient and environmentally friendly
reduced, though, by putting in place the right mitigation strategies. Land
use of solar energy while minimizing negative effects on the environ­
disturbance and habitat loss can be minimized during the construction
ment and improving positive social and economic outcomes is greatly
phase by taking steps including using existing access roads, minimizing
expected now and in the future. Further, the results of the existing level
vegetation cutting, and implementing erosion and sediment manage­
of knowledge can persuade the decision-makers to engage in the power
ment techniques [95]. Utilizing low-emission vehicles and
industry with more assurance, helping Bangladesh’s ambitions to com­
water-efficient construction methods can reduce air pollutants and
bat climate change.
water use [96]. By using noise-reducing construction equipment and
planning construction activities during times when they are less likely to
5.2. Recommendations
disturb neighboring homes, noise impacts can be minimized [97].
Placing solar power plants in less obvious locations, using non-reflective
❖ Furthermore, projected changes in solar irradiation, sunshine hours,
materials, and enhancing the plant’s perimeter with landscaping can all
air temperature, and/or other climatic factors, topography, and
help to reduce visual impacts [98]. By placing solar power plants in
LULC should be studied in the future due to climate change and
regions that are already disturbed or fragmented, habitat fragmentation
associated impacts;
can be minimized during the operation phase. By putting in place stra­
❖ In addition to the AHP tool, optimal site selection should be done
tegies like solar array fencing to avoid bird crashes and wildlife-friendly
based on several other MCDA tools such as WSM, TOPSIS, VIKOR,
lighting, the effects on wildlife can be minimized [99]. By employing
and MAUA, and finally, the results of the models that fit better with
water-efficient cleaning and gardening techniques, water consumption
the actual site can be prioritized;
can be decreased. When a project is initiated with decommissioning in
❖ Cross-validation of the simulated optimal solar plant sites with the
mind, it can assist in guaranteeing that the site is returned to a proper
actual scenario of the sites should be performed.
state when its useful life is coming to an end [100].

CRediT authorship contribution statement

5. Conclusions and recommendations

Md. Rabiul Islam: Conceptualization, Methodology, Software,

5.1. Conclusions
Writing – original draft. Md. Tareq Aziz: Data curation, Writing – re­
view & editing. Mohammed Alauddin: Investigation, Writing – review
Based on the AHP algorithm in GIS, this study has assessed the
& editing. Zarjes Kader: Resources, Writing – review & editing. Md.
suitable locations for installing solar plants in Bangladesh. AHP facili­
Rakibul Islam: Resources, Writing – review & editing.
tated with a GIS-supported MCDM technique effectively addresses such
complicated decision-making problems, taking into account the precise
influence of the factors on solar plant sites. Despite the difficulty in Declaration of competing interest
finding a suitable location, it is strongly recommended to find the
optimal locations for solar plants before moving towards the installation The authors declare that they have no known competing financial
of the energy generation equipment. However, there are several factors interests or personal relationships that could have inappropriately
related to the environmental, social, and financial aspects of the study impacted the research or conclusions presented in this manuscript.
area upon which decision-making for optimal solar plant sites is sub­
stantially influenced. The quantification of the importance and Acknowledgments
weightage of these factors influencing the decision were assessed using
AHP technology. The final solar suitability map was made by overlaying Authors are thankful to all Committee for Advance Studies and
Research (CASR) members for offering full financial support to conduct

15
Md.R. Islam et al.
the study at the Institute of Water and Environment (IWE) of Dhaka
University of Engineering & Technology, Gazipur. The staff of the Office
of the Director of Research and Extension (DRE) are also sincerely
thanked for their constant assistance. Finally, the University Grant
Commission of Bangladesh is gratefully acknowledged for providing the
research grant under the “University Teachers’ Research Fund” for the
2022–2023 fiscal year.
References
[1] F. Taghizadeh-Hesary, N. Yoshino, Sustainable solutions for green financing and
investment in renewable energy projects, Energies 13 (4) (2020) 788, https://doi.
org/10.3390/en13040788.
[2] X. Xu, Z. Wei, Q. Ji, C. Wang, G. Gao, Global renewable energy development:
influencing factors, trend predictions and countermeasures, Resour. Pol. 63
(2019), 101470, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resourpol.2019.101470.
[3] A. Khan, Y. Ali, D. Pamucar, Solar PV power plant site selection using a GIS-based
non-linear multi-criteria optimization technique, Environ. Sci. Pollut. Control Ser.
30 (20) (2023) 57378–57397, https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-023-26540-1.
[4] N. T. Suprova, M. Zidan, and A. Rashid, "Optimal Site Selection for Solar Farms
Using GIS and AHP: A Literature Review," presented at the vol, vol. 2020.
[5] R. Alizadeh, L. Soltanisehat, P.D. Lund, H. Zamanisabzi, Improving renewable
energy policy planning and decision-making through a hybrid MCDM method,
Energy Pol. 137 (2020), 111174, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2019.111174.
[6] S.S. Bohra, A. Anvari-Moghaddam, A comprehensive review on applications of
multicriteria decision-making methods in power and energy systems, Int. J.
Energy Res. 46 (4) (2022) 4088–4118, https://doi.org/10.1002/er.7517.
[7] M. Sousa, M.F. Almeida, R. Calili, Multiple criteria decision making for the
achievement of the UN sustainable development goals: a systematic literature
review and a research agenda, Sustainability 13 (8) (2021) 4129, https://doi.org/
10.3390/su13084129.
[8] H. Eroğlu, Multi-criteria decision analysis for wind power plant location selection
based on fuzzy AHP and geographic information systems, Environ. Dev. Sustain.
23 (12) (2021) 18278–18310, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10668-021-01438-5.
[9] M.B. Fard, P. Moradian, M. Emarati, M. Ebadi, A.G. Chofreh, J.J. Klemeŝ, Ground-
mounted photovoltaic power station site selection and economic analysis based
on a hybrid fuzzy best-worst method and geographic information system: a case
study Guilan province, Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 169 (2022), 112923, https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2022.112923.
[10] J. Banegas, J. Mamkhezri, A systematic review of geographic information systems
based methods and criteria used for electric vehicle charging station site
selection, Environ. Sci. Pollut. Control Ser. (2023) 1–30, https://doi.org/
10.1007/s11356-023-27383-6.
[11] A. Hashemizadeh, Y. Ju, P. Dong, A combined geographical information system
and Best–Worst Method approach for site selection for photovoltaic power plant
projects, Int. J. Environ. Sci. Technol. 17 (2020) 2027–2042, https://doi.org/
10.1007/s13762-019-02598-8.
[12] H. Yousefi, S.G. Motlagh, M. Montazeri, Multi-criteria decision-making system for
wind farm site-selection using geographic information system (GIS): case study of
semnan province, Iran, Sustainability 14 (13) (2022) 7640, https://doi.org/
10.3390/su14137640.
[13] E.B. Agyekum, F. Amjad, F. Aslam, A. Ali, Application of Weighted Linear
Combination approach in a Geographical Information System environment for
nuclear power plant site selection: the case of Ghana, Ann. Nucl. Energy 162
(2021), 108491, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anucene.2021.108491.
[14] R. Rios, S. Duarte, Selection of ideal sites for the development of large-scale solar
photovoltaic projects through Analytical Hierarchical Process–Geographic
information systems (AHP-GIS) in Peru, Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 149 (2021),
111310, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2021.111310.
[15] O. Artun, Determination of the suitable areas for the investment of the wind
energy plants (WEP) in Osmaniye using analytical hierarchy process (AHP) and
geographic information systems (GIS), Avrupa Bilim ve Teknoloji Dergisi 20
(2020) 196–205, https://doi.org/10.31590/ejosat.763866.
[16] M. Asadi, K. PourHossein, Wind and solar farms site selection using geographical
information system (GIS), based on multi criteria decision making (MCDM)
methods: a case-study for East-Azerbaijan, in: 2019 Iranian Conference on
Renewable Energy & Distributed Generation (ICREDG), IEEE, 2019, pp. 1–6,
https://doi.org/10.1109/ICREDG47187.2019.190216.
[17] M. Shao, Z. Han, J. Sun, C. Xiao, S. Zhang, Y. Zhao, A review of multi-criteria
decision making applications for renewable energy site selection, Renew. Energy
157 (2020) 377–403, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2020.04.137.
[18] T. Ali, A.J. Nahian, H. Ma, A hybrid multi-criteria decision-making approach to
solve renewable energy technology selection problem for Rohingya refugees in
Bangladesh, J. Clean. Prod. 273 (2020), 122967, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
jclepro.2020.122967.
[19] D.-J. Van de Ven, et al., The potential land requirements and related land use
change emissions of solar energy, Sci. Rep. 11 (1) (2021) 2907, https://doi.org/
10.1038/s41598-021-82042-5.
[20] S.N. Shorabeh, M.K. Firozjaei, O. Nematollahi, H.K. Firozjaei, M. Jelokhani-
Niaraki, A risk-based multi-criteria spatial decision analysis for solar power plant
site selection in different climates: a case study in Iran, Renew. Energy 143 (2019)
958–973, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2019.05.063.
16
Renewable Energy 220 (2024) 119595
[21] B. Ugwoke, S. Sulemanu, S. Corgnati, P. Leone, J. Pearce, Demonstration of the
integrated rural energy planning framework for sustainable energy development
in low-income countries: case studies of rural communities in Nigeria, Renew.
Sustain. Energy Rev. 144 (2021), 110983, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
rser.2021.110983.
[22] A. Tunç, G. Tuncay, Z. Alacakanat, F. Sevimli, GIS based solar power plants site
selection using Analytic Hierarchy Process (Ahp) in Istanbul, Turkey, Int. Arch.
Photogram. Rem. Sens. Spatial Inf. Sci. 42 (2019) 1353–1360, https://doi.org/
10.5194/isprs-archives-XLII-2-W13-1353-2019.
[23] M. Almutairi, K. Harb, O. Marey, K. Almutairi, Evaluation of wind power
generation projects to reduce air pollution using multi-criteria decision-making
methods in Saudi Arabia, Environ. Sci. Pollut. Control Ser. 29 (59) (2022)
88587–88605, https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-022-21950-z.
[24] E.B. Agyekum, F. Amjad, L. Shah, V.I. Velkin, Optimizing photovoltaic power
plant site selection using analytical hierarchy process and density-based
clustering–Policy implications for transmission network expansion, Ghana,
Sustain. Energy Technol. Assessments 47 (2021), 101521, https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.seta.2021.101521.
[25] J. Heo, H. Moon, S. Chang, S. Han, D.-E. Lee, Case study of solar photovoltaic
power-plant site selection for infrastructure planning using a BIM-GIS-based
approach, Appl. Sci. 11 (18) (2021) 8785, https://doi.org/10.3390/
app11188785.
[26] A. Alanazi, M. Alanazi, Multicriteria decision-making for evaluating solar energy
source of Saudi Arabia, Sustainability 15 (13) (2023), 10228, https://doi.org/
10.3390/su151310228.
[27] Z. Huang, T. Mendis, S. Xu, Urban solar utilization potential mapping via deep
learning technology: a case study of Wuhan, China, Appl. Energy 250 (2019)
283–291, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2019.04.113.
[28] I. Badi, D. Pamucar, L. Gigović, S. Tatomirović, Optimal site selection for sitting a
solar park using a novel GIS-SWA’TEL model: a case study in Libya, Int. J. Green
Energy 18 (4) (2021) 336–350, https://doi.org/10.1080/
15435075.2020.1854264.
[29] A.A. Hachicha, I. Al-Sawafta, Z. Said, Impact of dust on the performance of solar
photovoltaic (PV) systems under United Arab Emirates weather conditions,
Renew. Energy 141 (2019) 287–297, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
renene.2019.04.004.
[30] M. Xiao, T. Junne, J. Haas, M. Klein, Plummeting costs of renewables-are energy
scenarios lagging? Energy Strategy Rev. 35 (2021), 100636 https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.esr.2021.100636.
[31] S. Abdelhady, Performance and cost evaluation of solar dish power plant:
sensitivity analysis of levelized cost of electricity (LCOE) and net present value
(NPV), Renew. Energy 168 (2021) 332–342, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
renene.2020.12.074.
[32] M. Elkadeem, A. Younes, S.W. Sharshir, P.E. Campana, S. Wang, Sustainable
siting and design optimization of hybrid renewable energy system: a geospatial
multi-criteria analysis, Appl. Energy 295 (2021), 117071, https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.apenergy.2021.117071.
[33] A. Gerbo, K.V. Suryabhagavan, T. Kumar Raghuvanshi, GIS-based approach for
modeling grid-connected solar power potential sites: a case study of East Shewa
Zone, Ethiopia, Geology, Ecology, and Landscapes 6 (3) (2022) 159–173, https://
doi.org/10.1080/24749508.2020.1809059.
[34] S. Seker, Site selection for solar power plants using integrated two-stage hybrid
method based on intuitionistic fuzzy AHP and COPRAS approach, in: Intelligent
and Fuzzy Techniques in Big Data Analytics and Decision Making: Proceedings of
the INFUS 2019 Conference, Springer, Istanbul, Turkey, 2020, pp. 616–624,
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-23756-1_75. July 23-25, 2019.
[35] B. Settou, N. Settou, A. Gouareh, B. Negrou, C. Mokhtara, D. Messaoudi, A high-
resolution geographic information system-analytical hierarchy process-based
method for solar PV power plant site selection: a case study Algeria, Clean
Technol. Environ. Policy 23 (2021) 219–234, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10098-
020-01971-3.
[36] B.B. Adetokun, J.O. Ojo, C.M. Muriithi, Application of large-scale grid-connected
solar photovoltaic system for voltage stability improvement of weak national
grids, Sci. Rep. 11 (1) (2021), 24526, https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-021-
04300-w.
[37] J. Zhou, Y. Wu, C. Wu, F. He, B. Zhang, F. Liu, A geographical information system
based multi-criteria decision-making approach for location analysis and
evaluation of urban photovoltaic charging station: a case study in Beijing, Energy
Convers. Manag. 205 (2020), 112340, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
enconman.2019.112340.
[38] H.A. Effat, A.M. El-Zeiny, Geospatial modeling for selection of optimum sites for
hybrid solar-wind energy in Assiut Governorate, Egypt, Egyptian J. Remote
Sensing Space Sci. 25 (2) (2022) 627–637, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
ejrs.2022.03.005.
[39] S.N. Shorabeh, H.K. Firozjaei, M.K. Firozjaei, M. Jelokhani-Niaraki, M. Homaee,
O. Nematollahi, The site selection of wind energy power plant using GIS-multi-
criteria evaluation from economic perspectives, Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 168
(2022), 112778, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2022.112778.
[40] S. Zambrano-Asanza, J. Quiros-Tortos, J.F. Franco, Optimal site selection for
photovoltaic power plants using a GIS-based multi-criteria decision making and
spatial overlay with electric load, Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 143 (2021),
110853, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2021.110853.
[41] M. Abdel-Basset, A. Gamal, R.K. Chakrabortty, M. Ryan, A new hybrid multi-
criteria decision-making approach for location selection of sustainable offshore
wind energy stations: a case study, J. Clean. Prod. 280 (2021), 124462, https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.124462.
Md.R. Islam et al.
[42] M. Giamalaki, T. Tsoutsos, Sustainable siting of solar power installations in
Mediterranean using a GIS/AHP approach, Renew. Energy 141 (2019) 64–75,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2019.03.100.
[43] S. Goyal, S. Bhattacharya, S. Suresh, G. Goldes, S. Nirgudkar, Installing Solar
Power Plants in Snowbound Areas, 2021. http://hdl.handle.net/10986/35123.
[44] A. Demir, A.E. Dinçer, K. Yılmaz, A novel method for the site selection of large-
scale PV farms by using AHP and GIS: a case study in İzmir, Türkiye, Sol. Energy
259 (2023) 235–245, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.solener.2023.05.031.
[45] D.D. Baldocchi, et al., Outgoing near-infrared radiation from vegetation scales
with canopy photosynthesis across a spectrum of function, structure,
physiological capacity, and weather, J. Geophys. Res.: Biogeosciences 125 (7)
(2020), e2019JG005534, https://doi.org/10.1029/2019JG005534.
[46] S. Rekik, S. El Alimi, Optimal wind-solar site selection using a GIS-AHP based
approach: a case of Tunisia, Energy Convers. Manag. X 18 (2023), 100355,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecmx.2023.100355.
[47] C.-N. Wang, T.-T. Dang, J. Bayer, A two-stage multiple criteria decision making
for site selection of solar photovoltaic (PV) power plant: a case study in Taiwan,
IEEE Access 9 (2021) 75509–75525, https://doi.org/10.1109/
ACCESS.2021.3081995.
[48] O. Jbaihi, F.-z. Ouchani, A.A. Merrouni, M. Cherkaoui, A. Ghennioui,
M. Maaroufi, An AHP-GIS based site suitability analysis for integrating large-scale
hybrid CSP+ PV plants in Morocco: an approach to address the intermittency of
solar energy, J. Clean. Prod. 369 (2022), 133250, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
jclepro.2022.133250.
[49] Y. Xu, et al., Site selection of wind farms using GIS and multi-criteria decision
making method in Wafangdian, China, Energy 207 (2020), 118222, https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.energy.2020.118222.
[50] O.K. Overen, E.L. Meyer, Solar energy resources and photovoltaic power potential
of an underutilised region: a case of Alice, South Africa, Energies 15 (13) (2022)
4646, https://doi.org/10.3390/en15134646.
[51] E. Agbo, U. Nkajoe, M. Okono, E. Inyang, C. Edet, Temperature and solar
radiation interactions in all six zones of Nigeria, Indian J. Phys. 97 (3) (2023)
655–669, https://doi.org/10.1007/s12648-022-02429-6.
[52] Y. Wu, Y. Ke, C. Xu, L. Li, An integrated decision-making model for sustainable
photovoltaic module supplier selection based on combined weight and
cumulative prospect theory, Energy 181 (2019) 1235–1251, https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.energy.2019.06.027.
[53] A. Aly, S. Jensen, A. Pedersen, Solar power potential of Tanzania: identifying CSP
and PV hot spots through a, Renew. Energy 113 (2017) 159–175, https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.renene.2017.05.077.
[54] D.L. Wotlolan, J.H. Lowry, N.A. Wales, K. Glencross, Land suitability evaluation
for multiple crop agroforestry planning using GIS and multi-criteria decision
analysis: a case study in Fiji, Agrofor. Syst. 95 (8) (2021) 1519–1532, https://doi.
org/10.1007/s10457-021-00661-3.
[55] O.N. Mensour, B. El Ghazzani, B. Hlimi, A. Ihlal, A geographical information
system-based multi-criteria method for the evaluation of solar farms locations: a
case study in Souss-Massa area, southern Morocco, Energy 182 (2019) 900–919,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2019.06.063.
[56] L. Albraheem, L. Alabdulkarim, Geospatial analysis of solar energy in riyadh
using a GIS-AHP-based technique, ISPRS Int. J. Geo-Inf. 10 (5) (2021) 291,
https://doi.org/10.3390/ijgi10050291.
[57] T. Finn, P. McKenzie, A high-resolution suitability index for solar farm location in
complex landscapes, Renew. Energy 158 (2020) 520–533, https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.renene.2020.05.121.
[58] R. Dang, X. Li, C. Li, C. Xu, A MCDM framework for site selection of island
photovoltaic charging station based on new criteria identification and a hybrid
fuzzy approach, Sustain. Cities Soc. 74 (2021), 103230, https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.scs.2021.103230.
[59] D. Kaskaoutis, J. Polo, Editorial for the Special Issue “Solar Radiation, Modeling,
and Remote Sensing”, vol. 11, MDPI, 2019, p. 1198.
[60] M. Blal, et al., A prediction models for estimating global solar radiation and
evaluation meteorological effect on solar radiation potential under several
weather conditions at the surface of Adrar environment, Measurement 152
(2020), 107348, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.measurement.2019.107348.
[61] M.H. Esfe, S. Esfandeh, M.H. Kamyab, D. Toghraie, Simulation of the impact of
solar radiation intensity on the performance of economical solar water
desalination still in Semnan province, Case Stud. Therm. Eng. 28 (2021), 101471,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.csite.2021.101471.
[62] X. Sun, J.M. Bright, C.A. Gueymard, B. Acord, P. Wang, N.A. Engerer, Worldwide
performance assessment of 75 global clear-sky irradiance models using principal
component analysis, Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 111 (2019) 550–570, https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2019.04.006.
[63] E.F. Abreu, P. Canhoto, M.J. Costa, Prediction of diffuse horizontal irradiance
using a new climate zone model, Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 110 (2019) 28–42,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2019.04.055.
[64] D. Cho, C. Yoo, J. Im, Y. Lee, J. Lee, Improvement of spatial interpolation
accuracy of daily maximum air temperature in urban areas using a stacking
ensemble technique, GIScience Remote Sens. 57 (5) (2020) 633–649, https://doi.
org/10.1080/15481603.2020.1766768.
[65] K. Kamati, J. Smit, S. Hull, Multicriteria decision method for siting wind and solar
power plants in central north Namibia, Geomatics 3 (1) (2022) 47–67, https://
doi.org/10.3390/geomatics3010002.
[66] G. Rediske, J.C.M. Siluk, L. Michels, P.D. Rigo, C.B. Rosa, G. Cugler, Multi-criteria
decision-making model for assessment of large photovoltaic farms in Brazil,
Energy 197 (2020), 117167, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2020.117167.
17
Renewable Energy 220 (2024) 119595
[67] Y. Liu, C.M. Eckert, C. Earl, A review of fuzzy AHP methods for decision-making
with subjective judgements, Expert Syst. Appl. 161 (2020), 113738, https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.eswa.2020.113738.
[68] A.F. Faisal, A. Rahman, M.T.M. Habib, A.H. Siddique, M. Hasan, M.M. Khan,
Neural networks based multivariate time series forecasting of solar radiation
using meteorological data of different cities of Bangladesh, Results in Engineering
13 (2022), 100365, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rineng.2022.100365.
[69] F. Jin, C. Wang, X. Zhou, C. Wang, Application of ArcGIS spatial analysis
techniques on topography teaching, in: Proceedings of the 2nd International
Conference on Internet, Education and Information Technology (IEIT 2022), vol.
100, Springer Nature, 2023, p. 413, https://doi.org/10.2991/978-94-6463-058-
9_67.
[70] T. Nabil, T.M. Mansour, Augmenting the performance of photovoltaic panel by
decreasing its temperature using various cooling techniques, Results in
Engineering 15 (2022), 100564, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rineng.2022.100564.
[71] S. Gorjian, H. Sharon, H. Ebadi, K. Kant, F.B. Scavo, G.M. Tina, Recent technical
advancements, economics and environmental impacts of floating photovoltaic
solar energy conversion systems, J. Clean. Prod. 278 (2021), 124285, https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.124285.
[72] M. Kumar, Social, Economic, and Environmental Impacts of Renewable Energy
Resources (Wind Solar Hybrid Renewable Energy System), 2020.
[73] R.R. Hernandez, et al., Techno–ecological synergies of solar energy for global
sustainability, Nat. Sustain. 2 (7) (2019) 560–568, https://doi.org/10.1038/
s41893-019-0309-z.
[74] G.G. Dranka, P. Ferreira, A.I.F. Vaz, Cost-effectiveness of energy efficiency
investments for high renewable electricity systems, Energy 198 (2020), 117198,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2020.117198.
[75] J.-L. Fan, S. Wei, L. Yang, H. Wang, P. Zhong, X. Zhang, Comparison of the LCOE
between coal-fired power plants with CCS and main low-carbon generation
technologies: evidence from China, Energy 176 (2019) 143–155, https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.energy.2019.04.003.
[76] E.B. Agyekum, Techno-economic comparative analysis of solar photovoltaic
power systems with and without storage systems in three different climatic
regions, Ghana, Sustain. Energy Technol. Assessments 43 (2021), 100906,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.seta.2020.100906.
[77] F.R. Saquib, A. Chakma, A.Y. Rahman, F.H. Sneha, M. Shiblee, M.R. Riad, A case
study on the cost-effectiveness of net energy metering of residential grid-
connected photovoltaic in the context of Bangladesh, in: 2021 5th International
Conference on Electrical Engineering and Information Communication
Technology (ICEEICT), IEEE, 2021, pp. 1–6, https://doi.org/10.1109/
ICEEICT53905.2021.9667846.
[78] L. Xu, Y. Wang, Y.A. Solangi, H. Zameer, S.A.A. Shah, Off-grid solar PV power
generation system in Sindh, Pakistan: a techno-economic feasibility analysis,
Processes 7 (5) (2019) 308, https://doi.org/10.3390/pr7050308.
[79] S.S.M. Tehrani, R.A. Taylor, K. Nithyanandam, A.S. Ghazani, Annual comparative
performance and cost analysis of high temperature, sensible thermal energy
storage systems integrated with a concentrated solar power plant, Sol. Energy 153
(2017) 153–172, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.solener.2017.05.044.
[80] M.R. Islam, P.C. Sarker, S.K. Ghosh, Prospect and advancement of solar irrigation
in Bangladesh: a review, Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 77 (2017) 406–422,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2017.04.052.
[81] Feasibility study for development of utility scale solar PV & wind projects in
Bangladesh [Online] Available: http://egcb.portal.gov.bd/sites/default/files/f
iles/egcb.portal.gov.bd/miscellaneous_info/7c6bc618_6dd1_4d41_b0a3_c3ff050
c24a0/2020-01-29-10-42-804b97918997bfbe795a592764f984d3.pdf, 2018.
[82] M.I. Miskat, et al., Current scenario of solar energy applications in Bangladesh:
techno-economic perspective, policy implementation, and possibility of the
integration of artificial intelligence, Energies 16 (3) (2023) 1494, https://doi.
org/10.3390/en16031494.
[83] N. Orfanos, D. Mitzelos, A. Sagani, V. Dedoussis, Life-cycle environmental
performance assessment of electricity generation and transmission systems in
Greece, Renew. Energy 139 (2019) 1447–1462, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
renene.2019.03.009.
[84] M. Tawalbeh, A. Al-Othman, F. Kafiah, E. Abdelsalam, F. Almomani,
M. Alkasrawi, Environmental impacts of solar photovoltaic systems: a critical
review of recent progress and future outlook, Sci. Total Environ. 759 (2021),
143528, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.143528.
[85] S. Pai, H. Zerriffi, J. Jewell, J. Pathak, Solar has greater techno-economic resource
suitability than wind for replacing coal mining jobs, Environ. Res. Lett. 15 (3)
(2020), 034065. https://iopscience.iop.org/journal/1748-9326.
[86] K. Hirbodi, M. Enjavi-Arsanjani, M. Yaghoubi, Techno-economic assessment and
environmental impact of concentrating solar power plants in Iran, Renew.
Sustain. Energy Rev. 120 (2020), 109642, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
rser.2019.109642.
[87] K.R. Kumar, N.K. Chaitanya, N.S. Kumar, Solar thermal energy technologies and
its applications for process heating and power generation–A review, J. Clean.
Prod. 282 (2021), 125296, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.125296.
[88] A. Bielecki, S. Ernst, W. Skrodzka, I. Wojnicki, The externalities of energy
production in the context of development of clean energy generation, Environ.
Sci. Pollut. Control Ser. 27 (2020) 11506–11530, https://doi.org/10.1007/
s11356-020-07625-7.
[89] B.K. Biskaborn, et al., Effects of climate change and industrialization on lake
bolshoe toko, eastern siberia, J. Paleolimnol. 65 (2021) 335–352, https://doi.
org/10.1007/s10933-021-00175-z.
Md.R. Islam et al.
[90] M.K.H. Rabaia, et al., Environmental impacts of solar energy systems: a review,
Sci. Total Environ. 754 (2021), 141989, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
scitotenv.2020.141989.
[91] A. Rahman, O. Farrok, M.M. Haque, Environmental impact of renewable energy
source based electrical power plants: solar, wind, hydroelectric, biomass,
geothermal, tidal, ocean, and osmotic, Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 161 (2022),
112279, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2022.112279.
[92] G.D. Pimentel Da Silva, D.A.C. Branco, Is floating photovoltaic better than
conventional photovoltaic? Assessing environmental impacts, Impact Assess.
Proj. Apprais. 36 (5) (2018) 390–400, https://doi.org/10.1080/
14615517.2018.1477498.
[93] M. Gao, L. Zhu, C.K. Peh, G.W. Ho, Solar absorber material and system designs for
photothermal water vaporization towards clean water and energy production,
Energy Environ. Sci. 12 (3) (2019) 841–864, https://doi.org/10.1039/
C8EE01146J.
[94] W. Wang, et al., Simultaneous production of fresh water and electricity via
multistage solar photovoltaic membrane distillation, Nat. Commun. 10 (1) (2019)
3012, https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-019-10817-6.
18
Renewable Energy 220 (2024) 119595
[95] K. Ilse, et al., Techno-economic assessment of soiling losses and mitigation
strategies for solar power generation, Joule 3 (10) (2019) 2303–2321, https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.joule.2019.08.019.
[96] L.J. Walston, et al., A Review of Avian Monitoring and Mitigation Information at
Existing Utility-Scale Solar Facilities, 2015, https://doi.org/10.2172/1176921.
[97] D. Turney, V. Fthenakis, Environmental impacts from the installation and
operation of large-scale solar power plants, Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 15 (6)
(2011) 3261–3270, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2011.04.023.
[98] M. Bošnjaković, V. Tadijanović, Environment impact of a concentrated solar
power plant, Tehnički glasnik 13 (1) (2019) 68–74, https://doi.org/10.31803/tg-
20180911085644.
[99] S. Ghosh, V.K. Yadav, V. Mukherjee, Impact of environmental factors on
photovoltaic performance and their mitigation strategies–A holistic review,
Renewable Energy Focus 28 (2019) 153–172, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
ref.2018.12.005.
[100] S.J. Thomas, S. Thomas, S.S. Sahoo, A. Kumar, M.M. Awad, Solar parks: a review
on impacts, mitigation mechanism through Agrivoltaics and techno-economic
analysis, Energy Nexus (2023), 100220, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
nexus.2023.100220.