General Information
    • ISSN: 1793-821X (Print)
    • Frequency: Quarterly (2013-2014); Bimonthly (Since 2015)
    • DOI: 10.18178/JOCET
    • Editor-in-Chief: Prof. Haider F. Abdul Amir
    • Executive Editor: Ms. Jennifer Zeng
    • Abstracting/ Indexing: EI (INSPEC, IET), Electronic Journals Library, Chemical Abstracts Services (CAS), Ulrich's Periodicals Directory, Google Scholar, ProQuest.
    • E-mail:
  • May 14, 2019 News! JOCET Vol.5, No.5-Vol.6, No.4 has been indexed by EI(Inspec)!   [Click]
  • Apr 29, 2019 News! Vol. 7, No. 3 has been published with online version. 4 peer reviewed papers are published in this issue.   [Click]
School of Science and Technology Universiti Malaysia Sabah, Malaysia.
I would like to express my appreciation to all authors, reviewers and editors.

JOCET 2014 Vol.2(4): 349-356 ISSN: 1793-821X
DOI: 10.7763/JOCET.2014.V2.153

Comparison Study: Cost of Electricity, Emission, and Renewable Fraction for Single Residential Load at Geelong, Victoria State- Australia using HOMER

Harish Kumar R. N.
Abstract—This paper presents a comparison of change in Cost of Electricity (COE) ($), Emission (Kilogram/year-kg/yr), and Renewable Fraction (RF) for a single residential load at Geelong with five different methodologies. The National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) optimization computer model for distributed power, “HOMER,” is used to study the comparison. The first analysis with system 1 showed that, a 10.5 kilo-Watt (kW) Photovoltaic (PV) module (supporting 10.5 kW converter was opted, and 33 batteries (4 volts (V)), Nominal capacity 1900 Amp-hour (Ah)) is must to supply electricity for a single residential load with available solar radiation exposure, and the obtained COE, Emission, and RF are $0.35, zero, 1.00. The second analysis with system 2 showed that excess electricity generated can be sold to the grid, and the obtained COE- $ 0.30, Emission- -2250 kg/yr carbon-dioxide (CO2), -5.41 kg/yr Nitrogen oxide (N2O), -11.1 kg/yr sulphur dioxide (SO2), and RF 0.85. The third analysis with system 3 showed that with an optimized number of batteries a higher RF and reduced COE can be achieved, and excess electricity produced can be sold to the grid; the obtained COE- $ 0.14, Emission- -4,386 kg/yr CO2, -19 kg/yr SO2, -9.1 kg/yr N2O and RF-0.80. The fourth analysis with system 4 showed that there is a reduction in the percentage of RE factor and escalating price of COE, obtained COE- $0.18, Emission - 5055 kg/yr CO2, -10.7 kg/yr N2O, 21.9 kg/yr SO2, and RF- 0.80. The fifth analysis with system 5 showed that house load connected to only grid emits significant amount of Emission, the obtained COE, 0.26$, Emission - 3691 kg/yr CO2, 16 kg/yr SO2, 7.83 kg/yr N2O and RF- 0.80.

Index Terms—Photovoltaic (PV) modules, primary house load, battery, grid, converter, renewable energy (RE).

Harish Kumar R N is with School of Engineering, Deakin University, 75 Pigdons Rd, Waurn Ponds, Geelong VIC 3216, Australia (e-mail:


Cite:Harish Kumar R. N., "Comparison Study: Cost of Electricity, Emission, and Renewable Fraction for Single Residential Load at Geelong, Victoria State- Australia using HOMER," Journal of Clean Energy Technologies vol. 2, no. 4, pp. 349-356, 2014.

Copyright © 2008-2019. Journal of Clean Energy Technologies. All rights reserved.